The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
"Russia for Russians" to be Written Into the Constitution
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

It was always a longshot.

But the Russians who believed that ethnic Russians should have some official status within their putative country persevered. The Russians who believed that Russians, who constitute 85% of Russia’s citizens, are not inferior to and do not deserve any less than Jews, who proclaim Israel to be the Jewish State even though Jews make up only 75% of Israeli citizens, persevered. The Russians who wanted their country to follow in the footsteps of the post-Communist East European mainstream, where nationally-minded governments from Hungary to Poland have rewritten their Constitutions to prioritize God, traditional values, and their own people, persevered.

These Russians were not only “marginal” Russian nationalists in their “bubble of Internet subcultures“, such as Grigorov and the Russian Democrats with their petitions, Malofeev and his Tsargrad media empire, the more “official” lobbying efforts of Bespalko, and sundry individual publicists and activists. Enshrining ethnic Russians into the Constitution was the official position of the two largest opposition parties, the LDPR and the Communists; of several important figures within the Russian Orthodox Church; of certain individuals within the ruling “United Russia”, such as Konstantin Zatulin; and of numerous celebrities and intellectuals, such as sci-fi author Sergey Lukyanenko (most famous for The Night Watch).

We had plenty of “scares” along the way. For instance, one version of proposed Constitutional amendments leaked a week ago was most notable for obligating Russia to “combat all attempts to falsify history and revise the outcomes of the Second World War” – something that triggers senile sovoks into bouts of spittle-flecked rage against what they themselves castigate as small and irrelevant East European polities, and associates Russia with a regime that persecuted Russians more than anybody else. Another proposed addition called on Russia to “acknowledge the priority significance of science and technology for the country’s development.” That was something that could have only come from the imagination of a Russian bureaucrat-bugman. It’s what one imagines some tinpot Third World dictatorship would write in its Constitutional preamble. Central African Republic: We affirm the priority importance of vaccines and literacy for the country’s development. Meanwhile, there wasn’t even a hint that Russians would be mentioned. For a time, this seemed to confirm all our worst suspicions about the Kremlin’s antipathy towards Russianness.

So expectations were low – even if I did allow the possibility that this zrada (betrayal) could yet flower into a peremoga (victory), should Putin gather the courage to send the sovok apparatchiks packing – and propose his own, Russian changes.

And yet, against all expectations, we emerged triumphant. Putin really, really does read my blog!

Although the fine details have yet to be hammered out, we now know with a high degree of certainty that the following points will appear if not in the preamble, then at least somewhere, within the new Putin Constitution:

  1. Ethnic Russians as the “state-forming” (государствообразующей) nation of the Russian Federation.
  2. The rights of compatriots.
  3. God.
  4. Family as a union of woman and man.

Russia is transitioning from a post-Soviet scrapheap into a national democracy before our eyes.

(1) The acknowledgement that ethnic Russians have some stake in their own putative state does not impinge on the rights of the 15% of Russians who consider themselves to be minorities, since it does not contradict other statements about the multinational nature of the Russian Federation – nor, for that matter, does it impinge on the Constitutions of Russia’s ethnic minority Republics, most of which – including the two most important ones, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan – explicitly mention Tatars and Bashkirs, respectively, as peoples to whom they owe a special degree of responsibility.

So we have Bashkortostan for the Bashkirs. Tatarstan for the Tatars. Israel for the Jews. Skyrim for the Nords. Likewise, from April 22, 2020, Russia will be for the Russians.

(2) Russians are, along with Koreans, the world’s most divided major nation. Consequently, a special provision for Russians stranded abroad after the collapse of the USSR is called for – and Putin has promised to deliver.

(3) Barring a small Buddhist minority, at least 95% of Russian citizens come from cultures that practiced the Abrahamic faiths, while its core faith is undoubtedly and deeply Christian. This is something that most nations of the post-Communist bloc have been unafraid to recognize.

For instance, the Hungarian Constitution has the following lines:

We are proud that our king Saint Stephen built the Hungarian State on solid ground and made our country a part of Christian Europe one thousand years ago. … We recognise the role of Christianity in preserving nationhood. We value the various religious traditions of our country.

The West has become obsessed with LGBT rights since c.2010; since then, the US has gone from half of Americans opposed to gay marriage, to a bipartisan global Rainbow Crusade. So this particular point has perhaps received more vitriol than any other.

In reality, there is plenty of precedent for this – see, for example, the Polish Constitution of 1997:

Marriage, being a union of a man and a woman, as well as the family, motherhood and parenthood, shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland.

(4) The family as a union of woman and man (in that order – as befits socialist feminism) was even mentioned in the RSFSR Constitution of 1978.

Marriage is based on the mutual agreement of women and men; the spouses are equal in their familial relations.

The state expresses its care for the family through the creation and development of a wide network of childcare facilities, the organization and improvement of household services and public catering, the provisioning of child benefits, and the provisioning of subsidies and benefits to families with multiple children…

Incidentally, while we’re on this topic, the RSFSR even mentioned ethnic Russians in its preamble:

The formation of the RSFSR provided the [ethnic] Russian people, as well as all nations and peoples of the Russian Federation, with favorable conditions for comprehensive economic, social, and cultural development – while respecting their national characteristics within the brotherly family of Soviet peoples.

Tellingly, it was the USSR – the communal apartment in which ethnic Russians had to make do with squatting in the common areas, while the other major ethnicities got their own national republics – that fissured apart under centrifugal pressures in the late Gorbachev era. Whereas the RSFSR, which did assign ethnic Russians official status, had to be destroyed by Yeltsin’s tanks in 1993, to make way for an American-sponsored Constitution that had no place in it for ethnic Russians, a Constitution that proclaimed the superiority of the international community over Russia, a Constitution that we have had to put up with ever since. Until now.

Russians will imminently get a once in a generation opportunity to take their country back.

I am not saying that all the proposals are optimal from the viewpoint of Russian nation-building. At this point, we don’t even know the concrete wording, or even whether the changes will appear in the preamble or further within the Constitution.

But what I do know is that all the “right” people are enraged about this. Sovoks, liberals, and Russia’s Western “wellwishers” (ha-ha) – they are all triggered, and very, very sad at the prospect of Russians reclaiming their sovereignty – at least on paper – from their “multinational” elites and the “international community” that they serve.

But the dogs will bark and the caravan will move on.

The Russian Occupation Government is here to stay.

Слава России!

 
Hide 356 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. — H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker

    Let’s hope our government doesn’t cuck us and pulls a Crimea once more.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @melanf

    Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. — H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker
     
    Who (Alexander III), by his insane rule, paved the way for the Bolsheviks and other revolutionaries.
  3. This is a delightful payoff after six or so years of Russia-watching.

    I am very glad for you, the Russian nationalist community, and Russians in general.

    With luck, this marks the codification of the undoing of a century of tragedy.

    • Agree: BlackFlag
    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
  4. Well, congrats!

    Though, to tell it truthfully, there are many godless places where God is mentioned prominently in the constitution. Heck, the first line of the Preamble to the Irish Constitution says: In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred.

    But all it really means is that the pozzed pols will go to Hell.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    When I came to the States, another post-doc in the lab (born and bred in the US) said: look at the money. It says “In God we trust”. That’s the only God we trust in.
    , @Dmitry
    This amendment which will say something about god is controversial just in Russia, because of the Soviet history has made the issue something more than just rhetorical (in other constitutions this is usually just rhetorical use of the word "god" and nobody will notice it). Actually, what is happening is just that Russia is converging to the rest of the developed world, where constitutions say sentences like this, and it is just interpreted in a rhetorical way.

    In America though, the constitution does not refer to god at any part - and the Founding Fathers of America were mostly some kind of spiritualists and they were very critical of organized religions of their time.

  5. Isn’t it too early to celebrate? These amendments aren’t final yet. They can still pull the main “Russian” point to please the sovoks or libtards or whatever. Let’s keep our expectations low for just a bit longer.

  6. Looks surprisingly good. Though I wouldn’t mention God, given I’m an atheist, it makes sense if Russia is to be the third Rome, as its religion comes even more directly from the second Rome than the Western ones.

    • Replies: @Dacian Julien Soros
    I felt there was too much God in politics when I was young, but now I recognize it as majority's attempt to keep away the interlopers. It's unclear how much it works. In Romania, when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn't fell like he was integrating, given that the country was plundered, with his help, by indigenous and American "businessmen" who generally didn't celebrate Christmas. OTOH, Shoigu crossing himself is a decent signal of submission to the majority.

    So, despite being an atheist, I'd rather see more Christian displays, as long as we agree they are less important compared to decisions from locally-elected lawmakers.

    Talking of people who don't celebrate Christmas, Anatoly, please drop that Abrahamic nonsense. "Abrahamic" implies common values between Orthodox churches, the Catholic rebranding of the Roman Empire, tranny-worshipping Episcopalians, Erdogan's statist Islam, murderous Wahabism, Mafia-like Jew-supremacist Jaredkushnerism, and Ultraorthodox goat sacrificers of Brooklyn / West Bank.

    You have more in common with Stalin than with any of the others.

  7. There are many parts of Russia that Russians/Slavs are not native to and where the native non-Slavic population forms the majority. Yet presumably this new addition to the constitution would mean that ethnic Russians (Slavs) would potentially have more rights in these regions than the natives?

    That sounds a bit, well, Apartheid-ish to me.

    • Troll: AltSerrice
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Where, exactly, is that prescribed?

    Article 69
    (1) The RF guarantees the rights of indigenous small peoples in accordance with commonly accepted principles and norms of international law...
    (2) The state defends the cultural identity of all peoples and ethnic communities of the RF, guarantees the preservation of ethnocultural and linguistic diversity.
     
    , @Dmitry
    What sounds "Apartheid"?

    If you wrote in the constitution "Russia for Russians" (only Russians!), and created some laws to support this, then it could be. Although this is usually more a belief that other nationalities should leave or stop flooding the country, and receiving preferential rights (as currently) rather than any interest in apartheid.

    What they are going to write in the constitution is not going to be this - rather, it is something about Russian language as the language (which is already article 69) of statebuilding people.

    So while a nationalist can interpret this is as hidden or subtle support in their direction (because of the implication Russians formed the state), but it looks like they try to write it in a way which is not going to offend anyone (except some Tatar mufti).

    There is nothing very controversial (or to be honest, interesting), in this proposal.

    What is creating controversy is that Putin asked them to say something about "God" in the text.

  8. @Europe Europa
    There are many parts of Russia that Russians/Slavs are not native to and where the native non-Slavic population forms the majority. Yet presumably this new addition to the constitution would mean that ethnic Russians (Slavs) would potentially have more rights in these regions than the natives?

    That sounds a bit, well, Apartheid-ish to me.

    Where, exactly, is that prescribed?

    Article 69
    (1) The RF guarantees the rights of indigenous small peoples in accordance with commonly accepted principles and norms of international law…
    (2) The state defends the cultural identity of all peoples and ethnic communities of the RF, guarantees the preservation of ethnocultural and linguistic diversity.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    I don't really get it then. If the "Russia for (ethnic) Russians" law doesn't give ethnic Russians additional rights over other ethnic groups in the country then what's the point? Why wouldn't a "Russia for Russian citizens" law suffice?
    , @Yevardian
    There's nothing wrong with such laws. The Russian language is under no danger of being submerged (with the possible exception of English) in the next few decades, unlike almost all the non-caucasian local languages of the Russian Federation. To be concerned that use of Russian is going to come under fire from something like say, Mari, is frankly hysterical and ridiculous.
    Unlike most of the freebooters moving to Europe, these people have no other homeland and have always lived there.
  9. @Anatoly Karlin
    Where, exactly, is that prescribed?

    Article 69
    (1) The RF guarantees the rights of indigenous small peoples in accordance with commonly accepted principles and norms of international law...
    (2) The state defends the cultural identity of all peoples and ethnic communities of the RF, guarantees the preservation of ethnocultural and linguistic diversity.
     

    I don’t really get it then. If the “Russia for (ethnic) Russians” law doesn’t give ethnic Russians additional rights over other ethnic groups in the country then what’s the point? Why wouldn’t a “Russia for Russian citizens” law suffice?

    • Agree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Tusk
    The "X Country for X citizens" meme needs to die already. Obviously civic nationalism is a disgrace because then Indians or Africans will then move to Russia and become "Russian" magically because the state decrees it so. This is a ridiculous idea. Ethnic Russians deserve their own legal representation and sovereignty as do all people, and citizenship doesn't overule nationality.

    The fact is that non-Slavic minorities have their own zones as part of the Russian Federation, such as Tatarstan, that protect their ethnic interests. The only "apartheidi-ish" notion of this is that minorities in the RF have legally protected homelands but the majority do not, ergo ethnic Russians are being discriminated against as they don't have a (legally recognised) home of their own.
  10. @Europe Europa
    I don't really get it then. If the "Russia for (ethnic) Russians" law doesn't give ethnic Russians additional rights over other ethnic groups in the country then what's the point? Why wouldn't a "Russia for Russian citizens" law suffice?

    The “X Country for X citizens” meme needs to die already. Obviously civic nationalism is a disgrace because then Indians or Africans will then move to Russia and become “Russian” magically because the state decrees it so. This is a ridiculous idea. Ethnic Russians deserve their own legal representation and sovereignty as do all people, and citizenship doesn’t overule nationality.

    The fact is that non-Slavic minorities have their own zones as part of the Russian Federation, such as Tatarstan, that protect their ethnic interests. The only “apartheidi-ish” notion of this is that minorities in the RF have legally protected homelands but the majority do not, ergo ethnic Russians are being discriminated against as they don’t have a (legally recognised) home of their own.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

  11. @Tusk
    The "X Country for X citizens" meme needs to die already. Obviously civic nationalism is a disgrace because then Indians or Africans will then move to Russia and become "Russian" magically because the state decrees it so. This is a ridiculous idea. Ethnic Russians deserve their own legal representation and sovereignty as do all people, and citizenship doesn't overule nationality.

    The fact is that non-Slavic minorities have their own zones as part of the Russian Federation, such as Tatarstan, that protect their ethnic interests. The only "apartheidi-ish" notion of this is that minorities in the RF have legally protected homelands but the majority do not, ergo ethnic Russians are being discriminated against as they don't have a (legally recognised) home of their own.

    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don’t? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    • Replies: @Tusk
    It's a simple question. You either believe all ethnic groups have the right to have their interests represented legally, or you don't.

    The British people should most certainly be recognised by the state, otherwise you have exactly what I mentioned above: """"British"""" MPs that are actually foreigners from Pakistan, India, Africa, who are British citizens but not ethnically British. When you say "more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs" it's laughable considering the ethnic British people are declining and will soon be overtaken by ethnic Asians, labelled as Brits, who get to wield the political power for the English people.
    , @songbird
    Do you really want more politicians meeting regularly? "English" politicians? Wouldn't that just increase the power of MENA people over Britons?
    , @Korenchkin
    I doubt you want to use England as a good example m8, given that London is now only 45% White English
    They have all the rights in the world as they're erased from existence
    , @silviosilver

    The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.
     
    Sadly, it's often the English themselves doing the laughing - which is why they're mocked as "Cuck Island."

    If Russians-in-the-constitution does nothing else, it'll at least complicate the jobs of Russia-haters who attempt to pretend there's no such thing as Russian culture and no such thing as Russian ethnicity.

    Frankly, the only people who'd have a problem with Russians-in-the-constitution are Russia-haters and demented, delusional, bone-deep cuck faggots like anonfromTN ("muh precious darling black lab assistants, without whom my life would be nothing...").
    , @Mitleser
    If English were properly represented by Westminster, why did the English majority vote against the establishment Brexit stance?

    It is not a coincidence that Scotland and London, two anti-Brexit strongholds are better represented than the English regions.
    , @Pericles
    Not that easy to laugh at, actually. See also "The West Lothian Question".
  12. Congratulations!

    • Replies: @Paw
    Since Jews has ran away from Russia /since 1880/ and since 1970 and to the USA , the life for Russians returned to normal . Improved.
    They have now, the normal government and the normal president and that is, what they have wished for couple of centuries..At least.
    They wish to be let alone and let live and wish that for the whole world. They know the best, far best , what are wars , disasters insane revolutions and insane tragedies and they do no want any
    and do not wish it all to anyone ...
    It is that simple..
    , @Mr. Hack
    Yeah, that's what's needed, clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution. A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions (and other ethnicities' symbols too) within Russia. Are you sure that you've thought this one through? :-(
  13. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    It’s a simple question. You either believe all ethnic groups have the right to have their interests represented legally, or you don’t.

    The British people should most certainly be recognised by the state, otherwise you have exactly what I mentioned above: “”””British”””” MPs that are actually foreigners from Pakistan, India, Africa, who are British citizens but not ethnically British. When you say “more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs” it’s laughable considering the ethnic British people are declining and will soon be overtaken by ethnic Asians, labelled as Brits, who get to wield the political power for the English people.

  14. , are you out there? Do you feel the sky crashing on you? 😂

  15. Mixed bag, as always.

    Of course, it’s a good idea to affirm that the only legitimate meaning of marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Marriage is about procreation, first and foremost. When two gays produce a child via their sex, they would have a right to talk about gay marriage, but not before that.

    However, “Russia for Russians” won’t be written into the Constitution, thank goodness. If it were, that would be a death knell for Russia. Russia is very different from little inconsequential Eastern European Bantustans. It was and still is an empire, multi-national and multi-confessional. Any attempt to make it a Bantustan would shatter it and end its aspirations to be a super-power. If it writes something like that in a constitution, it would have the same importance as those who have it, like Hungary. So, sorry, dude, it ain’t gonna happen. Putin has many faults, but stupidity is not one of them.

    • Agree: Yevardian
    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    Honestly, fuck you dude! If this is what passes for Russophilia abroad, I prefer the Russophobes.
  16. @songbird
    Well, congrats!

    Though, to tell it truthfully, there are many godless places where God is mentioned prominently in the constitution. Heck, the first line of the Preamble to the Irish Constitution says: In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred.

    But all it really means is that the pozzed pols will go to Hell.

    When I came to the States, another post-doc in the lab (born and bred in the US) said: look at the money. It says “In God we trust”. That’s the only God we trust in.

    • Replies: @songbird
    The Zeus of America is no longer money, but Diversity. Money is burnt to Diversity, but Diversity is not burnt to Money.
    , @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    As always with the Americans, there seems to be a lot of BS around what the "founding fathers" intentions were on any given issue in the Constitution.

    Take the Electoral College voting system... all sorts of idiotic claims about it being done to "make elections competitive" and to make sure every state be vigorously campaigned in.

    To me it seems obvious that the system was implemented to reduce the massive chance and probability of corrupt voting over a vast territory (even for the time when US area was just in the North-East , but with too small number of states to make the "forces you to campaign in small and big states" theory just hot air).

    Pretty much an acceptance that a straightforward numerical vote would be a sham of ballot stuffing, bought votes exacerbated by a being a highly federalised country with a dispersed population.

    In other words, exactly what they have projected onto Russia.

    That said, if these scum had forced Ukraine into a similar system - giving the economically important and more heavily populated Novorossiya regions a very decisively high number of electoral college votes (along with Kiev), trading it off with the Banderetards for some concession on another issue- that would have been good.
  17. @AnonFromTN
    Mixed bag, as always.

    Of course, it’s a good idea to affirm that the only legitimate meaning of marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Marriage is about procreation, first and foremost. When two gays produce a child via their sex, they would have a right to talk about gay marriage, but not before that.

    However, "Russia for Russians" won’t be written into the Constitution, thank goodness. If it were, that would be a death knell for Russia. Russia is very different from little inconsequential Eastern European Bantustans. It was and still is an empire, multi-national and multi-confessional. Any attempt to make it a Bantustan would shatter it and end its aspirations to be a super-power. If it writes something like that in a constitution, it would have the same importance as those who have it, like Hungary. So, sorry, dude, it ain’t gonna happen. Putin has many faults, but stupidity is not one of them.

    Honestly, fuck you dude! If this is what passes for Russophilia abroad, I prefer the Russophobes.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Whatever. Every person is entitled to his/her illusions, you and Karlin included.
  18. @Felix Keverich
    Honestly, fuck you dude! If this is what passes for Russophilia abroad, I prefer the Russophobes.

    Whatever. Every person is entitled to his/her illusions, you and Karlin included.

    • Replies: @Denis
    Given that Russia for Russians was accepted to an extent even by the RSFSR, I don't see what has changed that it should be unacceptable now.
  19. Good. All problems of Russia are now solved.
    Russians have now nothing left to do than sing, dance and give thanks to Putin for their new Constitution.

  20. Russia is preparing to resume her mission. Pravoslavie, Samoderzhavie, Narodnost.
    Let’s hope that the memorable words of Konstantin Alexander Karl Wilhelm Christoph Graf von Benckendorff, that “Russia’s past was admirable, its present is more than magnificent and as for its future — it is beyond anything that the boldest mind can imagine” will come true. And these were words pronounced by a Baltic German!

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  21. Yes, this is literally Russian Brexit. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing, lots of time and effort wasted on nothing at all.
    British Empire is not coming back, and neither is Russian Empire.

    At least Brits will get their BLUE PASSPORTS.
    What will Russians get?

    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    "What will Russians get?"

    Only the largest nation on earth with the most natural resources and benefits from global warming (whatever the cause)
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Upsetting Jews like you is proof that they are doing something right.
  22. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    Do you really want more politicians meeting regularly? “English” politicians? Wouldn’t that just increase the power of MENA people over Britons?

  23. @AnonFromTN
    When I came to the States, another post-doc in the lab (born and bred in the US) said: look at the money. It says “In God we trust”. That’s the only God we trust in.

    The Zeus of America is no longer money, but Diversity. Money is burnt to Diversity, but Diversity is not burnt to Money.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Diversity is a scam for the sheeple. It is promoted by fat cats to allow them make more money by paying less to “diverse” workers.
  24. @songbird
    The Zeus of America is no longer money, but Diversity. Money is burnt to Diversity, but Diversity is not burnt to Money.

    Diversity is a scam for the sheeple. It is promoted by fat cats to allow them make more money by paying less to “diverse” workers.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Exactly.

    And that's why the left is resolutely opposed to any and all diversity directives, right?

    Lawl.

    What an absolute faggot of the ages you are.

  25. Paw says:
    @AP
    Congratulations!

    Since Jews has ran away from Russia /since 1880/ and since 1970 and to the USA , the life for Russians returned to normal . Improved.
    They have now, the normal government and the normal president and that is, what they have wished for couple of centuries..At least.
    They wish to be let alone and let live and wish that for the whole world. They know the best, far best , what are wars , disasters insane revolutions and insane tragedies and they do no want any
    and do not wish it all to anyone …
    It is that simple..

  26. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    I doubt you want to use England as a good example m8, given that London is now only 45% White English
    They have all the rights in the world as they’re erased from existence

  27. @another anon
    https://twitter.com/vilevarangian/status/1234531112636080129

    Yes, this is literally Russian Brexit. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing, lots of time and effort wasted on nothing at all.
    British Empire is not coming back, and neither is Russian Empire.

    At least Brits will get their BLUE PASSPORTS.
    What will Russians get?

    https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1234387968661438465

    “What will Russians get?”

    Only the largest nation on earth with the most natural resources and benefits from global warming (whatever the cause)

    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
  28. Good for Russia.

    Russia does not fuck with the rest of the world, so the Russian people don’t need to suffer the diversity problem the west has.

    Let the western white countries turn brown for all I care.

  29. @AP
    Congratulations!

    Yeah, that’s what’s needed, clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution. A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions (and other ethnicities’ symbols too) within Russia. Are you sure that you’ve thought this one through? 🙁

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.

    , @AP

    clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution.
     
    Why shouldn't the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions
     
    This is unfortunate but the bottom line is that it is their right, just as it is the right of the Ukrainian state to do such things. If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.
    , @Belarusian Dude
    Not surprised you use Stalinist terminology. Hohols owe everything to mr. Georgian
  30. Слава Русији!

    • Agree: TheTotallyAnonymous
  31. @AnonFromTN
    Whatever. Every person is entitled to his/her illusions, you and Karlin included.

    Given that Russia for Russians was accepted to an extent even by the RSFSR, I don’t see what has changed that it should be unacceptable now.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state. What’s more, so far RF defended its sovereignty and acted as an independent superpower. Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war. For an empire aspiring to be a super-power, it’s a death sentence.
  32. certain individuals within the ruling “United Russia”, such as Konstantin Zatulin

    Just FYI, Anatoly: Zatulin is a despicable мразь. Back when he was in the MGU, he was a known KGB informant. That’s how he made it up, with all of his komsomol/operotryad activists, in the early 1990s.

    celebrities and intellectuals, such as sci-fi author Sergey Lukyanenko

    Little wonder. Lukyanenko, like Zhirik, is originally from Alma-Ata, and knows damn well all the pleasures of living in a truly multicultural place.

  33. @Fluctuarius
    Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. --- H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker

    Let's hope our government doesn't cuck us and pulls a Crimea once more.

    Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. — H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker

    Who (Alexander III), by his insane rule, paved the way for the Bolsheviks and other revolutionaries.

    • Replies: @Fluctuarius
    Obviously, when bomb-throwing terrorists kill your father and pledge to destroy your country, you invite them to tea and cake

    Cuck-logic at its finest.

    , @Mitleser
    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.
  34. Out of curiosity, where does Dugin stand on the “Russian for the Russians” issue? On the subject of Dugin, I didn’t know that Anton Shekhovtsov had leaned in Dugin’s direction. Related:

    https://insomniacresurrected.com/2020/02/29/anton-shekhovtsov-denies-his-duginist-past-and-makes-apologetics-for-neonazis-in-the-atlantic-council/

    https://www.rt.com/op-ed/481939-atlantic-council-nazi-ukrainian-azov/

    Shekhovtsov’s reply here is lame:

    And just what exactly is “deceitful and slanderous” about that piece? In a Twitter comment, the author Bryan MacDonald, openly asked that question, adding that he’d correct any error.

  35. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    Sadly, it’s often the English themselves doing the laughing – which is why they’re mocked as “Cuck Island.”

    If Russians-in-the-constitution does nothing else, it’ll at least complicate the jobs of Russia-haters who attempt to pretend there’s no such thing as Russian culture and no such thing as Russian ethnicity.

    Frankly, the only people who’d have a problem with Russians-in-the-constitution are Russia-haters and demented, delusional, bone-deep cuck faggots like anonfromTN (“muh precious darling black lab assistants, without whom my life would be nothing…”).

    • LOL: Tusk
  36. @AnonFromTN
    Diversity is a scam for the sheeple. It is promoted by fat cats to allow them make more money by paying less to “diverse” workers.

    Exactly.

    And that’s why the left is resolutely opposed to any and all diversity directives, right?

    Lawl.

    What an absolute faggot of the ages you are.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Self-proclaimed American “left” is a 100% fake. CNN, NYT, and others of their ilk are lying corporate shills. They push that “diversity” BS following the orders of their owners.

    You sound like one of those gullible sheeple who swallowed the false Dem-Rep dichotomy hook, line, and sinker. Keep making the puppet-masters happy.
  37. While you are right that the sentence quoted by you from POlish constitution of 1997 was introduced specially for stopping same-sex marriage, in practice it may no suffice. Already there are lawyers and activists who pretend the sentence does not define marriage, but merely states that one form of marriage, that between man and women, must be protected by state – which does not exclude existence or support for other forms of marriage (including same-sex marriage). This interpretation, despite being against intentions of creators of constitution and the previous conclusions by our Constitutional Court, gets more and more steam on social media and I can’t count how many times I was debunking it.

    The lesson is, the statements should not be vague with a hope that it’s obvious what they mean.

    Another lesson is that maybe the Consitution should mandate that courts cannot institute new consequences by new interpretation of old laws, and in case of new interpretation they should ask the legislature for confirmation. Otherwise, we will be going into judgecracy.

    Also, jurists are saying that constitution defines Polish nation as all citizens of Poland, regardless of their ethnicity.

    BTW, you promised the report fro your recent travel to Poland. Have I missed it?

    • Replies: @Znzn
    Can't you forestall this problem with a sufficient amount of 5.56mm NATO ball ammo and lots and lots of shallow graves?
    , @Bill

    The lesson is, the statements should not be vague with a hope that it’s obvious what they mean.
     
    That absolutely is not the lesson. The lesson is that nobody cares about "the rule of law" except for spergs. Men rule. Laws do not. Care deeply about which men rule, who they are, and what they want. Care little for what shape the ink blots on the paper have.
  38. @Mr. Hack
    Yeah, that's what's needed, clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution. A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions (and other ethnicities' symbols too) within Russia. Are you sure that you've thought this one through? :-(

    What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.
     
    Strange. Maybe it depends on whose company you are in or what neighborhoods you visited. I'd estimate about 10% Ukrainian speech on the streets last time I was there, in 2017, about the same as in previous visits. Others have noted an increase so maybe it is now 15% but I hadn't noticed the difference.
  39. @another anon
    https://twitter.com/vilevarangian/status/1234531112636080129

    Yes, this is literally Russian Brexit. Lots of sound and fury signifying nothing, lots of time and effort wasted on nothing at all.
    British Empire is not coming back, and neither is Russian Empire.

    At least Brits will get their BLUE PASSPORTS.
    What will Russians get?

    https://twitter.com/ukhomeoffice/status/1234387968661438465

    Upsetting Jews like you is proof that they are doing something right.

    • Replies: @another anon
    I am not Jewish, and not upset at all. I just see the whole thing as empty gesture, nothing to be upset about either for or against.
    All Russian patriots in these threads swear they do not want to exclude anyone, they do not want to persecute anyone, they want all citizens of Russia to have equal rights regardless of ethnicity. In this case, what difference would this one sentence in constitution make?

    Anyway, constitutions are one thing and real life is another. For example, US Constitution says that you have right to own and carry nuclear weapon.
    Feel free to excercise your right ;-)

  40. @Daniel Chieh
    Upsetting Jews like you is proof that they are doing something right.

    I am not Jewish, and not upset at all. I just see the whole thing as empty gesture, nothing to be upset about either for or against.
    All Russian patriots in these threads swear they do not want to exclude anyone, they do not want to persecute anyone, they want all citizens of Russia to have equal rights regardless of ethnicity. In this case, what difference would this one sentence in constitution make?

    Anyway, constitutions are one thing and real life is another. For example, US Constitution says that you have right to own and carry nuclear weapon.
    Feel free to excercise your right 😉

    • Replies: @Dacian Julien Soros
    That's nothing. The US Constitution says you have a right to a trial by jury. IRL juries are "not allow" when sentences are shorter than 2 years. Few people afford nuclear weapons, but a majority of Americans have been contesting traffic fines in court.
  41. @szopen
    While you are right that the sentence quoted by you from POlish constitution of 1997 was introduced specially for stopping same-sex marriage, in practice it may no suffice. Already there are lawyers and activists who pretend the sentence does not define marriage, but merely states that one form of marriage, that between man and women, must be protected by state - which does not exclude existence or support for other forms of marriage (including same-sex marriage). This interpretation, despite being against intentions of creators of constitution and the previous conclusions by our Constitutional Court, gets more and more steam on social media and I can't count how many times I was debunking it.

    The lesson is, the statements should not be vague with a hope that it's obvious what they mean.

    Another lesson is that maybe the Consitution should mandate that courts cannot institute new consequences by new interpretation of old laws, and in case of new interpretation they should ask the legislature for confirmation. Otherwise, we will be going into judgecracy.

    Also, jurists are saying that constitution defines Polish nation as all citizens of Poland, regardless of their ethnicity.

    BTW, you promised the report fro your recent travel to Poland. Have I missed it?

    Can’t you forestall this problem with a sufficient amount of 5.56mm NATO ball ammo and lots and lots of shallow graves?

  42. And what is a Russian exactly? It will not take long for many Sub Saharans to learn that being Russian means speaking the language and converting to Russian Orthodox, and soon you will have a near endless influx of these new Russians. This cuck lite strategy will not work because it will not address the ultimate issue of identity, which is race.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    I suspect that Russians know what a Russian is, more than Americans know what an American is, without to incessantly talking about their 'race' or 'identity'.
    , @songbird

    And what is a Russian exactly?
     
    Yes, this is a big problem. As with the constitutions of many countries, a geographic definition is probably baked into the cake. And I am sure it was perfectly reasonable at one time - before globalism.
  43. Another proposed addition called on Russia to “acknowledge the priority significance of science and technology for the country’s development.” That was something that could have only come from the imagination of a Russian bureaucrat-bugman. It’s what one imagines some tinpot Third World dictatorship would write in its Constitutional preamble. Central African Republic: We affirm the priority importance of vaccines and literacy for the country’s development.

    Karlin, you’ve been in Russia for a long time, and yet you’re still a foreigner and completely clueless about the larger Russian cultural context.

    “Priority of science and technology” is a dogwhistle phrase that really means “priority of the atheist materialist world-view”. It’s a jibe at the fact that God was mentioned in this version of the constitution; they’re proposing to re-word it in a subversive way, something like “the rubes may believe in God for historical reasons, but we’re going to push atheism on your kids anyways”.

    TL;DR – translated to American it would be “I fucking love science”, with everything that implies.

    • Replies: @Dreadilk
    I think it's so obvious that he just did not mention it.
  44. Do Russians of Belarusian and Ukrainian descent count as ethnic Russians under this law? Presumably not as that would then mean that anyone who speaks Russian and professes Orthodox religion counts as an ethnic Russian which would by definition not be an ethnicity at all, unless Putin is planning to deny that Belarusians and Ukrainians are a separate ethnicity from Russians?

    Legally defining what “ethnic Russian” means seems potentially very complex as there are many people who identify as ethnic Russians who are not completely ethnic Russians in ancestral terms. So if being ethnic Russian is simply speaking Russian, being Orthodox and identifying as “ethnic Russian” then you are back to civic nationalism basically.

    • Replies: @Fluctuarius
    A Russian is whoever other Russians recognise as a Russian.
    , @Swedish Family

    Do Russians of Belarusian and Ukrainian descent count as ethnic Russians under this law? Presumably not as that would then mean that anyone who speaks Russian and professes Orthodox religion counts as an ethnic Russian which would by definition not be an ethnicity at all, unless Putin is planning to deny that Belarusians and Ukrainians are a separate ethnicity from Russians?
     
    He has more than once. My memory is a bit blurry, but he said something to that effect in a Russian TV interview a few months back -- or that's when I came across the clip anyway -- and at least once in the early 00s (to some foreign interviewer, I seem to remember).

    As for your worries, let's wait and see how the new constitution is worded until we start fretting about loopholes.
  45. @melanf

    Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. — H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker
     
    Who (Alexander III), by his insane rule, paved the way for the Bolsheviks and other revolutionaries.

    Obviously, when bomb-throwing terrorists kill your father and pledge to destroy your country, you invite them to tea and cake

    Cuck-logic at its finest.

    • Replies: @melanf

    Obviously, when bomb-throwing terrorists kill your father and pledge to destroy your country, you invite them to tea and cake
     
    In relation to terrorists, Alexander is guilty of excessive softness. But these are small things. But in other aspects, his policy was frankly insane: the refusal to introduce universal education, the preservation of a medieval village community with a system of open fields, the scum and degenerate Nicholas appointed as Alexander's heir, etc., etc.
  46. @Europe Europa
    Do Russians of Belarusian and Ukrainian descent count as ethnic Russians under this law? Presumably not as that would then mean that anyone who speaks Russian and professes Orthodox religion counts as an ethnic Russian which would by definition not be an ethnicity at all, unless Putin is planning to deny that Belarusians and Ukrainians are a separate ethnicity from Russians?

    Legally defining what "ethnic Russian" means seems potentially very complex as there are many people who identify as ethnic Russians who are not completely ethnic Russians in ancestral terms. So if being ethnic Russian is simply speaking Russian, being Orthodox and identifying as "ethnic Russian" then you are back to civic nationalism basically.

    A Russian is whoever other Russians recognise as a Russian.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    That's not really how laws work, at least not in democratic countries with due process. It seems to me that Putin is virtue signalling to a certain type of Russian nationalist but hasn't actually got the gumption to define a Russian as an Orthodox Slav which would actually give the law meaning then.

    In that sense it is sort of like Brexit, in that it's a symbolic gesture intended to appease the sentiments of a certain element of the population rather than actually change anything in reality.
  47. @Fluctuarius
    Obviously, when bomb-throwing terrorists kill your father and pledge to destroy your country, you invite them to tea and cake

    Cuck-logic at its finest.

    Obviously, when bomb-throwing terrorists kill your father and pledge to destroy your country, you invite them to tea and cake

    In relation to terrorists, Alexander is guilty of excessive softness. But these are small things. But in other aspects, his policy was frankly insane: the refusal to introduce universal education, the preservation of a medieval village community with a system of open fields, the scum and degenerate Nicholas appointed as Alexander’s heir, etc., etc.

  48. @Fluctuarius
    A Russian is whoever other Russians recognise as a Russian.

    That’s not really how laws work, at least not in democratic countries with due process. It seems to me that Putin is virtue signalling to a certain type of Russian nationalist but hasn’t actually got the gumption to define a Russian as an Orthodox Slav which would actually give the law meaning then.

    In that sense it is sort of like Brexit, in that it’s a symbolic gesture intended to appease the sentiments of a certain element of the population rather than actually change anything in reality.

    • Replies: @Bill
    Laws use "reasonable man" standards all the time. Laws are written in languages using words. Words mean what the speakers of the language say they mean.

    So, that's exactly how laws always work.
  49. Great news. Thanks Anatoly.

  50. @neutral
    And what is a Russian exactly? It will not take long for many Sub Saharans to learn that being Russian means speaking the language and converting to Russian Orthodox, and soon you will have a near endless influx of these new Russians. This cuck lite strategy will not work because it will not address the ultimate issue of identity, which is race.

    I suspect that Russians know what a Russian is, more than Americans know what an American is, without to incessantly talking about their ‘race’ or ‘identity’.

    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    He has a point, though.

    (((Liberals))) always find ways to wiggle through and cause trouble. So the Russians will hopefully ensure this new definition is prudent and practicable, *as enacted*, to hamper Jacob and his CIA butt-goy's efforts to destroy the Russian people as they are destroying the Americans and western Europeans.

    , @Europe Europa
    That's because Russian is actually a Slavic ethnicity, like Polish, Serbian, etc. American in contrast is a completely invented nationality.

    If you want to define what a "real American" is in historical terms, I would argue that it is an American of British descent who is an Anglican/Protestant but I doubt you or most Americans would agree with that definition.
    , @neutral
    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian. The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next. If you are going with "Russian is a culture" nonsense then you have absolutely zero reasons to deny every third worlder who learns Russian being a Russian.
  51. @Seraphim
    I suspect that Russians know what a Russian is, more than Americans know what an American is, without to incessantly talking about their 'race' or 'identity'.

    He has a point, though.

    (((Liberals))) always find ways to wiggle through and cause trouble. So the Russians will hopefully ensure this new definition is prudent and practicable, *as enacted*, to hamper Jacob and his CIA butt-goy’s efforts to destroy the Russian people as they are destroying the Americans and western Europeans.

  52. @Seraphim
    I suspect that Russians know what a Russian is, more than Americans know what an American is, without to incessantly talking about their 'race' or 'identity'.

    That’s because Russian is actually a Slavic ethnicity, like Polish, Serbian, etc. American in contrast is a completely invented nationality.

    If you want to define what a “real American” is in historical terms, I would argue that it is an American of British descent who is an Anglican/Protestant but I doubt you or most Americans would agree with that definition.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Maybe Churchill gave the best definition: "Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest".
    Russians are the ones who care for Russia's national interest. Who are the true Russians? The Varangian Russes, the Slav Polyanians who 'now are called Russes' as the Primary Chronicle says?
  53. @Seraphim
    I suspect that Russians know what a Russian is, more than Americans know what an American is, without to incessantly talking about their 'race' or 'identity'.

    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian. The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next. If you are going with “Russian is a culture” nonsense then you have absolutely zero reasons to deny every third worlder who learns Russian being a Russian.

    • Replies: @another anon

    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian.
     
    If we follow the logic "Russian recognizes Russian" it is easy.
    Polling whole Russian nation is completely impractical, but you can select a jury of randomly chosen Russians who will examine the applicants and judge whether they are Russian enough to be accepted.

    The details (unanimous or majority vote? beyond reasonable doubt or preponderance of evidence?), the costs of the procedure, the ways how to prevent corruption I leave to you ;-)

    , @Slimer

    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.
     
    They've already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ZsSwpFlKQ&pbjreload=10

  54. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    If English were properly represented by Westminster, why did the English majority vote against the establishment Brexit stance?

    It is not a coincidence that Scotland and London, two anti-Brexit strongholds are better represented than the English regions.

  55. @melanf

    Russia, for Russians, and in the Russian way. — H.I.M. Alexander III the Peacemaker
     
    Who (Alexander III), by his insane rule, paved the way for the Bolsheviks and other revolutionaries.

    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.

    • Replies: @melanf

    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.
     
    "Bismarck is to blame for everything that happened, he taught us to rely on force in everything"
    Prince Maximilian of Baden in 1918

    (I write from memory so I can't guarantee the accuracy of the quote)

  56. @neutral
    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian. The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next. If you are going with "Russian is a culture" nonsense then you have absolutely zero reasons to deny every third worlder who learns Russian being a Russian.

    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian.

    If we follow the logic “Russian recognizes Russian” it is easy.
    Polling whole Russian nation is completely impractical, but you can select a jury of randomly chosen Russians who will examine the applicants and judge whether they are Russian enough to be accepted.

    The details (unanimous or majority vote? beyond reasonable doubt or preponderance of evidence?), the costs of the procedure, the ways how to prevent corruption I leave to you 😉

  57. @E. Harding
    Looks surprisingly good. Though I wouldn't mention God, given I'm an atheist, it makes sense if Russia is to be the third Rome, as its religion comes even more directly from the second Rome than the Western ones.

    I felt there was too much God in politics when I was young, but now I recognize it as majority’s attempt to keep away the interlopers. It’s unclear how much it works. In Romania, when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn’t fell like he was integrating, given that the country was plundered, with his help, by indigenous and American “businessmen” who generally didn’t celebrate Christmas. OTOH, Shoigu crossing himself is a decent signal of submission to the majority.

    So, despite being an atheist, I’d rather see more Christian displays, as long as we agree they are less important compared to decisions from locally-elected lawmakers.

    Talking of people who don’t celebrate Christmas, Anatoly, please drop that Abrahamic nonsense. “Abrahamic” implies common values between Orthodox churches, the Catholic rebranding of the Roman Empire, tranny-worshipping Episcopalians, Erdogan’s statist Islam, murderous Wahabism, Mafia-like Jew-supremacist Jaredkushnerism, and Ultraorthodox goat sacrificers of Brooklyn / West Bank.

    You have more in common with Stalin than with any of the others.

    • Replies: @neutral

    when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn’t fell like he was integrating

     

    He can never integrate, that is absolutely impossible, all displays of being Romanian (or any other non jew grouping) is always utterly insincere and fake.
    , @The Big Red Scary

    “Abrahamic” implies common values
     
    Indeed. Like "Western civilization" was invented to include Jews in Christendom, "Abrahamic faith" was invented to include Mohammedans in "Western Civilization". That said, classical Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans are not completely alien to each other, and a practical-minded king not afraid to make judicious use of the sword could make them all live together in the same city with only occasional riots.
  58. @Dacian Julien Soros
    I felt there was too much God in politics when I was young, but now I recognize it as majority's attempt to keep away the interlopers. It's unclear how much it works. In Romania, when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn't fell like he was integrating, given that the country was plundered, with his help, by indigenous and American "businessmen" who generally didn't celebrate Christmas. OTOH, Shoigu crossing himself is a decent signal of submission to the majority.

    So, despite being an atheist, I'd rather see more Christian displays, as long as we agree they are less important compared to decisions from locally-elected lawmakers.

    Talking of people who don't celebrate Christmas, Anatoly, please drop that Abrahamic nonsense. "Abrahamic" implies common values between Orthodox churches, the Catholic rebranding of the Roman Empire, tranny-worshipping Episcopalians, Erdogan's statist Islam, murderous Wahabism, Mafia-like Jew-supremacist Jaredkushnerism, and Ultraorthodox goat sacrificers of Brooklyn / West Bank.

    You have more in common with Stalin than with any of the others.

    when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn’t fell like he was integrating

    He can never integrate, that is absolutely impossible, all displays of being Romanian (or any other non jew grouping) is always utterly insincere and fake.

  59. @Mitleser
    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.

    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.

    “Bismarck is to blame for everything that happened, he taught us to rely on force in everything”
    Prince Maximilian of Baden in 1918

    (I write from memory so I can’t guarantee the accuracy of the quote)

    • Replies: @Korenchkin

    he taught us to rely on force in everything
     
    Bismarck told them the Balkans "aren't worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier"
  60. @another anon
    I am not Jewish, and not upset at all. I just see the whole thing as empty gesture, nothing to be upset about either for or against.
    All Russian patriots in these threads swear they do not want to exclude anyone, they do not want to persecute anyone, they want all citizens of Russia to have equal rights regardless of ethnicity. In this case, what difference would this one sentence in constitution make?

    Anyway, constitutions are one thing and real life is another. For example, US Constitution says that you have right to own and carry nuclear weapon.
    Feel free to excercise your right ;-)

    That’s nothing. The US Constitution says you have a right to a trial by jury. IRL juries are “not allow” when sentences are shorter than 2 years. Few people afford nuclear weapons, but a majority of Americans have been contesting traffic fines in court.

    • Replies: @another anon
    Indeed, and there are many more examples.

    https://fee.org/articles/the-constitution-and-paper-money/

    There is no actual constitutional provision allowing the government to simply print paper money.

    As every tin foil wearer worth his salt would tell you, just about everything US govt does is unconstitional. Just like everything medieval Church did was unbiblical. ;-)
  61. @Dacian Julien Soros
    I felt there was too much God in politics when I was young, but now I recognize it as majority's attempt to keep away the interlopers. It's unclear how much it works. In Romania, when the first post-Socialist PM, a Jew, crossed himself in the nineties, it didn't fell like he was integrating, given that the country was plundered, with his help, by indigenous and American "businessmen" who generally didn't celebrate Christmas. OTOH, Shoigu crossing himself is a decent signal of submission to the majority.

    So, despite being an atheist, I'd rather see more Christian displays, as long as we agree they are less important compared to decisions from locally-elected lawmakers.

    Talking of people who don't celebrate Christmas, Anatoly, please drop that Abrahamic nonsense. "Abrahamic" implies common values between Orthodox churches, the Catholic rebranding of the Roman Empire, tranny-worshipping Episcopalians, Erdogan's statist Islam, murderous Wahabism, Mafia-like Jew-supremacist Jaredkushnerism, and Ultraorthodox goat sacrificers of Brooklyn / West Bank.

    You have more in common with Stalin than with any of the others.

    “Abrahamic” implies common values

    Indeed. Like “Western civilization” was invented to include Jews in Christendom, “Abrahamic faith” was invented to include Mohammedans in “Western Civilization”. That said, classical Jews, Christians, and Mohammedans are not completely alien to each other, and a practical-minded king not afraid to make judicious use of the sword could make them all live together in the same city with only occasional riots.

  62. AP says:
    @Mr. Hack
    Yeah, that's what's needed, clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution. A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions (and other ethnicities' symbols too) within Russia. Are you sure that you've thought this one through? :-(

    clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution.

    Why shouldn’t the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions

    This is unfortunate but the bottom line is that it is their right, just as it is the right of the Ukrainian state to do such things. If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.
     
    An inspiration for them to do what, exactly?

    Why shouldn’t the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.
     
    What about having the US be for white people (but with an expanded definition of white so that white-passing Hispanics and Latinos, white-passing Middle Easterners, white-passing South Asians, and even white-passing blacks (such as perhaps Ben Jealous) would also qualify for this)?
    , @Mr. XYZ
    Also, what about having India be for Hindus?
  63. @anonymous coward

    Another proposed addition called on Russia to “acknowledge the priority significance of science and technology for the country’s development.” That was something that could have only come from the imagination of a Russian bureaucrat-bugman. It’s what one imagines some tinpot Third World dictatorship would write in its Constitutional preamble. Central African Republic: We affirm the priority importance of vaccines and literacy for the country’s development.
     
    Karlin, you've been in Russia for a long time, and yet you're still a foreigner and completely clueless about the larger Russian cultural context.

    "Priority of science and technology" is a dogwhistle phrase that really means "priority of the atheist materialist world-view". It's a jibe at the fact that God was mentioned in this version of the constitution; they're proposing to re-word it in a subversive way, something like "the rubes may believe in God for historical reasons, but we're going to push atheism on your kids anyways".

    TL;DR - translated to American it would be "I fucking love science", with everything that implies.

    I think it’s so obvious that he just did not mention it.

  64. AP says:
    @The Big Red Scary
    What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.

    Strange. Maybe it depends on whose company you are in or what neighborhoods you visited. I’d estimate about 10% Ukrainian speech on the streets last time I was there, in 2017, about the same as in previous visits. Others have noted an increase so maybe it is now 15% but I hadn’t noticed the difference.

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    Certainly possible it was the neighborhoods. I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn't wanted to speak Russian. What stood out about them though was that they seemed to be temporarily embarrassed bourgeoisie, not the kind of people you expect to be driving taxis.

    Certainly in my wife's home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other-- and Russian to me.
  65. @Europe Europa
    That's because Russian is actually a Slavic ethnicity, like Polish, Serbian, etc. American in contrast is a completely invented nationality.

    If you want to define what a "real American" is in historical terms, I would argue that it is an American of British descent who is an Anglican/Protestant but I doubt you or most Americans would agree with that definition.

    Maybe Churchill gave the best definition: “Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest”.
    Russians are the ones who care for Russia’s national interest. Who are the true Russians? The Varangian Russes, the Slav Polyanians who ‘now are called Russes’ as the Primary Chronicle says?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    The Polyanins never were Russians, and served as the primary basis for the Ukrainian nation.
  66. Why shouldn’t the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    As others at this blog have pointed out, it’s difficult to actually pinpoint what it means in this day and age to define precisely what it means to actually be a Russian. Would the definition include Belorussians and Ukrainians too, due to their shared experiences within Kyivan Rus? How about other even non-Slavic peoples who use the Russian language often enough and perhaps are Orthodox Christians too? One can see the “unfortunate” effects of a campaign of full-blown russification going on in Tatarstan today. Are you willing to see the effects of a full blown, unhampered russification of the remaining Ukrainians that live in Russia today, that such changes to the constitution would probably entail, sooner or later? Certainly, this is their right, as is going in the opposite direction and providing an environment that is more amenable to respecting the rights of other ethnicities in a Russia that is indeed a country of many nationalities.

    Do you really believe that if such a position were enshrined within the Ukrainian constitution today, that Russians would standby and accept this without loud protestations of unfair discrimination and abuse of human rights? With Russia it seems, there’s always a hypicritcal approach to such matters, especially as it relates to Ukraine. It seems logical that Russia should soon officially become a unitary state too, to match it’s new views of Russian nationality.

    • Replies: @AP

    One can see the “unfortunate” effects of a campaign of full-blown russification going on in Tatarstan today.
     
    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.

    Are you willing to see the effects of a full blown, unhampered russification of the remaining Ukrainians that live in Russia today, that such changes to the constitution would probably entail, sooner or later?
     
    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv's ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).

    Do you really believe that if such a position were enshrined within the Ukrainian constitution today, that Russians would standby and accept this without loud protestations of unfair discrimination and abuse of human rights?
     
    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.
  67. @Seraphim
    Maybe Churchill gave the best definition: "Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest".
    Russians are the ones who care for Russia's national interest. Who are the true Russians? The Varangian Russes, the Slav Polyanians who 'now are called Russes' as the Primary Chronicle says?

    The Polyanins never were Russians, and served as the primary basis for the Ukrainian nation.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Your ignorance of the historical sources of your own history never failed to astonish me. But never let truth get in the way of a good story.
  68. @Dacian Julien Soros
    That's nothing. The US Constitution says you have a right to a trial by jury. IRL juries are "not allow" when sentences are shorter than 2 years. Few people afford nuclear weapons, but a majority of Americans have been contesting traffic fines in court.

    Indeed, and there are many more examples.

    https://fee.org/articles/the-constitution-and-paper-money/

    There is no actual constitutional provision allowing the government to simply print paper money.

    As every tin foil wearer worth his salt would tell you, just about everything US govt does is unconstitional. Just like everything medieval Church did was unbiblical. 😉

  69. @melanf

    That is like blaming Bismarck for the German revolution of 1918.
     
    "Bismarck is to blame for everything that happened, he taught us to rely on force in everything"
    Prince Maximilian of Baden in 1918

    (I write from memory so I can't guarantee the accuracy of the quote)

    he taught us to rely on force in everything

    Bismarck told them the Balkans “aren’t worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier”

    • Replies: @melanf


    he taught us to rely on force in everything
     
    Bismarck told them the Balkans “aren’t worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier”
     
    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/labas/64933/526440/526440_original.jpg

    translation: At a meal at Bismarck's, shortly after Luxembourg's neutrality was declared, a scholar suggested that Prussia should start a war with France. Bismarck very seriously objected:
    "Dear Professor, such a war would cost the lives of at least 30,000 of our brave soldiers, and even in the best case would not bring any benefits. Anyone who has ever looked into the fading eyes of a warrior dying on the battlefield will think well before starting a war."

    This is 1867. As we well know, Bismarck (to the great misfortune of Germany) did not follow his own wise advice.

  70. @neutral
    And what is a Russian exactly? It will not take long for many Sub Saharans to learn that being Russian means speaking the language and converting to Russian Orthodox, and soon you will have a near endless influx of these new Russians. This cuck lite strategy will not work because it will not address the ultimate issue of identity, which is race.

    And what is a Russian exactly?

    Yes, this is a big problem. As with the constitutions of many countries, a geographic definition is probably baked into the cake. And I am sure it was perfectly reasonable at one time – before globalism.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Practically speaking, something like: someone who is genetically at least about half Slavic and the remaining portion almost entirely European/Scandinavian, Caucasian, or central Asian (can’t exclude Messrs. Shoigu or Karlin, after all);

    Orthodox or at least nonCatholic Christian;

    fluent in Russian;

    and swearing allegiance only to Russia and other Russian people, which means no citizenship or military or government service for any other country ever;

    and owing and professing no loyalty to any other government, race, or religion.

    This does not exclude people not meeting the criteria from being loyal, fully understood, welcomed, respected, trusted citizens and part of the broader Russified pro-Russian community in other parts of the RF, just from “being Russian” and being always politically and culturally foremost and in full control of “Russia proper.”
  71. AP says:
    @Mr. Hack

    Why shouldn’t the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.
     
    As others at this blog have pointed out, it's difficult to actually pinpoint what it means in this day and age to define precisely what it means to actually be a Russian. Would the definition include Belorussians and Ukrainians too, due to their shared experiences within Kyivan Rus? How about other even non-Slavic peoples who use the Russian language often enough and perhaps are Orthodox Christians too? One can see the "unfortunate" effects of a campaign of full-blown russification going on in Tatarstan today. Are you willing to see the effects of a full blown, unhampered russification of the remaining Ukrainians that live in Russia today, that such changes to the constitution would probably entail, sooner or later? Certainly, this is their right, as is going in the opposite direction and providing an environment that is more amenable to respecting the rights of other ethnicities in a Russia that is indeed a country of many nationalities.

    Do you really believe that if such a position were enshrined within the Ukrainian constitution today, that Russians would standby and accept this without loud protestations of unfair discrimination and abuse of human rights? With Russia it seems, there's always a hypicritcal approach to such matters, especially as it relates to Ukraine. It seems logical that Russia should soon officially become a unitary state too, to match it's new views of Russian nationality.

    One can see the “unfortunate” effects of a campaign of full-blown russification going on in Tatarstan today.

    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.

    Are you willing to see the effects of a full blown, unhampered russification of the remaining Ukrainians that live in Russia today, that such changes to the constitution would probably entail, sooner or later?

    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv’s ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).

    Do you really believe that if such a position were enshrined within the Ukrainian constitution today, that Russians would standby and accept this without loud protestations of unfair discrimination and abuse of human rights?

    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.
     
    All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin's new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian? The first time in history where I've heard of natives being in favor of disbanding their own languages in favor of that of a foreign one, that has historically served as an imperial master.

    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv’s ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).
     
    I cannot comment directly on the success of Lviv's Ukrainianization policies, but in Ivano-Frankivsk (perhaps an even greater bastion of Ukrainian nationalism) Ukrainianization of transplants from Donbas is a mixed bag. Although the children of such tranplants can be heard speaking Ukrainian on the streets, their parents still often cling to Russian. Perhaps, even worse, they're actively creating new "suburban areas" where they can create their own ghettos including churches loyal to the MP. This could easily spell over into outright friction between the two groups in the future.

    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.
     
    Unfortunately, it' Russia that is backing militant pro-Russian insurgents in Ukraine, that has been responsible for the chaos in the East. Wasn't it precisely Russian language rights that was used as a pretext for war in Donbas?
  72. To compare this to Brexit doesn’t seem very accurate. The Brexit vision is to turn Britain into a European Singapore, a globalist island with open borders to India, Africa, the entirely world really.

    Brexit isn’t going to make Britain more insular and isn’t about putting the native British first, in fact it will only accelerate Britain’s transformation from white nation into a coffee coloured nation.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "The Brexit vision is to turn Britain into a European Singapore, a globalist island with open borders to India, Africa, the entirely world really."

    That's not what Leavers voted for - we voted for global trade and much more tightly controlled borders. Of course how globalists like Boris interpret the vote may well be different.
  73. @Denis
    Given that Russia for Russians was accepted to an extent even by the RSFSR, I don't see what has changed that it should be unacceptable now.

    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state. What’s more, so far RF defended its sovereignty and acted as an independent superpower. Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war. For an empire aspiring to be a super-power, it’s a death sentence.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    What is wrong with that?

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not "an empire aspiring to be a super-power".

    How much did Russians benefit from the Soviet Union's status as superpower that subsides others across the world?
    Apparently, not enough, hence there was not much opposition against the dissolution of the USSR.
    , @Denis

    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state.
     
    ?

    So Russians should have less official status within there own nation-state than they did in an administrative unit within the USSR?


    Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war.
     
    I agree to an extent but I don't see how officially acknowledging that Russia is the nation-state of the Russian people is beyond the pale. It has been the norm for quite some time for states to declare explicitly that they are the nation-state of their people. The primary reason that anyone questions this in English language media today is because they feel it is offensive to immigrant minorities. I don't really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.

    Perhaps Russians don't want to have the same status that Japanese have in Japan, Poles have in Poland, and Koreans have in Korea, but I doubt it.

  74. @silviosilver
    Exactly.

    And that's why the left is resolutely opposed to any and all diversity directives, right?

    Lawl.

    What an absolute faggot of the ages you are.

    Self-proclaimed American “left” is a 100% fake. CNN, NYT, and others of their ilk are lying corporate shills. They push that “diversity” BS following the orders of their owners.

    You sound like one of those gullible sheeple who swallowed the false Dem-Rep dichotomy hook, line, and sinker. Keep making the puppet-masters happy.

  75. @AP

    One can see the “unfortunate” effects of a campaign of full-blown russification going on in Tatarstan today.
     
    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.

    Are you willing to see the effects of a full blown, unhampered russification of the remaining Ukrainians that live in Russia today, that such changes to the constitution would probably entail, sooner or later?
     
    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv's ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).

    Do you really believe that if such a position were enshrined within the Ukrainian constitution today, that Russians would standby and accept this without loud protestations of unfair discrimination and abuse of human rights?
     
    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.

    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.

    All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin’s new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian? The first time in history where I’ve heard of natives being in favor of disbanding their own languages in favor of that of a foreign one, that has historically served as an imperial master.

    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv’s ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).

    I cannot comment directly on the success of Lviv’s Ukrainianization policies, but in Ivano-Frankivsk (perhaps an even greater bastion of Ukrainian nationalism) Ukrainianization of transplants from Donbas is a mixed bag. Although the children of such tranplants can be heard speaking Ukrainian on the streets, their parents still often cling to Russian. Perhaps, even worse, they’re actively creating new “suburban areas” where they can create their own ghettos including churches loyal to the MP. This could easily spell over into outright friction between the two groups in the future.

    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.

    Unfortunately, it’ Russia that is backing militant pro-Russian insurgents in Ukraine, that has been responsible for the chaos in the East. Wasn’t it precisely Russian language rights that was used as a pretext for war in Donbas?

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    "All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin’s new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian?"

    Could you elaborate? Last time you brought this up, you linked to some news piece about this, which made it clear that the change in the status quo consisted of Tatar language no longer being *obligatory*, which is not evidence of Tatar language being suppressed. No further information was provided as to the availability or non-availability of Tatar language courses for those who want them.

    In the long run, though, it is probably a good idea for a government to insist on a single official language. The Ukrainian government seems to agree.
  76. “Russia for Russians” to be Written Into the Constitution

    What a novel idea…the US should try it….American for Americans.

    • Replies: @Realist
    Should read... America for Americans.
  77. The most similar country I can think of to England is probably Germany. The natives are both are convinced to hate their own nation and history, both convinced to see themselves as deserving of mass immigration because of the “crimes” of their nation’s past.

    I can’t imagine either England or Germany ever passing a law putting their native people first, the very idea that native English and native Germans exist is considered completely racist and taboo in both countries. Both are also very squeamish about flag flying, terrified it will offend immigrants. Both the English and Germans also receive a similar amount of hate globally, they are both stereotyped as the quintessential “brutal oppressor” nations.

    • Agree: German_reader
  78. Broke: Russia for Russians

    Woke: Russian Empire for Triune Russian Nation

    Bespoke: Holy Russian Imperium of Man for Mankind.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/ccd831dd-b96c-4a03-a8a5-e0760700c024/d5hqxye-ea6ebcce-e2c8-457e-b54b-8a7c6d5be502.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7InBhdGgiOiJcL2ZcL2NjZDgzMWRkLWI5NmMtNGEwMy1hOGE1LWUwNzYwNzAwYzAyNFwvZDVocXh5ZS1lYTZlYmNjZS1lMmM4LTQ1N2UtYjU0Yi04YTdjNmQ1YmU1MDIuanBnIn1dXSwiYXVkIjpbInVybjpzZXJ2aWNlOmZpbGUuZG93bmxvYWQiXX0.BIv-7Hevby_EQbwwrCL1GnGoWidkTLb_PRUGMg8qZe4
  79. @Korenchkin

    he taught us to rely on force in everything
     
    Bismarck told them the Balkans "aren't worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier"

    he taught us to rely on force in everything

    Bismarck told them the Balkans “aren’t worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier”


    translation: At a meal at Bismarck’s, shortly after Luxembourg’s neutrality was declared, a scholar suggested that Prussia should start a war with France. Bismarck very seriously objected:
    Dear Professor, such a war would cost the lives of at least 30,000 of our brave soldiers, and even in the best case would not bring any benefits. Anyone who has ever looked into the fading eyes of a warrior dying on the battlefield will think well before starting a war.

    This is 1867. As we well know, Bismarck (to the great misfortune of Germany) did not follow his own wise advice.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    Touche
    But I doubt Otto would've liked to shackle Germany to two corpses and have her fight the rest of the world over poor Ferdinand
    Had the Germans played their cards better they could've entirely avoided their 20th Century misfortunes
  80. @AP

    By the way, I spent a week in Kiev last summer, and maybe once heard Ukrainian spoken on the street.
     
    Strange. Maybe it depends on whose company you are in or what neighborhoods you visited. I'd estimate about 10% Ukrainian speech on the streets last time I was there, in 2017, about the same as in previous visits. Others have noted an increase so maybe it is now 15% but I hadn't noticed the difference.

    Certainly possible it was the neighborhoods. I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn’t wanted to speak Russian. What stood out about them though was that they seemed to be temporarily embarrassed bourgeoisie, not the kind of people you expect to be driving taxis.

    Certainly in my wife’s home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other– and Russian to me.

    • Replies: @AP

    I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn’t wanted to speak Russian.
     
    I took about 8 cab rides (in 2017 a ride across the entire city cost $3.00). One of the drivers spoke Ukrainian on the cell phone while driving, the others were Russian-speaking.

    The thing with Kiev is that almost every Russian-speaking person is also fluent in Ukrainian and will switch effortlessly if you speak to them in Ukrainian.

    Certainly in my wife’s home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other
     
    I forgot - is your wife's village somewhere in the vicinity of Kiev? Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn't spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.
  81. @Mr. Hack

    Tatarstan is its own republic and IIRC its own constitution emphasizes that it is for the Tatar people.
     
    All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin's new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian? The first time in history where I've heard of natives being in favor of disbanding their own languages in favor of that of a foreign one, that has historically served as an imperial master.

    It is no worse than the Ukrainianization of, say, Lviv’s ethnic Russian population (most of whom now use Ukrainian as their primary language).
     
    I cannot comment directly on the success of Lviv's Ukrainianization policies, but in Ivano-Frankivsk (perhaps an even greater bastion of Ukrainian nationalism) Ukrainianization of transplants from Donbas is a mixed bag. Although the children of such tranplants can be heard speaking Ukrainian on the streets, their parents still often cling to Russian. Perhaps, even worse, they're actively creating new "suburban areas" where they can create their own ghettos including churches loyal to the MP. This could easily spell over into outright friction between the two groups in the future.

    If so, it would be irrelevant. Hungarian complaints matter because Hungary is an EU and NATO member. The Russians complain anyways.
     
    Unfortunately, it' Russia that is backing militant pro-Russian insurgents in Ukraine, that has been responsible for the chaos in the East. Wasn't it precisely Russian language rights that was used as a pretext for war in Donbas?

    “All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin’s new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian?”

    Could you elaborate? Last time you brought this up, you linked to some news piece about this, which made it clear that the change in the status quo consisted of Tatar language no longer being *obligatory*, which is not evidence of Tatar language being suppressed. No further information was provided as to the availability or non-availability of Tatar language courses for those who want them.

    In the long run, though, it is probably a good idea for a government to insist on a single official language. The Ukrainian government seems to agree.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Can you imagine a new law being promulgated in Russia, where the language of the majority speakers, Russian, was somehow relegated to a lower importance and only being offered on a 2 hour per week basis, with written authorization needed to take part in these classes by the parents? This is precisely what's taken place in Tatarstan. In the past the two languages were used concurrently. I realize that based on the preferences of underage students, there does seem to be a preference for Russian (62%), however, 83% prefer English. Perhaps, the new state language of Tatartan should be English, the language that is preferred by a majority of job seeking cosmopolitan Tatar students? https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/tatar-language-classes-russia
  82. @The Big Red Scary
    "All the more strange when you consider that ever since Putin’s new language laws were promulgated in 2018, Tatarstan and other republics within the Caucuses have been experiencing an assault on their own native languages, in favor of Russian?"

    Could you elaborate? Last time you brought this up, you linked to some news piece about this, which made it clear that the change in the status quo consisted of Tatar language no longer being *obligatory*, which is not evidence of Tatar language being suppressed. No further information was provided as to the availability or non-availability of Tatar language courses for those who want them.

    In the long run, though, it is probably a good idea for a government to insist on a single official language. The Ukrainian government seems to agree.

    Can you imagine a new law being promulgated in Russia, where the language of the majority speakers, Russian, was somehow relegated to a lower importance and only being offered on a 2 hour per week basis, with written authorization needed to take part in these classes by the parents? This is precisely what’s taken place in Tatarstan. In the past the two languages were used concurrently. I realize that based on the preferences of underage students, there does seem to be a preference for Russian (62%), however, 83% prefer English. Perhaps, the new state language of Tatartan should be English, the language that is preferred by a majority of job seeking cosmopolitan Tatar students? https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/tatar-language-classes-russia

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    Thank you for restoring my confidence in the government of the country in which I live. I was beginning to get worried.
    , @Mr. Hack
    The same sorts of things are going on in the Caucuses too, since 2018:

    Some political analysts and linguists have deemed this bill as a policy of Russification. As many as 87 linguists from different universities in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Italy contacted the State Duma with a demand to reject the draft law. The Russian President argued that it was wrong to force someone to learn a language that is not their own and that the Russian language was “the spiritual framework” of the country that “cannot be replaced with anything”. Stopping mandatory lessons in native languages by Vladimir Putin was seen as a move to “build one identity in Russian society” in the country, predominantly in the Caucasian Mountains.
     
    https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-did-russia-s-new-language-bill-draw-flak-from-the-caucasus-22975

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries. It's easy enough to do if the center is still located in Moscow. Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.

  83. @Europe Europa
    So is the UK an Apartheid state because the Scottish, Welsh and NI all have their own parliaments but the English don't? The ethnic English are in much the same position within the British state but any suggestion that the English are oppressed and deserve specific representation almost always gets laughed at.

    The usual argument in Britain is that Westminster is more than enough to represent English interests because English people make up the majority of MPs so therefore Westminster is by default an English parliament, I guess the same argument could apply to ethnic Russians.

    Not that easy to laugh at, actually. See also “The West Lothian Question”.

  84. @Mr. Hack
    Can you imagine a new law being promulgated in Russia, where the language of the majority speakers, Russian, was somehow relegated to a lower importance and only being offered on a 2 hour per week basis, with written authorization needed to take part in these classes by the parents? This is precisely what's taken place in Tatarstan. In the past the two languages were used concurrently. I realize that based on the preferences of underage students, there does seem to be a preference for Russian (62%), however, 83% prefer English. Perhaps, the new state language of Tatartan should be English, the language that is preferred by a majority of job seeking cosmopolitan Tatar students? https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/tatar-language-classes-russia

    Thank you for restoring my confidence in the government of the country in which I live. I was beginning to get worried.

  85. @Mr. Hack
    Can you imagine a new law being promulgated in Russia, where the language of the majority speakers, Russian, was somehow relegated to a lower importance and only being offered on a 2 hour per week basis, with written authorization needed to take part in these classes by the parents? This is precisely what's taken place in Tatarstan. In the past the two languages were used concurrently. I realize that based on the preferences of underage students, there does seem to be a preference for Russian (62%), however, 83% prefer English. Perhaps, the new state language of Tatartan should be English, the language that is preferred by a majority of job seeking cosmopolitan Tatar students? https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/tatar-language-classes-russia

    The same sorts of things are going on in the Caucuses too, since 2018:

    Some political analysts and linguists have deemed this bill as a policy of Russification. As many as 87 linguists from different universities in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Italy contacted the State Duma with a demand to reject the draft law. The Russian President argued that it was wrong to force someone to learn a language that is not their own and that the Russian language was “the spiritual framework” of the country that “cannot be replaced with anything”. Stopping mandatory lessons in native languages by Vladimir Putin was seen as a move to “build one identity in Russian society” in the country, predominantly in the Caucasian Mountains.

    https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-did-russia-s-new-language-bill-draw-flak-from-the-caucasus-22975

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries. It’s easy enough to do if the center is still located in Moscow. Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries.
     
    No, there's a new law where schoolkids can now choose a "native language" to study, regardless of where they live.

    Presumably, a huge boon to Armenian and Georgian schools in Russia. The Tatar nationalists suffered a blow, but on the flip side they can now form Tatar schools in places that aren't officially Tatarstan. (In fact, I'm suspecting the law is actually the result of Armenian lobbying; Armenians are the new Jews in Russia.)


    Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.
     
    No such thing as "Ukraine". If you mean "Galicia", then just come out and say so. (I understand coming out will be hard, seeing as Galicia is the asshole of Europe.)
  86. Just Google “Constitution” and a lot of articles about Russia are popping up today. The biggest bad things are heterosexual marriage and God.

  87. @melanf


    he taught us to rely on force in everything
     
    Bismarck told them the Balkans “aren’t worth the life of a single Pomeranian grenadier”
     
    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/labas/64933/526440/526440_original.jpg

    translation: At a meal at Bismarck's, shortly after Luxembourg's neutrality was declared, a scholar suggested that Prussia should start a war with France. Bismarck very seriously objected:
    "Dear Professor, such a war would cost the lives of at least 30,000 of our brave soldiers, and even in the best case would not bring any benefits. Anyone who has ever looked into the fading eyes of a warrior dying on the battlefield will think well before starting a war."

    This is 1867. As we well know, Bismarck (to the great misfortune of Germany) did not follow his own wise advice.

    Touche
    But I doubt Otto would’ve liked to shackle Germany to two corpses and have her fight the rest of the world over poor Ferdinand
    Had the Germans played their cards better they could’ve entirely avoided their 20th Century misfortunes

    • Replies: @Epigon
    I would wholeheartedly support a unified Germany in Regnum Teutonicum borders of 10th and 11th century.
    Practically ethnic borders, shared cultural and linguistic traits.

    Had Germany stopped at Bismarck’s borders, let alone post-Munich ones...

    I don’t see Bismarck as a reckless and aggressive politician, quite the opposite.
    That his successors were a mere shadow of him is the cause of German defeats - Bismarck managed to first crush Habsburgs without other Great Powers intervening, then humiliated the premiere continental power of Europe, again with no one intervening.

    Both times, he carefully weighed the war goals, war accomplishments and peace settlement details.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
    If anything, a Grossdeutschland policy at the expense of Habsburgs would be more logical and attainable, and it would avoid having Italy and AH as allies at the same time (who were hopelessly opposed over Italian irredentism).

    If resources were the ultimate concern - why antagonize Russian Empire? Followed by antagonizing United Kingdom with massive fleet program?

  88. @Korenchkin
    Touche
    But I doubt Otto would've liked to shackle Germany to two corpses and have her fight the rest of the world over poor Ferdinand
    Had the Germans played their cards better they could've entirely avoided their 20th Century misfortunes

    I would wholeheartedly support a unified Germany in Regnum Teutonicum borders of 10th and 11th century.
    Practically ethnic borders, shared cultural and linguistic traits.

    Had Germany stopped at Bismarck’s borders, let alone post-Munich ones…

    I don’t see Bismarck as a reckless and aggressive politician, quite the opposite.
    That his successors were a mere shadow of him is the cause of German defeats – Bismarck managed to first crush Habsburgs without other Great Powers intervening, then humiliated the premiere continental power of Europe, again with no one intervening.

    Both times, he carefully weighed the war goals, war accomplishments and peace settlement details.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
    If anything, a Grossdeutschland policy at the expense of Habsburgs would be more logical and attainable, and it would avoid having Italy and AH as allies at the same time (who were hopelessly opposed over Italian irredentism).

    If resources were the ultimate concern – why antagonize Russian Empire? Followed by antagonizing United Kingdom with massive fleet program?

    • Replies: @Korenchkin

    without other Great Powers intervening
     
    This above all else, isolate the enemy and reach understanding with other powers who might try to stop you
    Such a simple concept but one that strategists even today fail to follow, like when the US decided to antagonize Russia, Iran and China at the same time instead of picking them off one at a time
    , @Mitleser
    Bismarck was an aggressive politician, but his aggressions was mostly focused against fellow Germans.
    Of course, his successors were not going to do that and instead focused their aggressions against non-Germans.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
     
    Because they could.
    Once the German nation state was established, Germans were going to project their new might abroad and not worry too much about antagonizing other Great Powers. After all, it worked just fine against France.
  89. @Mr. Hack
    The same sorts of things are going on in the Caucuses too, since 2018:

    Some political analysts and linguists have deemed this bill as a policy of Russification. As many as 87 linguists from different universities in Sweden, Finland, Norway and Italy contacted the State Duma with a demand to reject the draft law. The Russian President argued that it was wrong to force someone to learn a language that is not their own and that the Russian language was “the spiritual framework” of the country that “cannot be replaced with anything”. Stopping mandatory lessons in native languages by Vladimir Putin was seen as a move to “build one identity in Russian society” in the country, predominantly in the Caucasian Mountains.
     
    https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/why-did-russia-s-new-language-bill-draw-flak-from-the-caucasus-22975

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries. It's easy enough to do if the center is still located in Moscow. Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries.

    No, there’s a new law where schoolkids can now choose a “native language” to study, regardless of where they live.

    Presumably, a huge boon to Armenian and Georgian schools in Russia. The Tatar nationalists suffered a blow, but on the flip side they can now form Tatar schools in places that aren’t officially Tatarstan. (In fact, I’m suspecting the law is actually the result of Armenian lobbying; Armenians are the new Jews in Russia.)

    Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.

    No such thing as “Ukraine”. If you mean “Galicia”, then just come out and say so. (I understand coming out will be hard, seeing as Galicia is the asshole of Europe.)

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president's cabinet of advisors? Your point of view is rehashed and regurgitated old sovok claptrap -
    Na Zdorovie!
  90. The yahoo news article for this is a riot.
    >WUH WELL HUH YER STILL A GOD HATIN’ COMMIE
    How much self-awareness do you have to lack to believe yourself christian and freak out when a country passes pro-christian amendments? Boomers are disgusting.

  91. @anonymous coward

    The new law seems to be designed to prop up the old Russian colonizing element that settled in these non-Russian countries.
     
    No, there's a new law where schoolkids can now choose a "native language" to study, regardless of where they live.

    Presumably, a huge boon to Armenian and Georgian schools in Russia. The Tatar nationalists suffered a blow, but on the flip side they can now form Tatar schools in places that aren't officially Tatarstan. (In fact, I'm suspecting the law is actually the result of Armenian lobbying; Armenians are the new Jews in Russia.)


    Thankfully, Ukraine has broken away.
     
    No such thing as "Ukraine". If you mean "Galicia", then just come out and say so. (I understand coming out will be hard, seeing as Galicia is the asshole of Europe.)

    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president’s cabinet of advisors? Your point of view is rehashed and regurgitated old sovok claptrap –
    Na Zdorovie!

    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president’s cabinet of advisors?
     
    Who cares? I was talking about you, not the failed state you like to LARP as.
    , @joni
    I think they are mostly just used for "guarding" occupations.
    , @AP
    Ukraine’s new PM is a native of Lviv.
  92. @Epigon
    I would wholeheartedly support a unified Germany in Regnum Teutonicum borders of 10th and 11th century.
    Practically ethnic borders, shared cultural and linguistic traits.

    Had Germany stopped at Bismarck’s borders, let alone post-Munich ones...

    I don’t see Bismarck as a reckless and aggressive politician, quite the opposite.
    That his successors were a mere shadow of him is the cause of German defeats - Bismarck managed to first crush Habsburgs without other Great Powers intervening, then humiliated the premiere continental power of Europe, again with no one intervening.

    Both times, he carefully weighed the war goals, war accomplishments and peace settlement details.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
    If anything, a Grossdeutschland policy at the expense of Habsburgs would be more logical and attainable, and it would avoid having Italy and AH as allies at the same time (who were hopelessly opposed over Italian irredentism).

    If resources were the ultimate concern - why antagonize Russian Empire? Followed by antagonizing United Kingdom with massive fleet program?

    without other Great Powers intervening

    This above all else, isolate the enemy and reach understanding with other powers who might try to stop you
    Such a simple concept but one that strategists even today fail to follow, like when the US decided to antagonize Russia, Iran and China at the same time instead of picking them off one at a time

  93. @Mr. Hack
    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president's cabinet of advisors? Your point of view is rehashed and regurgitated old sovok claptrap -
    Na Zdorovie!

    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president’s cabinet of advisors?

    Who cares? I was talking about you, not the failed state you like to LARP as.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'm neither of Galician ancestry nor a part of the Ukrainian government. Your reputation for posting comments that are "incorrect" that's been amply noted by others who take part in this blog's commentaries, remains untarnished. Congratulations! :-)
  94. @anonymous coward

    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president’s cabinet of advisors?
     
    Who cares? I was talking about you, not the failed state you like to LARP as.

    I’m neither of Galician ancestry nor a part of the Ukrainian government. Your reputation for posting comments that are “incorrect” that’s been amply noted by others who take part in this blog’s commentaries, remains untarnished. Congratulations! 🙂

    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    I’m neither of Galician ancestry
     
    And I didn't imply you were.

    ...nor a part of the Ukrainian government.
     
    I didn't imply this either.

    I merely suggested then when you post your Americanized LARPer drivel, you should replace your mentions of "Ukraine" with "Galicia" for it to make any sense.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of "le old country" would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.
  95. I’m glad for Russia. I’d hope such things could be done in my country, France.

  96. @Mr. Hack
    Yeah, that's what's needed, clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution. A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions (and other ethnicities' symbols too) within Russia. Are you sure that you've thought this one through? :-(

    Not surprised you use Stalinist terminology. Hohols owe everything to mr. Georgian

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Don't talk to me, you don't even know your own language. And even if you do, you don't use it. :-(
    , @AnonFromTN
    No, they only owe Galicia, Volhynia, and a few smaller pieces to Mr. Georgian. They owe East and South to another criminal, Mr. Lenin. Thank goodness the gift of Mr. Moron, Crimea, was taken back. They should have retained what Khmelnitsky “united” with the Russian Empire, about 1/6 of current territory.
  97. @Mr. Hack
    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president's cabinet of advisors? Your point of view is rehashed and regurgitated old sovok claptrap -
    Na Zdorovie!

    I think they are mostly just used for “guarding” occupations.

  98. @Belarusian Dude
    Not surprised you use Stalinist terminology. Hohols owe everything to mr. Georgian

    Don’t talk to me, you don’t even know your own language. And even if you do, you don’t use it. 🙁

    • Replies: @Belarusian Dude
    At least I know more than just English
  99. @Belarusian Dude
    Not surprised you use Stalinist terminology. Hohols owe everything to mr. Georgian

    No, they only owe Galicia, Volhynia, and a few smaller pieces to Mr. Georgian. They owe East and South to another criminal, Mr. Lenin. Thank goodness the gift of Mr. Moron, Crimea, was taken back. They should have retained what Khmelnitsky “united” with the Russian Empire, about 1/6 of current territory.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    And you own nothing, whatsoever. Just another gasterbeiter being kicked around the globe with no home of your own - just another wandering gypsy! :-(

    Or maybe, you're just another wandering Jew?
    (you don't seem to be on board with the majority of Russophiles here, that's for sure.)
  100. @AP

    clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution.
     
    Why shouldn't the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions
     
    This is unfortunate but the bottom line is that it is their right, just as it is the right of the Ukrainian state to do such things. If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.

    If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.

    An inspiration for them to do what, exactly?

    Why shouldn’t the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    What about having the US be for white people (but with an expanded definition of white so that white-passing Hispanics and Latinos, white-passing Middle Easterners, white-passing South Asians, and even white-passing blacks (such as perhaps Ben Jealous) would also qualify for this)?

  101. Anatoly, would you object to the constitutions of Ukraine and Belarus defining Ukrainians and Belarusians as the state-forming peoples of Ukraine and Belarus, respectively?

    BTW, Russia is 81% Russian–not 85% Russian. In fact, it might even be slightly lower than 81% Russian since some Ukrainians and Belarusians might be classified as Russian (such as my maternal grandmother back when she was still alive; she died in late 2009) on their records and/or on the Russian census.

    As for Israel, it’s actually slightly above 75% Jewish considering that Israel doesn’t actually view patrilineal Jews as being Jewish even though it certainly should. This would be similar to, say, US blacks refusing to consider anyone without a black mother as actually being black while treating someone with a black great-great-great-great-great-grandmother as black even if the rest of their ancestry is white and they look white.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty "based" - mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    Belarus' reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one ("We, the people of the Republic of Belarus"): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It's not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians - who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).
  102. @AnonFromTN
    No, they only owe Galicia, Volhynia, and a few smaller pieces to Mr. Georgian. They owe East and South to another criminal, Mr. Lenin. Thank goodness the gift of Mr. Moron, Crimea, was taken back. They should have retained what Khmelnitsky “united” with the Russian Empire, about 1/6 of current territory.

    And you own nothing, whatsoever. Just another gasterbeiter being kicked around the globe with no home of your own – just another wandering gypsy! 🙁

    Or maybe, you’re just another wandering Jew?
    (you don’t seem to be on board with the majority of Russophiles here, that’s for sure.)

    • Troll: Denis
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Butthurt duly noted.
  103. @Mr. XYZ
    Anatoly, would you object to the constitutions of Ukraine and Belarus defining Ukrainians and Belarusians as the state-forming peoples of Ukraine and Belarus, respectively?

    BTW, Russia is 81% Russian--not 85% Russian. In fact, it might even be slightly lower than 81% Russian since some Ukrainians and Belarusians might be classified as Russian (such as my maternal grandmother back when she was still alive; she died in late 2009) on their records and/or on the Russian census.

    As for Israel, it's actually slightly above 75% Jewish considering that Israel doesn't actually view patrilineal Jews as being Jewish even though it certainly should. This would be similar to, say, US blacks refusing to consider anyone without a black mother as actually being black while treating someone with a black great-great-great-great-great-grandmother as black even if the rest of their ancestry is white and they look white.

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    Belarus’ reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one (“We, the people of the Republic of Belarus”): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It’s not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians – who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/
     
    Thanks!

    Belarus’ reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one (“We, the people of the Republic of Belarus”): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/
     
    So, it might need some fixing.

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It’s not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.
     
    To be fair, though, weren't some of Russia's historical achievements also done by non-Russians, though? For instance, didn't much of Russia's historical, pre-1917 elite consist of ethnic Germans (albeit often Russified, such as with the Romanov family, which started out Russian but then heavily mixed with other European royalty--especially German royalty)?

    I seem to recall AP previously saying that Russia's historical elite was largely non-Russian while actual Russians were the peasants that this elite ruled over--as well as the descendants of these peasants, of course.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians – who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).
     
    Interesting. Is he also against mass non-Slavic (especially Muslim) immigration to Russia?
    , @AP

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/
     
    It also states:

    "confirming the European identity of the Ukrainian people "

    "conscious of responsibility to God, our own conscience, previous, present and future generations"

    "The state language in Ukraine is Ukrainian"

    "The state shall promote the consolidation and development of the Ukrainian nation, its historical consciousness, traditions and culture, as well as the development of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of all indigenous peoples and national minorities of Ukraine."

    "Ukraine takes care to satisfy the national - cultural and linguistic needs of Ukrainians living outside the state."

    So did Ukraine's constitution inspire the changes to the Russian one :-)
  104. @Epigon
    I would wholeheartedly support a unified Germany in Regnum Teutonicum borders of 10th and 11th century.
    Practically ethnic borders, shared cultural and linguistic traits.

    Had Germany stopped at Bismarck’s borders, let alone post-Munich ones...

    I don’t see Bismarck as a reckless and aggressive politician, quite the opposite.
    That his successors were a mere shadow of him is the cause of German defeats - Bismarck managed to first crush Habsburgs without other Great Powers intervening, then humiliated the premiere continental power of Europe, again with no one intervening.

    Both times, he carefully weighed the war goals, war accomplishments and peace settlement details.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
    If anything, a Grossdeutschland policy at the expense of Habsburgs would be more logical and attainable, and it would avoid having Italy and AH as allies at the same time (who were hopelessly opposed over Italian irredentism).

    If resources were the ultimate concern - why antagonize Russian Empire? Followed by antagonizing United Kingdom with massive fleet program?

    Bismarck was an aggressive politician, but his aggressions was mostly focused against fellow Germans.
    Of course, his successors were not going to do that and instead focused their aggressions against non-Germans.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?

    Because they could.
    Once the German nation state was established, Germans were going to project their new might abroad and not worry too much about antagonizing other Great Powers. After all, it worked just fine against France.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Let's be fair to Bismarck, he did everything in his power to discourage the popular feeling that the Germans can aggress Russia with impunity.
  105. @Realist

    "Russia for Russians" to be Written Into the Constitution
     
    What a novel idea...the US should try it....American for Americans.

    Should read… America for Americans.

  106. @Mr. Hack
    How many Galicians can you name at the very top levels of the Ukrainian government, or in the president's cabinet of advisors? Your point of view is rehashed and regurgitated old sovok claptrap -
    Na Zdorovie!

    Ukraine’s new PM is a native of Lviv.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    But the real boss is still Soros? Just asking.
  107. @Mr. Hack
    And you own nothing, whatsoever. Just another gasterbeiter being kicked around the globe with no home of your own - just another wandering gypsy! :-(

    Or maybe, you're just another wandering Jew?
    (you don't seem to be on board with the majority of Russophiles here, that's for sure.)

    Butthurt duly noted.

    • Agree: Aedib
  108. @AP
    Ukraine’s new PM is a native of Lviv.

    But the real boss is still Soros? Just asking.

    • LOL: Mr. XYZ
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Yep--George Soros, aka Gyorgy Schwarz, Controller of International Jewry, Master of the Illuminati, and Copyright Holder of the Rubik's Cube! ;)
  109. @neutral
    A Russian knowing what is a Russian is circular logic that does not answer the question what is a Russian. The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next. If you are going with "Russian is a culture" nonsense then you have absolutely zero reasons to deny every third worlder who learns Russian being a Russian.

    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.

    They’ve already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Maybe that chick would be considered attractive in the UK. In Russia, she is way below average.
    , @melanf


    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.
     
    They’ve already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!
     
    African "hordes" have not yet arrived in Russia. There are isolated cases, not hordes.
    For the opposite sex, these migrants are unattractive, and if they start a relationship then (in most cases) with extremely unattractive girls. The above picture in this case is only misleading, using this method I can successfully post something like this

    https://images11.cosmopolitan.ru/upload/img_cache/585/585fe5585c16bc0423aea8184a701daf_ce_464x334x0x0_fitted_740x0.jpg

    with the caption about "hordes" of attractive Australian women in Russia
  110. @Mr. Hack
    The Polyanins never were Russians, and served as the primary basis for the Ukrainian nation.

    Your ignorance of the historical sources of your own history never failed to astonish me. But never let truth get in the way of a good story.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    "Good stories" is about all that one can expect from a self professed "Romanian-Russophile." Your self description has always caused a sort of loud screech to my ears, and failing to find any google entries that might shed more light on any famous practitioners of this strange dual-identification (truly an anomaly), I'll have to continue believing that you've fallen under some strange form of a bi-polar disorder?

    I'm quite sure that I can provide you plenty of worthy scholarly opinions that favor the view that the Polyanin tribe had much more to do with the formation of the Ukrainian nation than the Russian one, but I confess I'm not nearly as familiar with Romanian history, so perhaps you can point me in the right direction to find out more about the "Romanian-Russophile" movement?"

    I'm grateful for the last monograph that you directed me towards, Flora Curtin's "Making of the Slavs, History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region c 500 - 700" where Curtin goes much further back in time than I thought, showing that Slavs had inhabited the Lower Danube Region and spread northwards (before any proto-Romanian presence in this area). You did read this history book and are yourself familiar with the history of your own, Romanian people? :-)

  111. @Slimer

    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.
     
    They've already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ZsSwpFlKQ&pbjreload=10

    Maybe that chick would be considered attractive in the UK. In Russia, she is way below average.

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    In Russia, she is way below average.
     
    You are trying waaaaay too hard now.
  112. @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty "based" - mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    Belarus' reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one ("We, the people of the Republic of Belarus"): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It's not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians - who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    Thanks!

    Belarus’ reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one (“We, the people of the Republic of Belarus”): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/

    So, it might need some fixing.

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It’s not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.

    To be fair, though, weren’t some of Russia’s historical achievements also done by non-Russians, though? For instance, didn’t much of Russia’s historical, pre-1917 elite consist of ethnic Germans (albeit often Russified, such as with the Romanov family, which started out Russian but then heavily mixed with other European royalty–especially German royalty)?

    I seem to recall AP previously saying that Russia’s historical elite was largely non-Russian while actual Russians were the peasants that this elite ruled over–as well as the descendants of these peasants, of course.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians – who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).

    Interesting. Is he also against mass non-Slavic (especially Muslim) immigration to Russia?

  113. @AnonFromTN
    But the real boss is still Soros? Just asking.

    Yep–George Soros, aka Gyorgy Schwarz, Controller of International Jewry, Master of the Illuminati, and Copyright Holder of the Rubik’s Cube! 😉

  114. @AP

    clearer signals for Russian chauvinism enshrined within the constitution.
     
    Why shouldn't the Russian state be for the Russian people? Just as the Ukrainian state should be for the Ukrainian people, the Polish state for the Polish people, Hungarian for Hungarian people., etc.

    A greater basis to shut down any remaining Ukrainian cultural institutions
     
    This is unfortunate but the bottom line is that it is their right, just as it is the right of the Ukrainian state to do such things. If there are any wavering Ukrainians left this could be an inspiration for them.

    Also, what about having India be for Hindus?

  115. @Seraphim
    Your ignorance of the historical sources of your own history never failed to astonish me. But never let truth get in the way of a good story.

    “Good stories” is about all that one can expect from a self professed “Romanian-Russophile.” Your self description has always caused a sort of loud screech to my ears, and failing to find any google entries that might shed more light on any famous practitioners of this strange dual-identification (truly an anomaly), I’ll have to continue believing that you’ve fallen under some strange form of a bi-polar disorder?

    I’m quite sure that I can provide you plenty of worthy scholarly opinions that favor the view that the Polyanin tribe had much more to do with the formation of the Ukrainian nation than the Russian one, but I confess I’m not nearly as familiar with Romanian history, so perhaps you can point me in the right direction to find out more about the “Romanian-Russophile” movement?”

    I’m grateful for the last monograph that you directed me towards, Flora Curtin’s “Making of the Slavs, History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region c 500 – 700” where Curtin goes much further back in time than I thought, showing that Slavs had inhabited the Lower Danube Region and spread northwards (before any proto-Romanian presence in this area). You did read this history book and are yourself familiar with the history of your own, Romanian people? 🙂

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Did you really read that book? If so, you should have realized that the name of the author is Florin Curta. You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading 'Ukrainians' where the text says 'Russes' in the Primary Chronicle.
    , @Mr. Hack
    Florin Curta, not Flora.
  116. @Mr. Hack
    "Good stories" is about all that one can expect from a self professed "Romanian-Russophile." Your self description has always caused a sort of loud screech to my ears, and failing to find any google entries that might shed more light on any famous practitioners of this strange dual-identification (truly an anomaly), I'll have to continue believing that you've fallen under some strange form of a bi-polar disorder?

    I'm quite sure that I can provide you plenty of worthy scholarly opinions that favor the view that the Polyanin tribe had much more to do with the formation of the Ukrainian nation than the Russian one, but I confess I'm not nearly as familiar with Romanian history, so perhaps you can point me in the right direction to find out more about the "Romanian-Russophile" movement?"

    I'm grateful for the last monograph that you directed me towards, Flora Curtin's "Making of the Slavs, History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region c 500 - 700" where Curtin goes much further back in time than I thought, showing that Slavs had inhabited the Lower Danube Region and spread northwards (before any proto-Romanian presence in this area). You did read this history book and are yourself familiar with the history of your own, Romanian people? :-)

    Did you really read that book? If so, you should have realized that the name of the author is Florin Curta. You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Is this all that you have? A spelling correction - very weak. :-(

    You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.
     
    The Romanians didn't arrive on the world stage known as "Romanians" either. Don't exhibit the paucity of your intellectual abilities by starting with this silly sophism.
    , @AP

    Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.
     
    An excellent point.

    But actually, dyslexia would be reading "Russians" where the text says"Russes."

    I hope you are proud of Romanians such as Virgil, Augustus, etc.
  117. @Mr. Hack
    "Good stories" is about all that one can expect from a self professed "Romanian-Russophile." Your self description has always caused a sort of loud screech to my ears, and failing to find any google entries that might shed more light on any famous practitioners of this strange dual-identification (truly an anomaly), I'll have to continue believing that you've fallen under some strange form of a bi-polar disorder?

    I'm quite sure that I can provide you plenty of worthy scholarly opinions that favor the view that the Polyanin tribe had much more to do with the formation of the Ukrainian nation than the Russian one, but I confess I'm not nearly as familiar with Romanian history, so perhaps you can point me in the right direction to find out more about the "Romanian-Russophile" movement?"

    I'm grateful for the last monograph that you directed me towards, Flora Curtin's "Making of the Slavs, History and Archaeology of the Lower Danube Region c 500 - 700" where Curtin goes much further back in time than I thought, showing that Slavs had inhabited the Lower Danube Region and spread northwards (before any proto-Romanian presence in this area). You did read this history book and are yourself familiar with the history of your own, Romanian people? :-)

    Florin Curta, not Flora.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    And Curta, not Curtin.
  118. @Mr. Hack
    Florin Curta, not Flora.

    And Curta, not Curtin.

  119. @Seraphim
    Did you really read that book? If so, you should have realized that the name of the author is Florin Curta. You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading 'Ukrainians' where the text says 'Russes' in the Primary Chronicle.

    Is this all that you have? A spelling correction – very weak. 🙁

    You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.

    The Romanians didn’t arrive on the world stage known as “Romanians” either. Don’t exhibit the paucity of your intellectual abilities by starting with this silly sophism.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the 'Valachians' call themselves 'Rumuin, hoc est Romanos' and who speak a language close to Italian, because they are descendants of the 'Romans'.
    Francesco della Valle (?-1545): "La lingua loro e poco diversa della nostra Italiana, si dimandano in lingua loro Romei perche dicono esser venuti anticamente da Roma ad habitar in quel paese, et se alcuno dimanda se sanno parlare la lor lingua valacca, dicono a quest modo: Sti Rominest?, che vol dire: Sai tu Romano, per esser corrotta la lingua".
    Are there testimonies that at the same time a 'Ruthenian' would ask 'Do you speak Ukrainian'? or calling themselves 'Ukrainians'?
  120. This news nearly brought tears to my eyes. Where there is life , there is hope.

    • Replies: @Brutiss
    Lol, this seems more like the beginning of the downfall
  121. @Mr. Hack
    Don't talk to me, you don't even know your own language. And even if you do, you don't use it. :-(

    At least I know more than just English

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?
  122. This is obviously great news for ethnic Russians (assuming no last minute cancels on this).

    Now it’s only a matter of time before every year an anniversary for “Constitutional recognition day” for ethnic Russians will be celebrated. 🙂

  123. @Belarusian Dude
    At least I know more than just English

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?
     
    No, he's some third-generation American LARPer. He even gets Polish and Ukrainian culture confused.

    (As for any American, his knowledge of Europe is very vague at best.)
    , @AnonFromTN

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?
     
    Judging by his/her/its posts, I would not bet my money on it.
    , @Belarusian Dude
    I soncerely doubt an amerimutt LARPer would know Ukrainian
  124. @Mitleser
    Bismarck was an aggressive politician, but his aggressions was mostly focused against fellow Germans.
    Of course, his successors were not going to do that and instead focused their aggressions against non-Germans.

    What was Germany trying to do by antagonizing Great Powers on both borders or allying with rivals of its neighbouring Great Powers?
     
    Because they could.
    Once the German nation state was established, Germans were going to project their new might abroad and not worry too much about antagonizing other Great Powers. After all, it worked just fine against France.

    Let’s be fair to Bismarck, he did everything in his power to discourage the popular feeling that the Germans can aggress Russia with impunity.

  125. @Slimer

    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.
     
    They've already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ZsSwpFlKQ&pbjreload=10

    The African hordes that will want to enter Russia is not a strange hypothetical, after Western Europe and North America have become a brown mess it is obvious where blacks will try to go next.

    They’ve already arrived, and some of the local women are cozying up to them. Attractive local women!

    African “hordes” have not yet arrived in Russia. There are isolated cases, not hordes.
    For the opposite sex, these migrants are unattractive, and if they start a relationship then (in most cases) with extremely unattractive girls. The above picture in this case is only misleading, using this method I can successfully post something like this

    with the caption about “hordes” of attractive Australian women in Russia

  126. @Mr. Hack
    Is this all that you have? A spelling correction - very weak. :-(

    You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.
     
    The Romanians didn't arrive on the world stage known as "Romanians" either. Don't exhibit the paucity of your intellectual abilities by starting with this silly sophism.

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’ and who speak a language close to Italian, because they are descendants of the ‘Romans’.
    Francesco della Valle (?-1545): “La lingua loro e poco diversa della nostra Italiana, si dimandano in lingua loro Romei perche dicono esser venuti anticamente da Roma ad habitar in quel paese, et se alcuno dimanda se sanno parlare la lor lingua valacca, dicono a quest modo: Sti Rominest?, che vol dire: Sai tu Romano, per esser corrotta la lingua”.
    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?

    • Replies: @AP

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’
     
    Cool. And there are Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey who call themselves "Rum." After you claim Rome perhaps you can claim the Turkish Black Sea coast as Romanian because names are magic.

    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?
     
    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Kiovia_Palatinatus._Beauplan_1664.jpg

    the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    But these are just labels. Clearly by the early 16th century Rusyns from what is now Ukraine considered themselves to be a different people from Muscovites.

    , @Mr. Hack
    What's the matter, somebody who pretends to be as erudite as you didn't know about Beauplan?

    summarized:


    Beauplan, Guillaume Le Vasseur de, a French army engineer, architect, and cartographer who spent many years in Ukraine (1630 to 1648) drew the first descriptive map of Ukraine in 1639. In 1654 in Danzig he published a specialized (scale of 1:452,000) and a ‘general’ (scale of 1:1,800,000) map of Ukraine, both engraved by the famous Dutch engraver Willem Hondius (de Hondt). Following their publication in Rouen, France, in 1660, these maps were duplicated many times in various European countries (they were reproduced, moreover, by Veniiamyn Kordt in Materialy po istorii russkoi kartografii [Materials for the History of Russian Cartography, 1–2, 1899–1910]). His book Description of Ukraine was widely known in Europe (Description des contrés du Royaume de Pologne, 1651; 2nd, enlarged edn, titled Description d'Ukranie, 1660; 3rd edn 1661; 4th edn, 1861). It includes geographical and economic information about Ukraine, describes the Ukrainian peasantry and other social classes, and gives a detailed description of the Dnipro Rapids. The Description, which was the first to describe Ukraine, was received with great interest in Europe (English translation, 1704; German, 1780; Polish, 1822; Russian, 1832; a partial translation also appeared in Ukrainian).
     
    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pic%5CB%5CE%5CBeauplan_Map_of_Ukraine%201648.jpg
  127. @Mr. XYZ
    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    No, he’s some third-generation American LARPer. He even gets Polish and Ukrainian culture confused.

    (As for any American, his knowledge of Europe is very vague at best.)

  128. @Mr. Hack
    I'm neither of Galician ancestry nor a part of the Ukrainian government. Your reputation for posting comments that are "incorrect" that's been amply noted by others who take part in this blog's commentaries, remains untarnished. Congratulations! :-)

    I’m neither of Galician ancestry

    And I didn’t imply you were.

    …nor a part of the Ukrainian government.

    I didn’t imply this either.

    I merely suggested then when you post your Americanized LARPer drivel, you should replace your mentions of “Ukraine” with “Galicia” for it to make any sense.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of “le old country” would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.

    • Replies: @AP
    LOL, you are wrong even when discussing what you have written.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of “le old country” would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.
     
    Various Russians here have pointed out that you are clueless about Russia, where you allegedly live.
  129. AP says:
    @The Big Red Scary
    Certainly possible it was the neighborhoods. I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn't wanted to speak Russian. What stood out about them though was that they seemed to be temporarily embarrassed bourgeoisie, not the kind of people you expect to be driving taxis.

    Certainly in my wife's home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other-- and Russian to me.

    I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn’t wanted to speak Russian.

    I took about 8 cab rides (in 2017 a ride across the entire city cost $3.00). One of the drivers spoke Ukrainian on the cell phone while driving, the others were Russian-speaking.

    The thing with Kiev is that almost every Russian-speaking person is also fluent in Ukrainian and will switch effortlessly if you speak to them in Ukrainian.

    Certainly in my wife’s home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other

    I forgot – is your wife’s village somewhere in the vicinity of Kiev? Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn’t spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn’t spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.
     
    The "Ukrainian" actually spoken in Ukraine is a vastly different language from what's officially pushed on TV, in schools, etc.

    The former sort of "Ukrainian" is a dialect continuum spoken all across a huge swath of southern Russia.

    Taking a normal (European) situation with dialect continuums and regional variation and turning it into some monstrous artificial frankenlanguage and then forcing people to speak it with state-sponsored violence is a deliberate act of deracination and ethnic cleansing.
  130. @Seraphim
    Did you really read that book? If so, you should have realized that the name of the author is Florin Curta. You show signs of dyslexia. Like, for example, reading 'Ukrainians' where the text says 'Russes' in the Primary Chronicle.

    Like, for example, reading ‘Ukrainians’ where the text says ‘Russes’ in the Primary Chronicle.

    An excellent point.

    But actually, dyslexia would be reading “Russians” where the text says”Russes.”

    I hope you are proud of Romanians such as Virgil, Augustus, etc.

  131. AP says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty "based" - mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    Belarus' reads more like a post-sovok construct, like the current RF one ("We, the people of the Republic of Belarus"): http://pravo.by/pravovaya-informatsiya/normativnye-dokumenty/konstitutsiya-respubliki-belarus/

    If Ukrainians and Belorussians want to larp as state-forming peoples, they are free to do so. It's not like inheriting the UkSSR and BSSR are very great achievements.

    ***

    Russia is 81% ethnic Russian. 84% adding Ukrainians and Belorussians - who are heavily Russified in Russia. (The head of the Union of Ukrainians in Russia, Bespalko, lobbied for the Russian amendment to the Constitution, as I have covered).

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/

    It also states:

    “confirming the European identity of the Ukrainian people ”

    “conscious of responsibility to God, our own conscience, previous, present and future generations”

    “The state language in Ukraine is Ukrainian”

    “The state shall promote the consolidation and development of the Ukrainian nation, its historical consciousness, traditions and culture, as well as the development of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of all indigenous peoples and national minorities of Ukraine.”

    “Ukraine takes care to satisfy the national – cultural and linguistic needs of Ukrainians living outside the state.”

    So did Ukraine’s constitution inspire the changes to the Russian one 🙂

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
    That doesn't appear to be recognising "ethnic Ukrainians" as one monolithic ethnic group though, but rather saying Ukrainians are made up of various different groups. It's basically a civic nationalist declaration.

    That's very different to saying "Russia for ethnic Russians".

  132. Do Ukrainians and Belarussians count as ethnic Russian? What about Karelians? Volga Germans, Kazak Germans? Jews even?

    In practice this law sounds problematic because while the majority of “Russians” are Slavs, Slavs don’t have a total monopoly on “Russianness”. Defining Russian as “white/European” would probably solve that dilemma but I doubt Putin would go that far.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    In Soviet times, you would be asking a question with an official answer.

    Nationality was officially determined by parents' nationality, and was a fixed category. Except in the case of children of mixed nationality marriages, where their parents choose one of the two nationalities provide, and that they want for their child.

    So if a Russian man married a Ukrainian woman in Soviet times, then they have to choose a nationality for their children from either Russian or Ukrainian (but not both).

    But in Soviet times, to be Russian was by far the most desirable nationality, as children of mixed nationality marriages with Russians, as almost always choose Russian nationality for their children.

    -

    However, today, your question does not have an official answer. As officially nationality is only asked in the census, and it is by self-selection. I.e. any Russian citizen can call themselves Russian, (or Ewok), when asked in the census. So officially it became something which measures voluntary self-identification.

    Of course, Russians in the ethnic-cultural sense are just those people who are from birth racially and culturally Russian, just like for any other ethnic-cultural peoples. And Russian in the native citizenship sense (in English language there is not the same distinction, but in Russian there has been inherited also a bit of difference in words which makes this easier to express) is the native citizen Russia, which can include many different nationalities which are native in the country.

  133. @AnonFromTN
    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state. What’s more, so far RF defended its sovereignty and acted as an independent superpower. Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war. For an empire aspiring to be a super-power, it’s a death sentence.

    What is wrong with that?

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not “an empire aspiring to be a super-power”.

    How much did Russians benefit from the Soviet Union’s status as superpower that subsides others across the world?
    Apparently, not enough, hence there was not much opposition against the dissolution of the USSR.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not “an empire aspiring to be a super-power”.
     
    That would be true if RF existed somewhere on the Moon or on Mars. Here on Earth the choice is stark: you are either a sovereign superpower, or a sidekick of one of the superpowers.

    As to the USSR, commies did a lot of stupid things, but they were right in at least one: you are either a sovereign superpower, or your sovereignty is an empty dream.
  134. “Russia for Russians” to be Written Into the Constitution

    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin’s sense of humour.

    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

    From a little information available, rather it looks like it will be a statement similar to article 68, but where there is reference to the language of a (mysterious?) statebuilding people, which it seems, it is taboo to name.

    The funny thing from the text which has so far been discussed, is how it makes the taboo look more awkward than before, while accepting that this people whose name cannot be stated is a statebuilding one.

    So perhaps it is necessary stage before there is a text which will state the name of this mysterious statebuilding nationality being referred to.

    senile sovoks

    In Soviet times, there was not a taboo on saying Russians. This is a modern invention of recent times.

    Such “terrible” soviet songs at 4:20

    • Replies: @melanf


    “Russia for Russians” to be Written Into the Constitution

     

    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin’s sense of humour.
    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

     

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2020/03/02/constitutional-update/

    "Third, if the amendments are passed, the constitutional will now state that,
    The state language of the Russian Federation on all its territory is the Russian language, as the language of the state-forming people [как язык государствообразующего народа].
    This is a concession to Russian ethno-nationalism, though it doesn’t go as far as some would have liked, as it doesn’t say that Russia is the state of the Russian [russkii] people (as opposed to that of the Rossiiskii people – the distinction between russkii and rossisskii being a crucial one). It merely calls Russians the ‘state-forming people’, while at the same time maintaining elsewhere the description of Russia as the state of the ‘multinational Rossiiskii people.’ As such I doubt that this change is of much importance, although entrenching Russian as the state language could well have an effect in terms of favouring Russian-language education over minority-language education in parts of Russia where there are large populations whose first language isn’t Russia.
    "

    In General, absolutely meaningless editing of the Constitution, in order to please fetishists (the issue with the language and so was solved without any editing of the Constitution).
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Yes, thanks for clarifying.

    The precise wording (which I did not have access to when writing the post - it was breaking news at the time) is suboptimal, but the identity of the "state-forming people" can now be logically deduced, and translates to russkie. And indeed, their very omission draws additional attention to that reality. So it's a massive improvement over the 1993 Constitution. https://www.facebook.com/holmogorov.egor/posts/10222702786343816

    In any case, this has been recognized by opponents of the Russian Article:

    Русских кинули, говорите?

    Имеется в виду многонациональный народ, говорите?

    Там понимают все правильно и реагируют соответственно.

    Муфтий Татарстана выступил против поправки о государствообразующем народе

    Муфтий Татарстана Камиль Самигуллин предупредил о "непоправимых последствиях" поправки в Конституцию, которая вводит понятие "государствообразующий народ". Это понятие содержится в положении о государственном языке России, которым является русский "как язык государствообразующего народа, входящего в союз равноправных народов."

    "Я не вижу положительных перспектив в отражении в Конституции понятия "государствообразующий народ" применительно к одной единственной нации", - заявил он через пресс-службу пресс-службу Духовного управления мусульман (ДУМ) Татарстана.
     
    Though he did kindly suggest a correction, which I actually endorse: https://www.facebook.com/holmogorov.egor/posts/10222702786343816

    Тем временем муфтий провел автокоррекцию:

    "Тогда, возможно, было бы целесообразно в конституции использовать следующий тезис: "выражая волю многонационального народа Российской Федерации и русского народа". Такой подход подчеркнул бы и многонациональность государства, и его особую роль в судьбе русского народа", - пояснил муфтий свою позицию"
     
    Hopefully getting russkie explicitly mentioned in the Constitution thanks to Tatar nationalists getting triggered by "state-forming bearers of the Russian language." LOL.

    So perhaps it is necessary stage before there is a text which will state the name of this mysterious statebuilding nationality being referred to.

     

    Indeed.


    ***

    In Soviet times, there was not a taboo on saying Russians. This is a modern invention of recent times.
     
    Indeed, I pointed out the contrast with the RSFSR Constitution.
  135. @anonymous coward

    I’m neither of Galician ancestry
     
    And I didn't imply you were.

    ...nor a part of the Ukrainian government.
     
    I didn't imply this either.

    I merely suggested then when you post your Americanized LARPer drivel, you should replace your mentions of "Ukraine" with "Galicia" for it to make any sense.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of "le old country" would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

    LOL, you are wrong even when discussing what you have written.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of “le old country” would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.

    Various Russians here have pointed out that you are clueless about Russia, where you allegedly live.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    Various reputable people here have pointed out that your mother turns tricks for crack cocaine.

    Would you trust the opinions of someone with a mother like that??
  136. @Europe Europa
    There are many parts of Russia that Russians/Slavs are not native to and where the native non-Slavic population forms the majority. Yet presumably this new addition to the constitution would mean that ethnic Russians (Slavs) would potentially have more rights in these regions than the natives?

    That sounds a bit, well, Apartheid-ish to me.

    What sounds “Apartheid”?

    If you wrote in the constitution “Russia for Russians” (only Russians!), and created some laws to support this, then it could be. Although this is usually more a belief that other nationalities should leave or stop flooding the country, and receiving preferential rights (as currently) rather than any interest in apartheid.

    What they are going to write in the constitution is not going to be this – rather, it is something about Russian language as the language (which is already article 69) of statebuilding people.

    So while a nationalist can interpret this is as hidden or subtle support in their direction (because of the implication Russians formed the state), but it looks like they try to write it in a way which is not going to offend anyone (except some Tatar mufti).

    There is nothing very controversial (or to be honest, interesting), in this proposal.

    What is creating controversy is that Putin asked them to say something about “God” in the text.

  137. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the 'Valachians' call themselves 'Rumuin, hoc est Romanos' and who speak a language close to Italian, because they are descendants of the 'Romans'.
    Francesco della Valle (?-1545): "La lingua loro e poco diversa della nostra Italiana, si dimandano in lingua loro Romei perche dicono esser venuti anticamente da Roma ad habitar in quel paese, et se alcuno dimanda se sanno parlare la lor lingua valacca, dicono a quest modo: Sti Rominest?, che vol dire: Sai tu Romano, per esser corrotta la lingua".
    Are there testimonies that at the same time a 'Ruthenian' would ask 'Do you speak Ukrainian'? or calling themselves 'Ukrainians'?

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’

    Cool. And there are Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey who call themselves “Rum.” After you claim Rome perhaps you can claim the Turkish Black Sea coast as Romanian because names are magic.

    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?

    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s):

    the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    But these are just labels. Clearly by the early 16th century Rusyns from what is now Ukraine considered themselves to be a different people from Muscovites.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident:

    https://www.acrod.org/

    http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1274.asp

    http://orthochristian.com/108811.html

    , @Seraphim
    Beautiful! The map would make the delight of many a bibliophile (it easily fetch a price in the region of $4,000). The book 'Description de l'Vkraine (sic). Depuis les confins de la Moscovie jusqu'aux limites de la Transylvanie' probably even more.
    It is "la description de la grande lisiere d'Vkraine, comprise entre la Moscouie et la Transiluanie, que Vos Predecesseurs vous ont acquise depuis cinquante ans, et dont les vaste plaines son deuenues autant fertilles qu'elles etoit desertes" dedicated to Jean Casimir, Roy de Pologne, Grand Duc de Lithuanie, de Russie, de Prussie...etc.
    The French 'lisière' (edge) is exactly the Russian (and more generally Slavic) край, as everybody knows.
    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this 'margin' he only says: 'Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus', 'Rus ou Cosaques'. 'Greques Russiens', 'Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie'.
    It is not a response to my question whether there was a 'document' that said people called themselves 'Ukrainians' who speak 'Ukrainian language' in the 17th century. Besides you can assert that the name Ukraine is attested in the 12th century by showing a document of the 17th.
    , @Swedish Family

    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s): [...] the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.
     
    Even if оукраина referred to the present lands of Ukraine, which may or may not have been so ("at the edge" is hardly specific, or necessarily confined to any one area), the word could have had all kinds of meanings. Over time, words are basically empty containers.

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie ("Mieszkam na Ukrainie"), which would support the idea that Ukraine's neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.
  138. @Dmitry

    "Russia for Russians" to be Written Into the Constitution
     
    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin's sense of humour.

    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

    From a little information available, rather it looks like it will be a statement similar to article 68, but where there is reference to the language of a (mysterious?) statebuilding people, which it seems, it is taboo to name.

    The funny thing from the text which has so far been discussed, is how it makes the taboo look more awkward than before, while accepting that this people whose name cannot be stated is a statebuilding one.

    So perhaps it is necessary stage before there is a text which will state the name of this mysterious statebuilding nationality being referred to.


    senile sovoks
     
    In Soviet times, there was not a taboo on saying Russians. This is a modern invention of recent times.

    Such "terrible" soviet songs at 4:20

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmd9obCRqo4

    “Russia for Russians” to be Written Into the Constitution

    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin’s sense of humour.
    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2020/03/02/constitutional-update/

    Third, if the amendments are passed, the constitutional will now state that,
    The state language of the Russian Federation on all its territory is the Russian language, as the language of the state-forming people [как язык государствообразующего народа].
    This is a concession to Russian ethno-nationalism, though it doesn’t go as far as some would have liked, as it doesn’t say that Russia is the state of the Russian [russkii] people (as opposed to that of the Rossiiskii people – the distinction between russkii and rossisskii being a crucial one). It merely calls Russians the ‘state-forming people’, while at the same time maintaining elsewhere the description of Russia as the state of the ‘multinational Rossiiskii people.’ As such I doubt that this change is of much importance, although entrenching Russian as the state language could well have an effect in terms of favouring Russian-language education over minority-language education in parts of Russia where there are large populations whose first language isn’t Russia.

    In General, absolutely meaningless editing of the Constitution, in order to please fetishists (the issue with the language and so was solved without any editing of the Constitution).

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Yes, now the constitution will still no word saying "Russians", but on the topic of language, will have this strange and awkward phrase about the language of a mysterious people that built the state but who strangely cannot be named.

    If nationalists are going to be satisfied with this, then Putin must be laughing to himself, that they are the world's most easy to make happy nationalists.

    As for the controversy about including a sentence about god, there is nothing so bad here in my opinion. Many constitutions in developed countries have such a sentence - it's more like convergence to international norms of constitutional rhetoric.

  139. @songbird
    Well, congrats!

    Though, to tell it truthfully, there are many godless places where God is mentioned prominently in the constitution. Heck, the first line of the Preamble to the Irish Constitution says: In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred.

    But all it really means is that the pozzed pols will go to Hell.

    This amendment which will say something about god is controversial just in Russia, because of the Soviet history has made the issue something more than just rhetorical (in other constitutions this is usually just rhetorical use of the word “god” and nobody will notice it). Actually, what is happening is just that Russia is converging to the rest of the developed world, where constitutions say sentences like this, and it is just interpreted in a rhetorical way.

    In America though, the constitution does not refer to god at any part – and the Founding Fathers of America were mostly some kind of spiritualists and they were very critical of organized religions of their time.

    • Replies: @songbird
    In the US, it is funny because we have the Pledge of Allegiance, where in school, you are expected to put your hand on your heart and recite, or at least stand quietly while someone else recites it:

    I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

    The "under God" of course, was added in the '50s to oppose communism, so people typically say it or hear it hundreds of times in their lives, but it seems pretty ineffective at preventing subversion.

    It's strongest messages seem to be anti-monarchist and anti-secessionist. But there is not much else in there. People have wildly different ideas of justice and liberty, and pledging to the flag and not the Constitution is very socialist.
  140. @Mr. XYZ
    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    Judging by his/her/its posts, I would not bet my money on it.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    You're always such a lousy loser! :-)
    , @Mr. Hack
    Щось тобі знова у голові засушилось? Вітри там віють?
  141. @Mitleser
    What is wrong with that?

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not "an empire aspiring to be a super-power".

    How much did Russians benefit from the Soviet Union's status as superpower that subsides others across the world?
    Apparently, not enough, hence there was not much opposition against the dissolution of the USSR.

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not “an empire aspiring to be a super-power”.

    That would be true if RF existed somewhere on the Moon or on Mars. Here on Earth the choice is stark: you are either a sovereign superpower, or a sidekick of one of the superpowers.

    As to the USSR, commies did a lot of stupid things, but they were right in at least one: you are either a sovereign superpower, or your sovereignty is an empty dream.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?

    A sovok loyalist may think that sovereignty is tied to superpowerdom, but it is not.
  142. @AnonFromTN

    The RF should be first and foremost a sovereign Russian state for Russians, not “an empire aspiring to be a super-power”.
     
    That would be true if RF existed somewhere on the Moon or on Mars. Here on Earth the choice is stark: you are either a sovereign superpower, or a sidekick of one of the superpowers.

    As to the USSR, commies did a lot of stupid things, but they were right in at least one: you are either a sovereign superpower, or your sovereignty is an empty dream.

    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?

    A sovok loyalist may think that sovereignty is tied to superpowerdom, but it is not.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?
     
    Without open or tacit protection of Russia and China, Iran would be crushed by the Empire. Vietnam and India are playing two superpowers, the US and Russia, against each other. This game is only possible when there are competing superpowers. In a unipolar world there would be no chance of playing this game.

    BTW, ad hominems are a sure sign that the person has no valid arguments. So, use them only when you run out of anything sensible or semi-sensible.
  143. @AP

    The Ukrainian Constitution is pretty “based” – mentions the Ukrainian nation in the preamble: https://meget.kiev.ua/zakon/konstitutsia-ukraini/razdel-1/
     
    It also states:

    "confirming the European identity of the Ukrainian people "

    "conscious of responsibility to God, our own conscience, previous, present and future generations"

    "The state language in Ukraine is Ukrainian"

    "The state shall promote the consolidation and development of the Ukrainian nation, its historical consciousness, traditions and culture, as well as the development of the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identity of all indigenous peoples and national minorities of Ukraine."

    "Ukraine takes care to satisfy the national - cultural and linguistic needs of Ukrainians living outside the state."

    So did Ukraine's constitution inspire the changes to the Russian one :-)

    That doesn’t appear to be recognising “ethnic Ukrainians” as one monolithic ethnic group though, but rather saying Ukrainians are made up of various different groups. It’s basically a civic nationalist declaration.

    That’s very different to saying “Russia for ethnic Russians”.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Too much of a hangup on this.

    Ethnicity alone doesn't always determine cultural/historical preferences. Certainly there're those who can be considered the most ethnic Russian of Russians who gravitate towards Western neolib and neocon views.

    A simple breakdown of this Russia for ethnic Russians versus Russia for Russians distinction without further consideration overlooks the differences among many who consider themselves ethnic Russian, while being 1/2 or 1/2 less some other group/groups.

    As an example, consider the differences between a good number of Azeri-Russians versus numerous Armenian Russians.

    How many of those calling themselves ethnic Russian are 1/4 or more of a different ethnic group?

  144. @Mitleser
    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?

    A sovok loyalist may think that sovereignty is tied to superpowerdom, but it is not.

    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?

    Without open or tacit protection of Russia and China, Iran would be crushed by the Empire. Vietnam and India are playing two superpowers, the US and Russia, against each other. This game is only possible when there are competing superpowers. In a unipolar world there would be no chance of playing this game.

    BTW, ad hominems are a sure sign that the person has no valid arguments. So, use them only when you run out of anything sensible or semi-sensible.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    There have been no competing superpowers since the late 1980s.
    Even now, the world is still partly unipolar.

    None of the states I mentioned rely on protection of Russia and China for their own defence.

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?
  145. @Seraphim
    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the 'Valachians' call themselves 'Rumuin, hoc est Romanos' and who speak a language close to Italian, because they are descendants of the 'Romans'.
    Francesco della Valle (?-1545): "La lingua loro e poco diversa della nostra Italiana, si dimandano in lingua loro Romei perche dicono esser venuti anticamente da Roma ad habitar in quel paese, et se alcuno dimanda se sanno parlare la lor lingua valacca, dicono a quest modo: Sti Rominest?, che vol dire: Sai tu Romano, per esser corrotta la lingua".
    Are there testimonies that at the same time a 'Ruthenian' would ask 'Do you speak Ukrainian'? or calling themselves 'Ukrainians'?

    What’s the matter, somebody who pretends to be as erudite as you didn’t know about Beauplan?

    summarized:

    Beauplan, Guillaume Le Vasseur de, a French army engineer, architect, and cartographer who spent many years in Ukraine (1630 to 1648) drew the first descriptive map of Ukraine in 1639. In 1654 in Danzig he published a specialized (scale of 1:452,000) and a ‘general’ (scale of 1:1,800,000) map of Ukraine, both engraved by the famous Dutch engraver Willem Hondius (de Hondt). Following their publication in Rouen, France, in 1660, these maps were duplicated many times in various European countries (they were reproduced, moreover, by Veniiamyn Kordt in Materialy po istorii russkoi kartografii [Materials for the History of Russian Cartography, 1–2, 1899–1910]). His book Description of Ukraine was widely known in Europe (Description des contrés du Royaume de Pologne, 1651; 2nd, enlarged edn, titled Description d’Ukranie, 1660; 3rd edn 1661; 4th edn, 1861). It includes geographical and economic information about Ukraine, describes the Ukrainian peasantry and other social classes, and gives a detailed description of the Dnipro Rapids. The Description, which was the first to describe Ukraine, was received with great interest in Europe (English translation, 1704; German, 1780; Polish, 1822; Russian, 1832; a partial translation also appeared in Ukrainian).

  146. @AnonFromTN

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?
     
    Judging by his/her/its posts, I would not bet my money on it.

    You’re always such a lousy loser! 🙂

  147. Russia is transitioning from a post-Soviet scrapheap into a national democracy before our eyes.

    At this rate he’ll mandate a raise in salaries by 2075. Slow down, glorious Rasha!

  148. @AnonFromTN

    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?
     
    Judging by his/her/its posts, I would not bet my money on it.

    Щось тобі знова у голові засушилось? Вітри там віють?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Оце так! Воно розмовляє по-україньски.
    (For those who can’t read Ukrainian, translation: “Wow! It speaks Ukrainian”)
  149. I’ve recommend also that the constitution be expressed against judicial review.

    because otherwise it’s very easy in the future to activist judges being the major part of policy. like it happens in nearly every western country.

    in brazil there is a line in the constitution defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but judges legalized butt marriage anyway

  150. @Rosie
    This news nearly brought tears to my eyes. Where there is life , there is hope.

    Lol, this seems more like the beginning of the downfall

  151. @Dmitry
    This amendment which will say something about god is controversial just in Russia, because of the Soviet history has made the issue something more than just rhetorical (in other constitutions this is usually just rhetorical use of the word "god" and nobody will notice it). Actually, what is happening is just that Russia is converging to the rest of the developed world, where constitutions say sentences like this, and it is just interpreted in a rhetorical way.

    In America though, the constitution does not refer to god at any part - and the Founding Fathers of America were mostly some kind of spiritualists and they were very critical of organized religions of their time.

    In the US, it is funny because we have the Pledge of Allegiance, where in school, you are expected to put your hand on your heart and recite, or at least stand quietly while someone else recites it:

    I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

    The “under God” of course, was added in the ’50s to oppose communism, so people typically say it or hear it hundreds of times in their lives, but it seems pretty ineffective at preventing subversion.

    It’s strongest messages seem to be anti-monarchist and anti-secessionist. But there is not much else in there. People have wildly different ideas of justice and liberty, and pledging to the flag and not the Constitution is very socialist.

  152. @AP

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’
     
    Cool. And there are Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey who call themselves "Rum." After you claim Rome perhaps you can claim the Turkish Black Sea coast as Romanian because names are magic.

    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?
     
    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Kiovia_Palatinatus._Beauplan_1664.jpg

    the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    But these are just labels. Clearly by the early 16th century Rusyns from what is now Ukraine considered themselves to be a different people from Muscovites.

    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident:

    https://www.acrod.org/

    http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1274.asp

    http://orthochristian.com/108811.html

    • Replies: @AP

    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident
     
    Among confused Englishmen like Andrew Phillips, the author of your last linked article. Not among the overwhelming majority of the natives, who vote for Ukrainian nationalist parties at the same rate as do central Ukrainians.
  153. @Mr. Hack
    Щось тобі знова у голові засушилось? Вітри там віють?

    Оце так! Воно розмовляє по-україньски.
    (For those who can’t read Ukrainian, translation: “Wow! It speaks Ukrainian”)

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Sorry, the word Ukrainian is spelled "українськи" not "україньски". I can see that you never received a 5 in spelling, Herr Professor. :-(
  154. @Europe Europa
    That doesn't appear to be recognising "ethnic Ukrainians" as one monolithic ethnic group though, but rather saying Ukrainians are made up of various different groups. It's basically a civic nationalist declaration.

    That's very different to saying "Russia for ethnic Russians".

    Too much of a hangup on this.

    Ethnicity alone doesn’t always determine cultural/historical preferences. Certainly there’re those who can be considered the most ethnic Russian of Russians who gravitate towards Western neolib and neocon views.

    A simple breakdown of this Russia for ethnic Russians versus Russia for Russians distinction without further consideration overlooks the differences among many who consider themselves ethnic Russian, while being 1/2 or 1/2 less some other group/groups.

    As an example, consider the differences between a good number of Azeri-Russians versus numerous Armenian Russians.

    How many of those calling themselves ethnic Russian are 1/4 or more of a different ethnic group?

  155. @AnonFromTN
    Оце так! Воно розмовляє по-україньски.
    (For those who can’t read Ukrainian, translation: “Wow! It speaks Ukrainian”)

    Sorry, the word Ukrainian is spelled “українськи” not “україньски”. I can see that you never received a 5 in spelling, Herr Professor. 🙁

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Помiтив, поздоровляю! Це добре. Значить, ще не все втрачено. Може, колись i розум повернеться.
    (Translation: “You’ve noticed, congrats! That’s good. It means that not everything is lost yet. Maybe at some point your brains will return”)
  156. @AnonFromTN
    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state. What’s more, so far RF defended its sovereignty and acted as an independent superpower. Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war. For an empire aspiring to be a super-power, it’s a death sentence.

    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state.

    ?

    So Russians should have less official status within there own nation-state than they did in an administrative unit within the USSR?

    Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war.

    I agree to an extent but I don’t see how officially acknowledging that Russia is the nation-state of the Russian people is beyond the pale. It has been the norm for quite some time for states to declare explicitly that they are the nation-state of their people. The primary reason that anyone questions this in English language media today is because they feel it is offensive to immigrant minorities. I don’t really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.

    Perhaps Russians don’t want to have the same status that Japanese have in Japan, Poles have in Poland, and Koreans have in Korea, but I doubt it.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    I don’t really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.
     
    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa), etc. The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians. The official language is also Russian. I don’t see why anyone (except some fetishists with severe inferiority complex) would want to belabor the point.
  157. @Denis

    RSFSR was not a state, just an administrative unit within the USSR, whereas Russian Federation is a state.
     
    ?

    So Russians should have less official status within there own nation-state than they did in an administrative unit within the USSR?


    Tribal nationalism is more ruinous for a modern state than a war.
     
    I agree to an extent but I don't see how officially acknowledging that Russia is the nation-state of the Russian people is beyond the pale. It has been the norm for quite some time for states to declare explicitly that they are the nation-state of their people. The primary reason that anyone questions this in English language media today is because they feel it is offensive to immigrant minorities. I don't really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.

    Perhaps Russians don't want to have the same status that Japanese have in Japan, Poles have in Poland, and Koreans have in Korea, but I doubt it.

    I don’t really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa), etc. The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians. The official language is also Russian. I don’t see why anyone (except some fetishists with severe inferiority complex) would want to belabor the point.

    • Replies: @Mitleser

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation.
     
    Not in Russian which is what matters the most.

    The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians.
     
    Russkiye or Rossianye?
    , @songbird

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa)
     
    I'm confused by your comment here. If I read it correctly, you seem to be acknowledging that Germany and France have imported big problems - I would say existential problems - but you seem to be promoting the idea that etiology is enough of an acknowledgement for them and Russians.

    There are numerous places on the map that were named by people who were completely killed off, but the names still survive. Countless such places in America.
  158. @Mr. Hack
    Sorry, the word Ukrainian is spelled "українськи" not "україньски". I can see that you never received a 5 in spelling, Herr Professor. :-(

    Помiтив, поздоровляю! Це добре. Значить, ще не все втрачено. Може, колись i розум повернеться.
    (Translation: “You’ve noticed, congrats! That’s good. It means that not everything is lost yet. Maybe at some point your brains will return”)

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Oh no, what's wrong with my brains?...

    https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/crying-face-emoticon-tear-347866430
  159. @AnonFromTN

    Is the Islamic Republic of Iran a sidekick of someone else? Is modern Socialist Republic of Vietnam? Or the Republic of India?
     
    Without open or tacit protection of Russia and China, Iran would be crushed by the Empire. Vietnam and India are playing two superpowers, the US and Russia, against each other. This game is only possible when there are competing superpowers. In a unipolar world there would be no chance of playing this game.

    BTW, ad hominems are a sure sign that the person has no valid arguments. So, use them only when you run out of anything sensible or semi-sensible.

    There have been no competing superpowers since the late 1980s.
    Even now, the world is still partly unipolar.

    None of the states I mentioned rely on protection of Russia and China for their own defence.

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?
     
    My definition is purely functional: if the Empire is afraid of you and keeps droning about the threat you pose, you are a superpower. At the moment only Russia and China fit this definition.
    , @RadicalCenter
    How about Syria and Armenia, though? They may owe their continued existence and sovereignty to the RF.

    It would seem that the Turks (I.e. part-Greek muslims ;) with an assist from Azerbaijanis) would finish the genocide of the Armenians without Russian protection.

    It also appears that Syrian people, especially Alawites and the remaining Christians, would be subjugated or eliminated by Islamists or be conquered by Turkey if not for Russian involvement and power.
  160. Re: Stupidity of high IQ people

    Mike Bloomberg, Jewish financier, quit the presidential race after spending
    $1 BILLION (1000 million) and gaining only 44 delegates. It shows that
    high-IQ people are capable of exceedingly poor judgment. Another example
    is a French politician who recently withdrew from the mayoral race in
    Paris because he foolishly was videotaped while masturbating and the
    tape somehow surfaced on the Internet (a woman was, of course,
    involved /cherchez la femme! revenge porn?/ and a Russian (Jewish?)
    “artist”). It shows that good judgment is by far more important in life
    than a high IQ. And good judgment begins with the Aristotelian Pr.
    of moderation in all things

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Controversial opinion: neither of those people are highly intelligent.
  161. @Mitleser
    There have been no competing superpowers since the late 1980s.
    Even now, the world is still partly unipolar.

    None of the states I mentioned rely on protection of Russia and China for their own defence.

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?

    My definition is purely functional: if the Empire is afraid of you and keeps droning about the threat you pose, you are a superpower. At the moment only Russia and China fit this definition.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    That would also make the DPRK a superpower.
    Iran too, considering how the Iran got away with striking a US base in Iraq.

    Your definition is very US-centric.
  162. @AnonFromTN

    I don’t really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.
     
    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa), etc. The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians. The official language is also Russian. I don’t see why anyone (except some fetishists with severe inferiority complex) would want to belabor the point.

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation.

    Not in Russian which is what matters the most.

    The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians.

    Russkiye or Rossianye?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Russkiye or Rossianye?
     
    Now, from my perspective, in official state documents it should be “Rossianye”, because if you care for the wellbeing of the RF, you don’t want to exclude its citizens who are not ethnic Russians. The state is prudently named “Rossiyskaya Federatsiya”, not “Russkaya Federatsiya”, for the same reason. In fact, this policy was in effect even back in the Russian Empire: the unit that guarded the tsar was composed of people from the North Caucasus, not ethnic Russians. The language was and is Russian, with the provision that other ethnicities can get education and file official documents in their languages (the latter are officially translated into Russian for further use). As Soviet poet from Dagestan Rasul Gamzatov wisely said, if it weren’t for the Russian language, I’d be a poet of one village (there are 30+ different languages in Dagestan, his native Avar is only one of those). This way small nations in the RF actually partake in the greatness they would never achieve by being tribal. This is the key difference in requirements between the countries that aspire to greatness and those inconsequential entities that are happy being one-tribe Bantustans.
  163. @songbird

    And what is a Russian exactly?
     
    Yes, this is a big problem. As with the constitutions of many countries, a geographic definition is probably baked into the cake. And I am sure it was perfectly reasonable at one time - before globalism.

    Practically speaking, something like: someone who is genetically at least about half Slavic and the remaining portion almost entirely European/Scandinavian, Caucasian, or central Asian (can’t exclude Messrs. Shoigu or Karlin, after all);

    Orthodox or at least nonCatholic Christian;

    fluent in Russian;

    and swearing allegiance only to Russia and other Russian people, which means no citizenship or military or government service for any other country ever;

    and owing and professing no loyalty to any other government, race, or religion.

    This does not exclude people not meeting the criteria from being loyal, fully understood, welcomed, respected, trusted citizens and part of the broader Russified pro-Russian community in other parts of the RF, just from “being Russian” and being always politically and culturally foremost and in full control of “Russia proper.”

    • Replies: @songbird
    When a lot of people hear DNA, they just go absolutely nuts. Of course, that doesn't mean that one could not come up with a fairly functional genetic definition of Russian, which might even include Buryats, peripheral people, and people who can be successfully Russified, through intermarriage with Russians. But which would exclude unassimilable peoples, like Nigerians, and the children of mudsharks.

    Not that you wouldn't want more layers of selection on top of that - political and cultural tests.
  164. @AnonFromTN

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?
     
    My definition is purely functional: if the Empire is afraid of you and keeps droning about the threat you pose, you are a superpower. At the moment only Russia and China fit this definition.

    That would also make the DPRK a superpower.
    Iran too, considering how the Iran got away with striking a US base in Iraq.

    Your definition is very US-centric.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Yes, the Empire is scared of DPRK and Iran, but neither of these can stand on its own. The Empire could have obliterated both with nukes. It does not do that, not out of kindness of its heart, but because Russia and China have enough nukes to obliterate the Empire.
  165. @Mitleser
    There have been no competing superpowers since the late 1980s.
    Even now, the world is still partly unipolar.

    None of the states I mentioned rely on protection of Russia and China for their own defence.

    What is your definition of superpowerdom, anyway?

    How about Syria and Armenia, though? They may owe their continued existence and sovereignty to the RF.

    It would seem that the Turks (I.e. part-Greek muslims 😉 with an assist from Azerbaijanis) would finish the genocide of the Armenians without Russian protection.

    It also appears that Syrian people, especially Alawites and the remaining Christians, would be subjugated or eliminated by Islamists or be conquered by Turkey if not for Russian involvement and power.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    That means that Russia still has some significant power projection left, but that also applies to a lesser degree to other countries like the Iran whose role in Syria is as important as Russia's.

    Other examples are France who saved Mali in the last decade or Turkey.

    https://beapatriot.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/war-in-northern-mali-map.jpg
  166. @AnonFromTN
    Помiтив, поздоровляю! Це добре. Значить, ще не все втрачено. Може, колись i розум повернеться.
    (Translation: “You’ve noticed, congrats! That’s good. It means that not everything is lost yet. Maybe at some point your brains will return”)
  167. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident:

    https://www.acrod.org/

    http://www.thearda.com/Denoms/D_1274.asp

    http://orthochristian.com/108811.html

    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident

    Among confused Englishmen like Andrew Phillips, the author of your last linked article. Not among the overwhelming majority of the natives, who vote for Ukrainian nationalist parties at the same rate as do central Ukrainians.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    From what has been brought up at this thread, you distort in at least two instances by not addressing:

    - sites stating a Carpatho-Russian identity from people of that group
    - the point about that feeling being more evident in the past as opposed to the present - something which you contradicted.

    The 1970s movie "The Deer Hunter" relates to this matter.

  168. @Mitleser

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation.
     
    Not in Russian which is what matters the most.

    The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians.
     
    Russkiye or Rossianye?

    Russkiye or Rossianye?

    Now, from my perspective, in official state documents it should be “Rossianye”, because if you care for the wellbeing of the RF, you don’t want to exclude its citizens who are not ethnic Russians. The state is prudently named “Rossiyskaya Federatsiya”, not “Russkaya Federatsiya”, for the same reason. In fact, this policy was in effect even back in the Russian Empire: the unit that guarded the tsar was composed of people from the North Caucasus, not ethnic Russians. The language was and is Russian, with the provision that other ethnicities can get education and file official documents in their languages (the latter are officially translated into Russian for further use). As Soviet poet from Dagestan Rasul Gamzatov wisely said, if it weren’t for the Russian language, I’d be a poet of one village (there are 30+ different languages in Dagestan, his native Avar is only one of those). This way small nations in the RF actually partake in the greatness they would never achieve by being tribal. This is the key difference in requirements between the countries that aspire to greatness and those inconsequential entities that are happy being one-tribe Bantustans.

  169. @Mitleser
    That would also make the DPRK a superpower.
    Iran too, considering how the Iran got away with striking a US base in Iraq.

    Your definition is very US-centric.

    Yes, the Empire is scared of DPRK and Iran, but neither of these can stand on its own. The Empire could have obliterated both with nukes. It does not do that, not out of kindness of its heart, but because Russia and China have enough nukes to obliterate the Empire.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    The PRC does not have impressive second-strike capabilities that would destroy your Empire, or at least it did not have for a long time and its is the only state treaty-bound to protect the DPRK.

    Iran has no more powerful defenders.

    Your Empire does obliterate them with nukes because it would be too costly against something that are only limited well-contained threats as long as they are not pushed too far.
  170. @AP
    LOL, you are wrong even when discussing what you have written.

    Like all Americans, your knowledge of “le old country” would be laughable if it wasn’t so pathetic.
     
    Various Russians here have pointed out that you are clueless about Russia, where you allegedly live.

    Various reputable people here have pointed out that your mother turns tricks for crack cocaine.

    Would you trust the opinions of someone with a mother like that??

    • LOL: Denis
    • Troll: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP
    No, but our host among others has pointed out that you are wrong all the time. I forgot who made the specific observation that you were clueless about Russia.
  171. @AP

    I am not certain about the cabbies. Maybe the silent ones didn’t wanted to speak Russian.
     
    I took about 8 cab rides (in 2017 a ride across the entire city cost $3.00). One of the drivers spoke Ukrainian on the cell phone while driving, the others were Russian-speaking.

    The thing with Kiev is that almost every Russian-speaking person is also fluent in Ukrainian and will switch effortlessly if you speak to them in Ukrainian.

    Certainly in my wife’s home village everyone speaks Ukrainian to each other
     
    I forgot - is your wife's village somewhere in the vicinity of Kiev? Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn't spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.

    Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn’t spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.

    The “Ukrainian” actually spoken in Ukraine is a vastly different language from what’s officially pushed on TV, in schools, etc.

    The former sort of “Ukrainian” is a dialect continuum spoken all across a huge swath of southern Russia.

    Taking a normal (European) situation with dialect continuums and regional variation and turning it into some monstrous artificial frankenlanguage and then forcing people to speak it with state-sponsored violence is a deliberate act of deracination and ethnic cleansing.

    • Disagree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP
    Every one of your paragraphs is a false claim but that’s standard for you.
  172. @anonymous coward

    Some Russian posters here fantasize that Ukrainian isn’t spoken anywhere in Ukraine outside Galicia or the far West.
     
    The "Ukrainian" actually spoken in Ukraine is a vastly different language from what's officially pushed on TV, in schools, etc.

    The former sort of "Ukrainian" is a dialect continuum spoken all across a huge swath of southern Russia.

    Taking a normal (European) situation with dialect continuums and regional variation and turning it into some monstrous artificial frankenlanguage and then forcing people to speak it with state-sponsored violence is a deliberate act of deracination and ethnic cleansing.

    Every one of your paragraphs is a false claim but that’s standard for you.

  173. @Mr. XYZ
    Mr. Hack knows Ukrainian, no?

    I soncerely doubt an amerimutt LARPer would know Ukrainian

  174. @AnonFromTN

    I don’t really see that (offense to minorities) as a sufficient justification for refusing to officially recognize the status of Russians (Russkiye) within Russia.
     
    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa), etc. The name Russian Federation already proclaims that it is a state created by Russians. The official language is also Russian. I don’t see why anyone (except some fetishists with severe inferiority complex) would want to belabor the point.

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa)

    I’m confused by your comment here. If I read it correctly, you seem to be acknowledging that Germany and France have imported big problems – I would say existential problems – but you seem to be promoting the idea that etiology is enough of an acknowledgement for them and Russians.

    There are numerous places on the map that were named by people who were completely killed off, but the names still survive. Countless such places in America.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I should add that 26 of the 50 states in America have names of at least partly indigenous origin.
    , @AnonFromTN
    I was not talking about places, I was talking about countries. Russia is 80%+ Russian, France is still majority French, Germany is still majority German. There are differences, though. >95% of minorities in Russia are the people living where their ancestors lived. What’s more, they and Russians living near them have adjusted to each other for centuries and mostly coexist peacefully. In contrast, Germany and France imported hordes of culturally incompatible savages who lived god knows where.
  175. @anonymous coward
    Various reputable people here have pointed out that your mother turns tricks for crack cocaine.

    Would you trust the opinions of someone with a mother like that??

    No, but our host among others has pointed out that you are wrong all the time. I forgot who made the specific observation that you were clueless about Russia.

  176. @Europe Europa
    Do Russians of Belarusian and Ukrainian descent count as ethnic Russians under this law? Presumably not as that would then mean that anyone who speaks Russian and professes Orthodox religion counts as an ethnic Russian which would by definition not be an ethnicity at all, unless Putin is planning to deny that Belarusians and Ukrainians are a separate ethnicity from Russians?

    Legally defining what "ethnic Russian" means seems potentially very complex as there are many people who identify as ethnic Russians who are not completely ethnic Russians in ancestral terms. So if being ethnic Russian is simply speaking Russian, being Orthodox and identifying as "ethnic Russian" then you are back to civic nationalism basically.

    Do Russians of Belarusian and Ukrainian descent count as ethnic Russians under this law? Presumably not as that would then mean that anyone who speaks Russian and professes Orthodox religion counts as an ethnic Russian which would by definition not be an ethnicity at all, unless Putin is planning to deny that Belarusians and Ukrainians are a separate ethnicity from Russians?

    He has more than once. My memory is a bit blurry, but he said something to that effect in a Russian TV interview a few months back — or that’s when I came across the clip anyway — and at least once in the early 00s (to some foreign interviewer, I seem to remember).

    As for your worries, let’s wait and see how the new constitution is worded until we start fretting about loopholes.

  177. @RadicalCenter
    Practically speaking, something like: someone who is genetically at least about half Slavic and the remaining portion almost entirely European/Scandinavian, Caucasian, or central Asian (can’t exclude Messrs. Shoigu or Karlin, after all);

    Orthodox or at least nonCatholic Christian;

    fluent in Russian;

    and swearing allegiance only to Russia and other Russian people, which means no citizenship or military or government service for any other country ever;

    and owing and professing no loyalty to any other government, race, or religion.

    This does not exclude people not meeting the criteria from being loyal, fully understood, welcomed, respected, trusted citizens and part of the broader Russified pro-Russian community in other parts of the RF, just from “being Russian” and being always politically and culturally foremost and in full control of “Russia proper.”

    When a lot of people hear DNA, they just go absolutely nuts. Of course, that doesn’t mean that one could not come up with a fairly functional genetic definition of Russian, which might even include Buryats, peripheral people, and people who can be successfully Russified, through intermarriage with Russians. But which would exclude unassimilable peoples, like Nigerians, and the children of mudsharks.

    Not that you wouldn’t want more layers of selection on top of that – political and cultural tests.

  178. @AP

    Among them was the view that they were and/or could be considered one people (Russian), albeit with some different historical/cultural experiences, greatly influenced by geography. Though diminished, this sentiment is still evident
     
    Among confused Englishmen like Andrew Phillips, the author of your last linked article. Not among the overwhelming majority of the natives, who vote for Ukrainian nationalist parties at the same rate as do central Ukrainians.

    From what has been brought up at this thread, you distort in at least two instances by not addressing:

    – sites stating a Carpatho-Russian identity from people of that group
    – the point about that feeling being more evident in the past as opposed to the present – something which you contradicted.

    The 1970s movie “The Deer Hunter” relates to this matter.

    • Replies: @AP
    That marginal people and ideas exist doesn’t mean much.
    , @Mr. Hack
    So now you're endorsing a Ukrainian regional group as a separate nationality based on a film about Pennsylvania Ruyns in the 1970's? Talk about grasping for straws! :-)
  179. @songbird

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa)
     
    I'm confused by your comment here. If I read it correctly, you seem to be acknowledging that Germany and France have imported big problems - I would say existential problems - but you seem to be promoting the idea that etiology is enough of an acknowledgement for them and Russians.

    There are numerous places on the map that were named by people who were completely killed off, but the names still survive. Countless such places in America.

    I should add that 26 of the 50 states in America have names of at least partly indigenous origin.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Reminder that the names of the modern German capital and other cities and towns in Germany (Leipzig, Lübeck, Rostock,...) have at least partly Slavic origin.

    The Sorbs is Lusatia is what is left of Germany's native Slavs.

  180. @RadicalCenter
    How about Syria and Armenia, though? They may owe their continued existence and sovereignty to the RF.

    It would seem that the Turks (I.e. part-Greek muslims ;) with an assist from Azerbaijanis) would finish the genocide of the Armenians without Russian protection.

    It also appears that Syrian people, especially Alawites and the remaining Christians, would be subjugated or eliminated by Islamists or be conquered by Turkey if not for Russian involvement and power.

    That means that Russia still has some significant power projection left, but that also applies to a lesser degree to other countries like the Iran whose role in Syria is as important as Russia’s.

    Other examples are France who saved Mali in the last decade or Turkey.

    • Replies: @Yevardian
    Yeah, it 'saved' Mali from it's own people. Ok.
  181. @AnonFromTN
    Yes, the Empire is scared of DPRK and Iran, but neither of these can stand on its own. The Empire could have obliterated both with nukes. It does not do that, not out of kindness of its heart, but because Russia and China have enough nukes to obliterate the Empire.

    The PRC does not have impressive second-strike capabilities that would destroy your Empire, or at least it did not have for a long time and its is the only state treaty-bound to protect the DPRK.

    Iran has no more powerful defenders.

    Your Empire does obliterate them with nukes because it would be too costly against something that are only limited well-contained threats as long as they are not pushed too far.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    First, it is not my Empire. It is my country now, but the Empire is killing this country, and I resent that.

    Second, the military might of the Empire is largely a myth. It is repeated to the gullible sheeple to fleece them and feed the insatiable maw of the US MIC. What’s more, a lot of money ostensibly spent on “defense” is simply stolen, or pays fraudulently inflated prices of the toys MIC makes maximum profits on. The last unambiguous military victory of the Empire was in 1983 in a war with Grenada (population ~100,000). The best the Empire can do now is ruin the country, declare victory, and leave. There are many examples of created chaos, and none of actual victories in the last 30+ years.
  182. @songbird
    I should add that 26 of the 50 states in America have names of at least partly indigenous origin.

    Reminder that the names of the modern German capital and other cities and towns in Germany (Leipzig, Lübeck, Rostock,…) have at least partly Slavic origin.

    The Sorbs is Lusatia is what is left of Germany’s native Slavs.

    • Replies: @songbird
    That's interesting - I didn't know that. In Europe, I was thinking specifically about some placenames in Greece.

    But now that you got me thinking of that area, I remember it is a common theory that the name Germany actually comes from the Celts. Some believe that it was even derived from the name of a Celtic tribe that lived east of the Rhine, though that may or may not be true.
  183. @Mikhail
    From what has been brought up at this thread, you distort in at least two instances by not addressing:

    - sites stating a Carpatho-Russian identity from people of that group
    - the point about that feeling being more evident in the past as opposed to the present - something which you contradicted.

    The 1970s movie "The Deer Hunter" relates to this matter.

    That marginal people and ideas exist doesn’t mean much.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Marginal to some marginal people like yourself.
  184. @Mikhail
    From what has been brought up at this thread, you distort in at least two instances by not addressing:

    - sites stating a Carpatho-Russian identity from people of that group
    - the point about that feeling being more evident in the past as opposed to the present - something which you contradicted.

    The 1970s movie "The Deer Hunter" relates to this matter.

    So now you’re endorsing a Ukrainian regional group as a separate nationality based on a film about Pennsylvania Ruyns in the 1970’s? Talk about grasping for straws! 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    One of other examples including:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurus_%C5%A0kurla

    https://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/engdocuments/enart_fekula.html

    I know someone who is a friend of the last linked above. She told me that some in his family had been harassed in the old country by OUN/UPA types, who didn't like the stated proud affiliation with Russia.
  185. @Mitleser
    Reminder that the names of the modern German capital and other cities and towns in Germany (Leipzig, Lübeck, Rostock,...) have at least partly Slavic origin.

    The Sorbs is Lusatia is what is left of Germany's native Slavs.

    That’s interesting – I didn’t know that. In Europe, I was thinking specifically about some placenames in Greece.

    But now that you got me thinking of that area, I remember it is a common theory that the name Germany actually comes from the Celts. Some believe that it was even derived from the name of a Celtic tribe that lived east of the Rhine, though that may or may not be true.

  186. @szopen
    While you are right that the sentence quoted by you from POlish constitution of 1997 was introduced specially for stopping same-sex marriage, in practice it may no suffice. Already there are lawyers and activists who pretend the sentence does not define marriage, but merely states that one form of marriage, that between man and women, must be protected by state - which does not exclude existence or support for other forms of marriage (including same-sex marriage). This interpretation, despite being against intentions of creators of constitution and the previous conclusions by our Constitutional Court, gets more and more steam on social media and I can't count how many times I was debunking it.

    The lesson is, the statements should not be vague with a hope that it's obvious what they mean.

    Another lesson is that maybe the Consitution should mandate that courts cannot institute new consequences by new interpretation of old laws, and in case of new interpretation they should ask the legislature for confirmation. Otherwise, we will be going into judgecracy.

    Also, jurists are saying that constitution defines Polish nation as all citizens of Poland, regardless of their ethnicity.

    BTW, you promised the report fro your recent travel to Poland. Have I missed it?

    The lesson is, the statements should not be vague with a hope that it’s obvious what they mean.

    That absolutely is not the lesson. The lesson is that nobody cares about “the rule of law” except for spergs. Men rule. Laws do not. Care deeply about which men rule, who they are, and what they want. Care little for what shape the ink blots on the paper have.

    • Agree: Swedish Family
  187. @Europe Europa
    That's not really how laws work, at least not in democratic countries with due process. It seems to me that Putin is virtue signalling to a certain type of Russian nationalist but hasn't actually got the gumption to define a Russian as an Orthodox Slav which would actually give the law meaning then.

    In that sense it is sort of like Brexit, in that it's a symbolic gesture intended to appease the sentiments of a certain element of the population rather than actually change anything in reality.

    Laws use “reasonable man” standards all the time. Laws are written in languages using words. Words mean what the speakers of the language say they mean.

    So, that’s exactly how laws always work.

  188. @songbird

    It is already acknowledged in the name of the state: it’s Russian Federation, not Chechen Federation or Buryat Federation. Same as in most countries: Germany (not little Turkey), France (not little Africa)
     
    I'm confused by your comment here. If I read it correctly, you seem to be acknowledging that Germany and France have imported big problems - I would say existential problems - but you seem to be promoting the idea that etiology is enough of an acknowledgement for them and Russians.

    There are numerous places on the map that were named by people who were completely killed off, but the names still survive. Countless such places in America.

    I was not talking about places, I was talking about countries. Russia is 80%+ Russian, France is still majority French, Germany is still majority German. There are differences, though. >95% of minorities in Russia are the people living where their ancestors lived. What’s more, they and Russians living near them have adjusted to each other for centuries and mostly coexist peacefully. In contrast, Germany and France imported hordes of culturally incompatible savages who lived god knows where.

    • Replies: @songbird
    To the contrary, countries are places, so when you are talking about countries, it follows that you are talking about places. And obviously, what holds true of one, holds true of the other: namely, that newer people moving to a place will replace the older people who lived there, if they move in sufficient numbers. Generally, this is not desirable for the older people, and it is in their interest to try to avoid it.

    In order to avoid it, you cannot just say, "My country is different. It won't happen here" because that is just a delusion. There were places in Ireland in the 1970s that still had no electricity or had dirt floors. But look at it now - you will see black faces in the villages of those same places. Twenty years ago, it would have been hard to find a black in Dublin. Now, it seems to be under the fastest transformation in Europe.

    One of the essential flaws of the US is that people said we shouldn't offend the Indians, by making English the official language, or by saying we are a European people. They never talked to the Indians, or tried to accommodate them into some special relationship - it was just a rhetorical trick, to further the idea of open borders.

    The point is Russia needs a strategy to avoid the West's fate. If there is anything wrong with putting some acknowledgement into the constitution, it is that it is too superficial to be a strategy. Not that it conjures the specter of Nazism, or offends 1 out of 100 Buryats.
  189. @Mitleser
    The PRC does not have impressive second-strike capabilities that would destroy your Empire, or at least it did not have for a long time and its is the only state treaty-bound to protect the DPRK.

    Iran has no more powerful defenders.

    Your Empire does obliterate them with nukes because it would be too costly against something that are only limited well-contained threats as long as they are not pushed too far.

    First, it is not my Empire. It is my country now, but the Empire is killing this country, and I resent that.

    Second, the military might of the Empire is largely a myth. It is repeated to the gullible sheeple to fleece them and feed the insatiable maw of the US MIC. What’s more, a lot of money ostensibly spent on “defense” is simply stolen, or pays fraudulently inflated prices of the toys MIC makes maximum profits on. The last unambiguous military victory of the Empire was in 1983 in a war with Grenada (population ~100,000). The best the Empire can do now is ruin the country, declare victory, and leave. There are many examples of created chaos, and none of actual victories in the last 30+ years.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Why should non-USians care whether the US can achieve an unambiguous military victory or not?

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.
  190. @AnonFromTN
    First, it is not my Empire. It is my country now, but the Empire is killing this country, and I resent that.

    Second, the military might of the Empire is largely a myth. It is repeated to the gullible sheeple to fleece them and feed the insatiable maw of the US MIC. What’s more, a lot of money ostensibly spent on “defense” is simply stolen, or pays fraudulently inflated prices of the toys MIC makes maximum profits on. The last unambiguous military victory of the Empire was in 1983 in a war with Grenada (population ~100,000). The best the Empire can do now is ruin the country, declare victory, and leave. There are many examples of created chaos, and none of actual victories in the last 30+ years.

    Why should non-USians care whether the US can achieve an unambiguous military victory or not?

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.
     
    Well, that’s over. Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped. Even Yemen is successfully fighting back against Gulf satrapies, fully backed, armed, and supplied current intelligence by the Empire. Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating. Lately the Empire is only successful with hapless morons with deep inferiority complexes, like Balts, Ukrainians, and Poles. Even there, it owns compradore elites and a few LARPers, but does not rule hearts and minds of the population.
  191. @Anon 2
    Re: Stupidity of high IQ people

    Mike Bloomberg, Jewish financier, quit the presidential race after spending
    $1 BILLION (1000 million) and gaining only 44 delegates. It shows that
    high-IQ people are capable of exceedingly poor judgment. Another example
    is a French politician who recently withdrew from the mayoral race in
    Paris because he foolishly was videotaped while masturbating and the
    tape somehow surfaced on the Internet (a woman was, of course,
    involved /cherchez la femme! revenge porn?/ and a Russian (Jewish?)
    “artist”). It shows that good judgment is by far more important in life
    than a high IQ. And good judgment begins with the Aristotelian Pr.
    of moderation in all things

    Controversial opinion: neither of those people are highly intelligent.

  192. @AnonFromTN
    I was not talking about places, I was talking about countries. Russia is 80%+ Russian, France is still majority French, Germany is still majority German. There are differences, though. >95% of minorities in Russia are the people living where their ancestors lived. What’s more, they and Russians living near them have adjusted to each other for centuries and mostly coexist peacefully. In contrast, Germany and France imported hordes of culturally incompatible savages who lived god knows where.

    To the contrary, countries are places, so when you are talking about countries, it follows that you are talking about places. And obviously, what holds true of one, holds true of the other: namely, that newer people moving to a place will replace the older people who lived there, if they move in sufficient numbers. Generally, this is not desirable for the older people, and it is in their interest to try to avoid it.

    In order to avoid it, you cannot just say, “My country is different. It won’t happen here” because that is just a delusion. There were places in Ireland in the 1970s that still had no electricity or had dirt floors. But look at it now – you will see black faces in the villages of those same places. Twenty years ago, it would have been hard to find a black in Dublin. Now, it seems to be under the fastest transformation in Europe.

    One of the essential flaws of the US is that people said we shouldn’t offend the Indians, by making English the official language, or by saying we are a European people. They never talked to the Indians, or tried to accommodate them into some special relationship – it was just a rhetorical trick, to further the idea of open borders.

    The point is Russia needs a strategy to avoid the West’s fate. If there is anything wrong with putting some acknowledgement into the constitution, it is that it is too superficial to be a strategy. Not that it conjures the specter of Nazism, or offends 1 out of 100 Buryats.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    I believe the best defense against the suicide that the West is currently committing is the fact that Russians actively reject PC. Perverts are tolerated, but the terms describing their perversions are swearwords in Russian. Freeloaders are actively discouraged, which protects it from hordes of third world scum (decent third worlders do not run to Europe or the US). There are lots of jokes that show immunity to Western malaise. For example, while the West is gripped by #metoo hysteria, Russian joke describes it this way:
    - Young lady, your 100 euro bill is counterfeit.
    - So, I have been raped!
  193. @Mitleser
    Why should non-USians care whether the US can achieve an unambiguous military victory or not?

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.

    Well, that’s over. Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped. Even Yemen is successfully fighting back against Gulf satrapies, fully backed, armed, and supplied current intelligence by the Empire. Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating. Lately the Empire is only successful with hapless morons with deep inferiority complexes, like Balts, Ukrainians, and Poles. Even there, it owns compradore elites and a few LARPers, but does not rule hearts and minds of the population.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
    No, it is not over yet. The situation is better than it used to, but it is not over.

    Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped.
     
    Just as attempts to cause regime change in Baathist Iraq and Socialist Cuba failed in the 1990s , but that does not mean US dominance in that decade was stronger than ever.

    Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating.
     
    Mixed results, actually.
    They showed that they can strike back, but that did not save them from crippling sanctions or protected Soleimani.
  194. @songbird
    To the contrary, countries are places, so when you are talking about countries, it follows that you are talking about places. And obviously, what holds true of one, holds true of the other: namely, that newer people moving to a place will replace the older people who lived there, if they move in sufficient numbers. Generally, this is not desirable for the older people, and it is in their interest to try to avoid it.

    In order to avoid it, you cannot just say, "My country is different. It won't happen here" because that is just a delusion. There were places in Ireland in the 1970s that still had no electricity or had dirt floors. But look at it now - you will see black faces in the villages of those same places. Twenty years ago, it would have been hard to find a black in Dublin. Now, it seems to be under the fastest transformation in Europe.

    One of the essential flaws of the US is that people said we shouldn't offend the Indians, by making English the official language, or by saying we are a European people. They never talked to the Indians, or tried to accommodate them into some special relationship - it was just a rhetorical trick, to further the idea of open borders.

    The point is Russia needs a strategy to avoid the West's fate. If there is anything wrong with putting some acknowledgement into the constitution, it is that it is too superficial to be a strategy. Not that it conjures the specter of Nazism, or offends 1 out of 100 Buryats.

    I believe the best defense against the suicide that the West is currently committing is the fact that Russians actively reject PC. Perverts are tolerated, but the terms describing their perversions are swearwords in Russian. Freeloaders are actively discouraged, which protects it from hordes of third world scum (decent third worlders do not run to Europe or the US). There are lots of jokes that show immunity to Western malaise. For example, while the West is gripped by #metoo hysteria, Russian joke describes it this way:
    – Young lady, your 100 euro bill is counterfeit.
    – So, I have been raped!

    • Replies: @songbird
    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.

    Do they have a different culture, as a nation? Maybe, but if so, it is only analogous to Western Europe or America, in earlier years, and so is no defense.

    I'd hate to think what Russia would look like in 20 years, if America merely split its diversity bucks with Russia, or if Russia could bump up its hourly wage to merely half of America's.
  195. @melanf


    “Russia for Russians” to be Written Into the Constitution

     

    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin’s sense of humour.
    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

     

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2020/03/02/constitutional-update/

    "Third, if the amendments are passed, the constitutional will now state that,
    The state language of the Russian Federation on all its territory is the Russian language, as the language of the state-forming people [как язык государствообразующего народа].
    This is a concession to Russian ethno-nationalism, though it doesn’t go as far as some would have liked, as it doesn’t say that Russia is the state of the Russian [russkii] people (as opposed to that of the Rossiiskii people – the distinction between russkii and rossisskii being a crucial one). It merely calls Russians the ‘state-forming people’, while at the same time maintaining elsewhere the description of Russia as the state of the ‘multinational Rossiiskii people.’ As such I doubt that this change is of much importance, although entrenching Russian as the state language could well have an effect in terms of favouring Russian-language education over minority-language education in parts of Russia where there are large populations whose first language isn’t Russia.
    "

    In General, absolutely meaningless editing of the Constitution, in order to please fetishists (the issue with the language and so was solved without any editing of the Constitution).

    Yes, now the constitution will still no word saying “Russians”, but on the topic of language, will have this strange and awkward phrase about the language of a mysterious people that built the state but who strangely cannot be named.

    If nationalists are going to be satisfied with this, then Putin must be laughing to himself, that they are the world’s most easy to make happy nationalists.

    As for the controversy about including a sentence about god, there is nothing so bad here in my opinion. Many constitutions in developed countries have such a sentence – it’s more like convergence to international norms of constitutional rhetoric.

  196. @Europe Europa
    Do Ukrainians and Belarussians count as ethnic Russian? What about Karelians? Volga Germans, Kazak Germans? Jews even?

    In practice this law sounds problematic because while the majority of "Russians" are Slavs, Slavs don't have a total monopoly on "Russianness". Defining Russian as "white/European" would probably solve that dilemma but I doubt Putin would go that far.

    In Soviet times, you would be asking a question with an official answer.

    Nationality was officially determined by parents’ nationality, and was a fixed category. Except in the case of children of mixed nationality marriages, where their parents choose one of the two nationalities provide, and that they want for their child.

    So if a Russian man married a Ukrainian woman in Soviet times, then they have to choose a nationality for their children from either Russian or Ukrainian (but not both).

    But in Soviet times, to be Russian was by far the most desirable nationality, as children of mixed nationality marriages with Russians, as almost always choose Russian nationality for their children.

    However, today, your question does not have an official answer. As officially nationality is only asked in the census, and it is by self-selection. I.e. any Russian citizen can call themselves Russian, (or Ewok), when asked in the census. So officially it became something which measures voluntary self-identification.

    Of course, Russians in the ethnic-cultural sense are just those people who are from birth racially and culturally Russian, just like for any other ethnic-cultural peoples. And Russian in the native citizenship sense (in English language there is not the same distinction, but in Russian there has been inherited also a bit of difference in words which makes this easier to express) is the native citizen Russia, which can include many different nationalities which are native in the country.

  197. @Anatoly Karlin
    Where, exactly, is that prescribed?

    Article 69
    (1) The RF guarantees the rights of indigenous small peoples in accordance with commonly accepted principles and norms of international law...
    (2) The state defends the cultural identity of all peoples and ethnic communities of the RF, guarantees the preservation of ethnocultural and linguistic diversity.
     

    There’s nothing wrong with such laws. The Russian language is under no danger of being submerged (with the possible exception of English) in the next few decades, unlike almost all the non-caucasian local languages of the Russian Federation. To be concerned that use of Russian is going to come under fire from something like say, Mari, is frankly hysterical and ridiculous.
    Unlike most of the freebooters moving to Europe, these people have no other homeland and have always lived there.

    • Agree: Swedish Family
  198. @Mitleser
    That means that Russia still has some significant power projection left, but that also applies to a lesser degree to other countries like the Iran whose role in Syria is as important as Russia's.

    Other examples are France who saved Mali in the last decade or Turkey.

    https://beapatriot.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/war-in-northern-mali-map.jpg

    Yeah, it ‘saved’ Mali from it’s own people. Ok.

  199. Re: Meaning of “highly intelligent”

    True, this is somewhat subjective. I’d define “highly intelligent” as at least
    2 standard deviations above the average, i.e., 2 x 15 = 30 pts above. According
    to Audacious Epigone, the average U.S. IQ has slipped from 98 to 96, due to
    all sorts of dysfunctional effects. So 96+30=126. I’m sure that Bloomberg’s
    IQ is higher.

    The problem with Bloomberg was so obvious any 7-year-old could’ve told him not
    to bother trying: 1. He’s a tiny little guy. In the U.S. you need to be tall to be
    president; 2. He’s obviously too old; 3. His last name is too long. In politics
    perfect names are Bush, Obama, Trump, Nixon. Clinton is the longest the
    public can tolerate. Donald Tusk, Polish politician, has a perfect name for
    politics, and he’s had an illustrious career; 4. Bloomberg was nasty to his
    female employees, a major no-no in the current year. In general, his delusions
    of grandeur have obliterated his good judgment.

    My insistence on good judgment accords with Game Theory – one of the
    corollaries of the Aristotelian Principle of the Golden Mean is
    the Minimax Principle, i.e., live your life so as to minimize maximum
    errors. Bloomberg in wasting $1 billion has become an object of ridicule
    and destroyed his legacy, such as it was.

    • Replies: @AP

    $1 billion has become an object of ridicule
     
    He spend about $660 million which is only 1% of his fortune, not a big deal for him at all. He's rather old, what else will he spend money on?
  200. @Anon 2
    Re: Meaning of “highly intelligent”

    True, this is somewhat subjective. I’d define “highly intelligent” as at least
    2 standard deviations above the average, i.e., 2 x 15 = 30 pts above. According
    to Audacious Epigone, the average U.S. IQ has slipped from 98 to 96, due to
    all sorts of dysfunctional effects. So 96+30=126. I’m sure that Bloomberg’s
    IQ is higher.

    The problem with Bloomberg was so obvious any 7-year-old could’ve told him not
    to bother trying: 1. He’s a tiny little guy. In the U.S. you need to be tall to be
    president; 2. He’s obviously too old; 3. His last name is too long. In politics
    perfect names are Bush, Obama, Trump, Nixon. Clinton is the longest the
    public can tolerate. Donald Tusk, Polish politician, has a perfect name for
    politics, and he’s had an illustrious career; 4. Bloomberg was nasty to his
    female employees, a major no-no in the current year. In general, his delusions
    of grandeur have obliterated his good judgment.

    My insistence on good judgment accords with Game Theory - one of the
    corollaries of the Aristotelian Principle of the Golden Mean is
    the Minimax Principle, i.e., live your life so as to minimize maximum
    errors. Bloomberg in wasting $1 billion has become an object of ridicule
    and destroyed his legacy, such as it was.

    $1 billion has become an object of ridicule

    He spend about $660 million which is only 1% of his fortune, not a big deal for him at all. He’s rather old, what else will he spend money on?

    • Replies: @JL
    Yes, when you're one of the richest people in the world and are going to die soon anyway, why not splurge on some messianic vanity project? I don't know what else he will spend his money on in the time he has left, and apparently he is planning on leaving his kids only a low eight-figure inheritance. I imagine both Trump and Steyer were similarly motivated.
  201. @AnonFromTN
    I believe the best defense against the suicide that the West is currently committing is the fact that Russians actively reject PC. Perverts are tolerated, but the terms describing their perversions are swearwords in Russian. Freeloaders are actively discouraged, which protects it from hordes of third world scum (decent third worlders do not run to Europe or the US). There are lots of jokes that show immunity to Western malaise. For example, while the West is gripped by #metoo hysteria, Russian joke describes it this way:
    - Young lady, your 100 euro bill is counterfeit.
    - So, I have been raped!

    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.

    Do they have a different culture, as a nation? Maybe, but if so, it is only analogous to Western Europe or America, in earlier years, and so is no defense.

    I’d hate to think what Russia would look like in 20 years, if America merely split its diversity bucks with Russia, or if Russia could bump up its hourly wage to merely half of America’s.

    • Agree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @AP

    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.
     
    The many Russians I know who have moved to the West have rather different characters than do Westerners.

    AnoninTN is a Donbasser who moved to the West and he is still quite a Sovok, just like the people in the region that he left 30 years ago.
    , @AnonFromTN
    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.

    We don’t say much, but deep down, Russians are absolutely politically incorrect. Say, virtually no Russian would believe that faggotry is normal, the word meaning “gay” is a swearword in Russian, etc. There are tons of jokes about faggots, all of them politically incorrect. The same is true for all other aspects of PC BS, accepted as a new religion in the West (at least by the elites; the majority of ordinary people in the US do not believe in this PC BS, despite massive indoctrination at school and in the MSM).

    As to pay, if you take into account astronomical prices of healthcare, higher education, and rent in the US, as well as the necessity to have a car (and hence insurance), because public transportation is virtually non-existent in most cities, what remains as the disposable income by PPP in Russia is likely greater than half of the US level.

    That is not the major hurdle for the third worlders. What stops them is that in Russia there are no freebies, you have to earn your keep. Those hordes invading Europe fall into three categories. Maybe 5% are real refugees (women, children, and the elderly), about 10-15% are bandits, essentially an invasion army of Islamic crazies (all draft-age males), with the rest being freeloaders, looking for freebies, not the opportunity to work. That’s why they flock to the countries where they can get freebies, avoiding the ones where you have to work to get something. People prepared to do honest work are few and far between, and only those have a chance in Russia and several other Eastern European countries. Their small numbers mean that even if they come, they won’t create culturally isolated ghettos and unsolvable problems associated with these.
  202. @AP

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’
     
    Cool. And there are Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey who call themselves "Rum." After you claim Rome perhaps you can claim the Turkish Black Sea coast as Romanian because names are magic.

    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?
     
    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Kiovia_Palatinatus._Beauplan_1664.jpg

    the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    But these are just labels. Clearly by the early 16th century Rusyns from what is now Ukraine considered themselves to be a different people from Muscovites.

    Beautiful! The map would make the delight of many a bibliophile (it easily fetch a price in the region of $4,000). The book ‘Description de l’Vkraine (sic). Depuis les confins de la Moscovie jusqu’aux limites de la Transylvanie’ probably even more.
    It is “la description de la grande lisiere d’Vkraine, comprise entre la Moscouie et la Transiluanie, que Vos Predecesseurs vous ont acquise depuis cinquante ans, et dont les vaste plaines son deuenues autant fertilles qu’elles etoit desertes” dedicated to Jean Casimir, Roy de Pologne, Grand Duc de Lithuanie, de Russie, de Prussie…etc.
    The French ‘lisière’ (edge) is exactly the Russian (and more generally Slavic) край, as everybody knows.
    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this ‘margin’ he only says: ‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’, ‘Rus ou Cosaques’. ‘Greques Russiens’, ‘Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie’.
    It is not a response to my question whether there was a ‘document’ that said people called themselves ‘Ukrainians’ who speak ‘Ukrainian language’ in the 17th century. Besides you can assert that the name Ukraine is attested in the 12th century by showing a document of the 17th.

    • Replies: @AP

    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this ‘margin’ he only says: ‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’, ‘Rus ou Cosaques’. ‘Greques Russiens’, ‘Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie’.
     
    You must have missed when I wrote: "the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there [Ukraine] did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s."

    I think we have established that you believe that names are magic and that miraculously when these people began to call themselves Ukrainians they became a new people, and that before they called themselves Ukrainians they must have been the same people as Russians because their name was very similar (though not identical). It is a peculiar magic - it also makes people in southern Switzerland, the city of Rome, and the Turkish Black Sea coast all Romanians. As were the Caesars, Ovid, Virgil, etc.

    , @Seraphim
    I should have added another passage, quite relevant:
    "La noblesse parmi eux dont il y en a fort petit nombre tient de la polonaise, et il semble qu'elle ait honte d'estre d'autre religion que de la romaine, a laquelle se range tout les iours, quoy que tous les grands, et tous ceux qui portent le nom de prince soient issue de la grecque".
    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously. The 'people' went to Muscovy in 1654 because of Orthodoxy (‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’).
  203. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    Beautiful! The map would make the delight of many a bibliophile (it easily fetch a price in the region of $4,000). The book 'Description de l'Vkraine (sic). Depuis les confins de la Moscovie jusqu'aux limites de la Transylvanie' probably even more.
    It is "la description de la grande lisiere d'Vkraine, comprise entre la Moscouie et la Transiluanie, que Vos Predecesseurs vous ont acquise depuis cinquante ans, et dont les vaste plaines son deuenues autant fertilles qu'elles etoit desertes" dedicated to Jean Casimir, Roy de Pologne, Grand Duc de Lithuanie, de Russie, de Prussie...etc.
    The French 'lisière' (edge) is exactly the Russian (and more generally Slavic) край, as everybody knows.
    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this 'margin' he only says: 'Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus', 'Rus ou Cosaques'. 'Greques Russiens', 'Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie'.
    It is not a response to my question whether there was a 'document' that said people called themselves 'Ukrainians' who speak 'Ukrainian language' in the 17th century. Besides you can assert that the name Ukraine is attested in the 12th century by showing a document of the 17th.

    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this ‘margin’ he only says: ‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’, ‘Rus ou Cosaques’. ‘Greques Russiens’, ‘Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie’.

    You must have missed when I wrote: “the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there [Ukraine] did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.”

    I think we have established that you believe that names are magic and that miraculously when these people began to call themselves Ukrainians they became a new people, and that before they called themselves Ukrainians they must have been the same people as Russians because their name was very similar (though not identical). It is a peculiar magic – it also makes people in southern Switzerland, the city of Rome, and the Turkish Black Sea coast all Romanians. As were the Caesars, Ovid, Virgil, etc.

  204. AP says:
    @songbird
    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.

    Do they have a different culture, as a nation? Maybe, but if so, it is only analogous to Western Europe or America, in earlier years, and so is no defense.

    I'd hate to think what Russia would look like in 20 years, if America merely split its diversity bucks with Russia, or if Russia could bump up its hourly wage to merely half of America's.

    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.

    The many Russians I know who have moved to the West have rather different characters than do Westerners.

    AnoninTN is a Donbasser who moved to the West and he is still quite a Sovok, just like the people in the region that he left 30 years ago.

    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    For sure, many in the US from Russia or of Russian heritage, who're proud of that aspect have differences with some others on issues like (as an example) the history of Russian-Polish relations.

    That aside, on a people to people basis, these folks generally blend well with the rest of the US population and coexist amiably in business, civic, recreational and educational settings, often marrying outside of their ethnic background.

    Re:


    AnoninTN is a Donbasser who moved to the West and he is still quite a Sovok, just like the people in the region that he left 30 years ago.
     
    Don't know how true this is. Regardless, you've numerous Galicia-Volhyn expats in the US, who've their own quirks that differ from most Americans.
  205. @Seraphim
    Beautiful! The map would make the delight of many a bibliophile (it easily fetch a price in the region of $4,000). The book 'Description de l'Vkraine (sic). Depuis les confins de la Moscovie jusqu'aux limites de la Transylvanie' probably even more.
    It is "la description de la grande lisiere d'Vkraine, comprise entre la Moscouie et la Transiluanie, que Vos Predecesseurs vous ont acquise depuis cinquante ans, et dont les vaste plaines son deuenues autant fertilles qu'elles etoit desertes" dedicated to Jean Casimir, Roy de Pologne, Grand Duc de Lithuanie, de Russie, de Prussie...etc.
    The French 'lisière' (edge) is exactly the Russian (and more generally Slavic) край, as everybody knows.
    But when he talks about the inhabitants of this 'margin' he only says: 'Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus', 'Rus ou Cosaques'. 'Greques Russiens', 'Les maisons sont baties a la maniere de Moscouie'.
    It is not a response to my question whether there was a 'document' that said people called themselves 'Ukrainians' who speak 'Ukrainian language' in the 17th century. Besides you can assert that the name Ukraine is attested in the 12th century by showing a document of the 17th.

    I should have added another passage, quite relevant:
    “La noblesse parmi eux dont il y en a fort petit nombre tient de la polonaise, et il semble qu’elle ait honte d’estre d’autre religion que de la romaine, a laquelle se range tout les iours, quoy que tous les grands, et tous ceux qui portent le nom de prince soient issue de la grecque”.
    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously. The ‘people’ went to Muscovy in 1654 because of Orthodoxy (‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’).

    • Replies: @AP

    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously.
     
    No, even before.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    Union of Brest did not happen until 1595.
  206. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    I should have added another passage, quite relevant:
    "La noblesse parmi eux dont il y en a fort petit nombre tient de la polonaise, et il semble qu'elle ait honte d'estre d'autre religion que de la romaine, a laquelle se range tout les iours, quoy que tous les grands, et tous ceux qui portent le nom de prince soient issue de la grecque".
    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously. The 'people' went to Muscovy in 1654 because of Orthodoxy (‘Ils sont Grecs de religion, appelez dans leur langue Rus’).

    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously.

    No, even before.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    Union of Brest did not happen until 1595.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him, unlike his son who (as noted by Subtelny) entered into an anti-Catholic arrangement with the Protestants.

    Your linked Wiki entry describes your hero having some sort of personal gripe with the Moscow elites of the period at issue. If I correctly offhand recall (could be wrong), some kind of monument honoring him in Crimea was taken down, following that area's popular move to reunify with Russia.
    , @Swedish Family

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    This is all a bottomless hole of meaningless parochialism, so let me just state this: whatever was a local identity in the 16th century -- and there must have been dozens of them only in Sweden -- means nothing in the modern world outside its use as a nation-building propaganda tool.
    , @Seraphim
    Even before, agreed. Unia was the 'coronation' of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the 'East' which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of 'All Rus'. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that's why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as 'Rex Russiae' while the 'illustrious king' committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church". Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric 'in partibus Russiae'. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians").
    You admit that 'Rus' was no more Orthodox: "Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus", "Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”. 'Ukrainians' are 'Europeans', mind you.
  207. JL says:
    @AP

    $1 billion has become an object of ridicule
     
    He spend about $660 million which is only 1% of his fortune, not a big deal for him at all. He's rather old, what else will he spend money on?

    Yes, when you’re one of the richest people in the world and are going to die soon anyway, why not splurge on some messianic vanity project? I don’t know what else he will spend his money on in the time he has left, and apparently he is planning on leaving his kids only a low eight-figure inheritance. I imagine both Trump and Steyer were similarly motivated.

    • Replies: @AP
    Exactly.

    It was also a cunning way to get around campaign finance laws. I forgot the details, but apparently there are spending limits in terms of how much one can donate to another campaign that don't apply to oneself. Sp Bloomberg couldn't give Biden $600 million for Biden to attack Trump, but he could spend it on himself. Apparently most of Bloomberg's advertisements were anti-Trump ads...so the Bloomberg campaign meant a lot of "free" anti-Trump advertisements.

    If Bloomberg's presence wouldn't have enabled Sanders to win, he could have continued to stay in and to game the system in this way for the rest of the spring and summer.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Rather OT for this thread, but Bloomberg had a great ROI on what is (as AP correctly points out) a trivial percentage of his gross wealth. He might not have gotten the Presidency, but he did play a large role in torpedoing Bernie - who would have been much worse for his finances, had he beat Trump, than Biden.
  208. @AP
    That marginal people and ideas exist doesn’t mean much.

    Marginal to some marginal people like yourself.

  209. Given that the native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population, and the government‘s continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia (not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East), it is hard to see this constitutional language as much more than a dark joke. Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens. Not a good move long term.

    • Replies: @another anon

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdvxkvB8GLA

    This is old Western dream that is not coming true.
    Imminent Chinese "takeover" of Far East was predicted since 1990's, hadn't happened yet and is not going to happen.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-china-no-war/

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/myth-of-the-yellow-peril/

    This article is from 2009, and China got much richer since then. Chinese have much more options, no one in China dreams about Drang nach North and homesteading in the taiga.

    Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.
     
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/many-of-russias-republics-are-national-states/

    As AK pointed, Bashkirs already have their constitution that says Bashkiria belongs to Bashkir nation.
    Non-Bashkirs (70% of population) are not making any trouble, because this one sentence in constitution (that no one reads anyway) does not make any difference in real life.
    I predict that the new Russian constitution will have the same effect.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkortostan#Demographics

    productive Germans

     

    When Russia was ran by Germans

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_II_of_Russia#Ancestry

    it ended in complete and total catastrophe. Maybe the fabulous German IQ is not so superior, after all? ;-)
    , @Korenchkin

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East
     
    *AHEM*
    Proofs?
    , @Dmitry

    Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic
     
    Demographic situation of those groups is collapsing - not so much because of low fertility (as that is widespread among most nationalities in Russia), but because of relatively high rate of intermarriage to Russians, and lack of identification of the children with the minority nationality.

    So, Tatar nationalism is losing viability in each subsequent generation.


    Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East
     
    Well, Chinese are talented at creating new diseases, through eating of exotic animals, and which might kill millions of foreigners in neighbouring countries. This is about the limit of their capability to clear territory.

    is also humorous.
     
    This blogpost is some kind of humorous trolling for sure.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    ... native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population
     
    From a very low base - really, only DICh is problematic from this respect - and fertility rates are declining in the long-term. No reason to believe they will not eventually converge.

    ... continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia
     
    As I keep pointing out, it is not accompanied by significant Central Asian settlement in Russia.

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East
     
    Laughable nonsense.

    bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.
     
    What are they going to do? And why?

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens.
     
    Tatars are highly functional and a net positive in economic terms, Kalmyks are not a major cultural or economic burden either. DIch (Dagestan-Ingushetia-Chechnya) are indeed economic and cultural black holes, but 5 million/146 million isn't that big of a deal.
  210. @Mr. Hack
    So now you're endorsing a Ukrainian regional group as a separate nationality based on a film about Pennsylvania Ruyns in the 1970's? Talk about grasping for straws! :-)

    One of other examples including:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurus_%C5%A0kurla

    https://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/engdocuments/enart_fekula.html

    I know someone who is a friend of the last linked above. She told me that some in his family had been harassed in the old country by OUN/UPA types, who didn’t like the stated proud affiliation with Russia.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'm not sure what these two links have to do with the "Deerhunter" film that we started to discuss? Actually, I'm not quite sure what overall point you're trying to make? That a few Rusyns think that they're actually Russians? If that's the case, I'd like to be the first to inform you that over 1,000,000 inhabitants of Zakarpattya (the "Rusyn" homeland) feel that they're part and parcel of the larger Ukrainian nation, and have no desire to try and form a separate distinct nationality there.
  211. @AP

    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.
     
    The many Russians I know who have moved to the West have rather different characters than do Westerners.

    AnoninTN is a Donbasser who moved to the West and he is still quite a Sovok, just like the people in the region that he left 30 years ago.

    For sure, many in the US from Russia or of Russian heritage, who’re proud of that aspect have differences with some others on issues like (as an example) the history of Russian-Polish relations.

    That aside, on a people to people basis, these folks generally blend well with the rest of the US population and coexist amiably in business, civic, recreational and educational settings, often marrying outside of their ethnic background.

    Re:

    AnoninTN is a Donbasser who moved to the West and he is still quite a Sovok, just like the people in the region that he left 30 years ago.

    Don’t know how true this is. Regardless, you’ve numerous Galicia-Volhyn expats in the US, who’ve their own quirks that differ from most Americans.

  212. @Peter Akuleyev
    Given that the native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population, and the government‘s continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia (not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East), it is hard to see this constitutional language as much more than a dark joke. Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens. Not a good move long term.

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

    This is old Western dream that is not coming true.
    Imminent Chinese “takeover” of Far East was predicted since 1990’s, hadn’t happened yet and is not going to happen.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-china-no-war/

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/myth-of-the-yellow-peril/

    This article is from 2009, and China got much richer since then. Chinese have much more options, no one in China dreams about Drang nach North and homesteading in the taiga.

    Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/many-of-russias-republics-are-national-states/

    As AK pointed, Bashkirs already have their constitution that says Bashkiria belongs to Bashkir nation.
    Non-Bashkirs (70% of population) are not making any trouble, because this one sentence in constitution (that no one reads anyway) does not make any difference in real life.
    I predict that the new Russian constitution will have the same effect.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkortostan#Demographics

    productive Germans

    When Russia was ran by Germans

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_II_of_Russia#Ancestry

    it ended in complete and total catastrophe. Maybe the fabulous German IQ is not so superior, after all? 😉

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    Romanov rule was the peak of Russian civilization. It has been demographic and cultural decline ever since.
  213. @AP

    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously.
     
    No, even before.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    Union of Brest did not happen until 1595.

    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him, unlike his son who (as noted by Subtelny) entered into an anti-Catholic arrangement with the Protestants.

    Your linked Wiki entry describes your hero having some sort of personal gripe with the Moscow elites of the period at issue. If I correctly offhand recall (could be wrong), some kind of monument honoring him in Crimea was taken down, following that area’s popular move to reunify with Russia.

    • Replies: @AP

    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him
     
    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?

    But University of Toronto's Encyclopedia of Ukraine has an entry about him:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CO%5CS%5COstrozkyKostiantyn.htm

    Between 1492 and 1494 he distinguished himself during a Lithuanian-Muscovite war, and in 1496–7 he headed an army responsible for defending Right-Bank Ukraine from Tatar attacks. From November 1497 Ostrozky served as grand hetman of Lithuania. He commanded his armies in over thirty (some chroniclers say sixty) victorious battles against the Crimean Tatars or Muscovy. In 1500 he was wounded and taken prisoner by the Muscovites during the battle on the Vedrosh River. Repeatedly entreated to join Muscovite service, in 1506 Ostrozky agreed to swear loyalty to Moscow, but used his first opportunity to escape to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1507. Reinstated as grand hetman, he continued his successful military career. Among his most celebrated victories were those of the 80,000-strong Muscovite army at the Battle of Orsha in 1514 and of the Crimean Tatars at Olshanytsia in the Kyiv region in 1527, after which 25,000 Tatars were taken prisoner and settled near Ostrih. Ostrozky’s military victories earned him considerable fame among his contemporaries. Maciej Stryjkowski referred to him as the ‘second Hannibal’ and the ‘Ruthenian Scipio.’

    Ostrozky served as starosta of Bratslav, Zvenyhorodka, and Vinnytsia from 1497, starosta of Lutsk and marshal of Volhynia from 1507, castellan of Vilnius from 1511, and palatine of Trakai from 1522. One of the five wealthiest magnates in the Lithuanian-Ruthenian state, he was a defender and patron of the Orthodox church. He built numerous churches in Ukraine and Lithuania, including two Orthodox churches in Vilnius and the Trinity Monastery in Ostrih. He generously supported the Kyivan Cave Monastery and was buried in the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyivan Cave Monastery.

    [I suspect the numbers of soldiers are wild overestimates]

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.
  214. @Peter Akuleyev
    Given that the native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population, and the government‘s continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia (not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East), it is hard to see this constitutional language as much more than a dark joke. Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens. Not a good move long term.

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

    *AHEM*
    Proofs?

    • Replies: @another anon

    Proofs?
     
    https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/oZUAAOSwQEpdOMw3/s-l400.jpg
  215. @Korenchkin

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East
     
    *AHEM*
    Proofs?

    Proofs?

  216. AP says:
    @JL
    Yes, when you're one of the richest people in the world and are going to die soon anyway, why not splurge on some messianic vanity project? I don't know what else he will spend his money on in the time he has left, and apparently he is planning on leaving his kids only a low eight-figure inheritance. I imagine both Trump and Steyer were similarly motivated.

    Exactly.

    It was also a cunning way to get around campaign finance laws. I forgot the details, but apparently there are spending limits in terms of how much one can donate to another campaign that don’t apply to oneself. Sp Bloomberg couldn’t give Biden $600 million for Biden to attack Trump, but he could spend it on himself. Apparently most of Bloomberg’s advertisements were anti-Trump ads…so the Bloomberg campaign meant a lot of “free” anti-Trump advertisements.

    If Bloomberg’s presence wouldn’t have enabled Sanders to win, he could have continued to stay in and to game the system in this way for the rest of the spring and summer.

  217. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him, unlike his son who (as noted by Subtelny) entered into an anti-Catholic arrangement with the Protestants.

    Your linked Wiki entry describes your hero having some sort of personal gripe with the Moscow elites of the period at issue. If I correctly offhand recall (could be wrong), some kind of monument honoring him in Crimea was taken down, following that area's popular move to reunify with Russia.

    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him

    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?

    But University of Toronto’s Encyclopedia of Ukraine has an entry about him:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CO%5CS%5COstrozkyKostiantyn.htm

    Between 1492 and 1494 he distinguished himself during a Lithuanian-Muscovite war, and in 1496–7 he headed an army responsible for defending Right-Bank Ukraine from Tatar attacks. From November 1497 Ostrozky served as grand hetman of Lithuania. He commanded his armies in over thirty (some chroniclers say sixty) victorious battles against the Crimean Tatars or Muscovy. In 1500 he was wounded and taken prisoner by the Muscovites during the battle on the Vedrosh River. Repeatedly entreated to join Muscovite service, in 1506 Ostrozky agreed to swear loyalty to Moscow, but used his first opportunity to escape to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1507. Reinstated as grand hetman, he continued his successful military career. Among his most celebrated victories were those of the 80,000-strong Muscovite army at the Battle of Orsha in 1514 and of the Crimean Tatars at Olshanytsia in the Kyiv region in 1527, after which 25,000 Tatars were taken prisoner and settled near Ostrih. Ostrozky’s military victories earned him considerable fame among his contemporaries. Maciej Stryjkowski referred to him as the ‘second Hannibal’ and the ‘Ruthenian Scipio.’

    Ostrozky served as starosta of Bratslav, Zvenyhorodka, and Vinnytsia from 1497, starosta of Lutsk and marshal of Volhynia from 1507, castellan of Vilnius from 1511, and palatine of Trakai from 1522. One of the five wealthiest magnates in the Lithuanian-Ruthenian state, he was a defender and patron of the Orthodox church. He built numerous churches in Ukraine and Lithuania, including two Orthodox churches in Vilnius and the Trinity Monastery in Ostrih. He generously supported the Kyivan Cave Monastery and was buried in the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyivan Cave Monastery.

    [I suspect the numbers of soldiers are wild overestimates]

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?
     
    If you're referring to Orest Subtelny, I think that labeling him a "Ukrainian nationalist" is going a bit too far. I knew and studied Ukrainian history from him at Harvard when he was a newly minted PhD graduate. He was a very outgoing and charismatic individual who liked to socialize with his students. Also, his upbringing included a long association with the Ukrainian Plast organization (scouting) for which he took part in even into his later life. In fact, I think that he was even writing a book about Plast right before he passed away, just a few years ago. Otherwise I would try getting in touch with him and ask him why he didn't devote some time to Konstantin Ostrozky within his monumental history about Ukraine. The guy obviously was an important figure. (both Osztrozky & Subtelny!). I think labeling Subtelny a Ukrainian patriot (kind of like yourself) would be a more appropriate identification.
    , @Mikhail

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.
     
    It's within reason to believe that the simultaneous Polish encouragement of the UNIA and restriction of the OC was done in part to have the Rus folk under their rule to be more in line with Poland than Russia. Subtelny among others doesn't challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed. It's also a fact that the Polish attack on Russia involved the destruction of OC structures.

    As for your hero, who you and some others keep propping, there're exceptions to the rule. Consider those of Jewish background serving Germany in WW II. Somewhat reminded of Chief Buthelezi in apartheid era South Africa. The then South African government used to prop him as a model leader. He did have some homegrown support, but within limits.
  218. @Europe Europa
    To compare this to Brexit doesn't seem very accurate. The Brexit vision is to turn Britain into a European Singapore, a globalist island with open borders to India, Africa, the entirely world really.

    Brexit isn't going to make Britain more insular and isn't about putting the native British first, in fact it will only accelerate Britain's transformation from white nation into a coffee coloured nation.

    “The Brexit vision is to turn Britain into a European Singapore, a globalist island with open borders to India, Africa, the entirely world really.”

    That’s not what Leavers voted for – we voted for global trade and much more tightly controlled borders. Of course how globalists like Boris interpret the vote may well be different.

  219. @Mikhail
    One of other examples including:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurus_%C5%A0kurla

    https://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/engdocuments/enart_fekula.html

    I know someone who is a friend of the last linked above. She told me that some in his family had been harassed in the old country by OUN/UPA types, who didn't like the stated proud affiliation with Russia.

    I’m not sure what these two links have to do with the “Deerhunter” film that we started to discuss? Actually, I’m not quite sure what overall point you’re trying to make? That a few Rusyns think that they’re actually Russians? If that’s the case, I’d like to be the first to inform you that over 1,000,000 inhabitants of Zakarpattya (the “Rusyn” homeland) feel that they’re part and parcel of the larger Ukrainian nation, and have no desire to try and form a separate distinct nationality there.

    • Replies: @AP
    Deer hunter has the actor George Dzundza, who says some words in Ukrainian in the film. Wikipedia claims he is Jewish but he comes to Ukrainian diaspora events and presents as a diaspora Ukrainian, he even tended bar at the Ukrainian National Home; I strongly suspect Wikipedia is wrong there.
    , @Mikhail
    Further confirms that over the course of time, there're people from that area who positively identify with Russia. If you check back, I didn't deny that this view has diminished. Ukraianization has been a reality. Rusyn sources have noted that the Soviets didn't formally acknowledge a Rusyn identity.
  220. @AP

    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him
     
    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?

    But University of Toronto's Encyclopedia of Ukraine has an entry about him:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CO%5CS%5COstrozkyKostiantyn.htm

    Between 1492 and 1494 he distinguished himself during a Lithuanian-Muscovite war, and in 1496–7 he headed an army responsible for defending Right-Bank Ukraine from Tatar attacks. From November 1497 Ostrozky served as grand hetman of Lithuania. He commanded his armies in over thirty (some chroniclers say sixty) victorious battles against the Crimean Tatars or Muscovy. In 1500 he was wounded and taken prisoner by the Muscovites during the battle on the Vedrosh River. Repeatedly entreated to join Muscovite service, in 1506 Ostrozky agreed to swear loyalty to Moscow, but used his first opportunity to escape to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1507. Reinstated as grand hetman, he continued his successful military career. Among his most celebrated victories were those of the 80,000-strong Muscovite army at the Battle of Orsha in 1514 and of the Crimean Tatars at Olshanytsia in the Kyiv region in 1527, after which 25,000 Tatars were taken prisoner and settled near Ostrih. Ostrozky’s military victories earned him considerable fame among his contemporaries. Maciej Stryjkowski referred to him as the ‘second Hannibal’ and the ‘Ruthenian Scipio.’

    Ostrozky served as starosta of Bratslav, Zvenyhorodka, and Vinnytsia from 1497, starosta of Lutsk and marshal of Volhynia from 1507, castellan of Vilnius from 1511, and palatine of Trakai from 1522. One of the five wealthiest magnates in the Lithuanian-Ruthenian state, he was a defender and patron of the Orthodox church. He built numerous churches in Ukraine and Lithuania, including two Orthodox churches in Vilnius and the Trinity Monastery in Ostrih. He generously supported the Kyivan Cave Monastery and was buried in the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyivan Cave Monastery.

    [I suspect the numbers of soldiers are wild overestimates]

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.

    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?

    If you’re referring to Orest Subtelny, I think that labeling him a “Ukrainian nationalist” is going a bit too far. I knew and studied Ukrainian history from him at Harvard when he was a newly minted PhD graduate. He was a very outgoing and charismatic individual who liked to socialize with his students. Also, his upbringing included a long association with the Ukrainian Plast organization (scouting) for which he took part in even into his later life. In fact, I think that he was even writing a book about Plast right before he passed away, just a few years ago. Otherwise I would try getting in touch with him and ask him why he didn’t devote some time to Konstantin Ostrozky within his monumental history about Ukraine. The guy obviously was an important figure. (both Osztrozky & Subtelny!). I think labeling Subtelny a Ukrainian patriot (kind of like yourself) would be a more appropriate identification.

  221. @Peter Akuleyev
    Given that the native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population, and the government‘s continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia (not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East), it is hard to see this constitutional language as much more than a dark joke. Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens. Not a good move long term.

    Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic

    Demographic situation of those groups is collapsing – not so much because of low fertility (as that is widespread among most nationalities in Russia), but because of relatively high rate of intermarriage to Russians, and lack of identification of the children with the minority nationality.

    So, Tatar nationalism is losing viability in each subsequent generation.

    Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

    Well, Chinese are talented at creating new diseases, through eating of exotic animals, and which might kill millions of foreigners in neighbouring countries. This is about the limit of their capability to clear territory.

    is also humorous.

    This blogpost is some kind of humorous trolling for sure.

  222. @songbird
    The idea that Russians have an innately differently character can be easily debunked by observing Russians who have moved to the West.

    Do they have a different culture, as a nation? Maybe, but if so, it is only analogous to Western Europe or America, in earlier years, and so is no defense.

    I'd hate to think what Russia would look like in 20 years, if America merely split its diversity bucks with Russia, or if Russia could bump up its hourly wage to merely half of America's.

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.

    We don’t say much, but deep down, Russians are absolutely politically incorrect. Say, virtually no Russian would believe that faggotry is normal, the word meaning “gay” is a swearword in Russian, etc. There are tons of jokes about faggots, all of them politically incorrect. The same is true for all other aspects of PC BS, accepted as a new religion in the West (at least by the elites; the majority of ordinary people in the US do not believe in this PC BS, despite massive indoctrination at school and in the MSM).

    As to pay, if you take into account astronomical prices of healthcare, higher education, and rent in the US, as well as the necessity to have a car (and hence insurance), because public transportation is virtually non-existent in most cities, what remains as the disposable income by PPP in Russia is likely greater than half of the US level.

    That is not the major hurdle for the third worlders. What stops them is that in Russia there are no freebies, you have to earn your keep. Those hordes invading Europe fall into three categories. Maybe 5% are real refugees (women, children, and the elderly), about 10-15% are bandits, essentially an invasion army of Islamic crazies (all draft-age males), with the rest being freeloaders, looking for freebies, not the opportunity to work. That’s why they flock to the countries where they can get freebies, avoiding the ones where you have to work to get something. People prepared to do honest work are few and far between, and only those have a chance in Russia and several other Eastern European countries. Their small numbers mean that even if they come, they won’t create culturally isolated ghettos and unsolvable problems associated with these.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.
     
    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an "American smile" in Russian. I think the connotation in Russian was slightly worse (i.e. suggesting insincerity), but you would know that better than I do.
  223. @Mr. Hack
    I'm not sure what these two links have to do with the "Deerhunter" film that we started to discuss? Actually, I'm not quite sure what overall point you're trying to make? That a few Rusyns think that they're actually Russians? If that's the case, I'd like to be the first to inform you that over 1,000,000 inhabitants of Zakarpattya (the "Rusyn" homeland) feel that they're part and parcel of the larger Ukrainian nation, and have no desire to try and form a separate distinct nationality there.

    Deer hunter has the actor George Dzundza, who says some words in Ukrainian in the film. Wikipedia claims he is Jewish but he comes to Ukrainian diaspora events and presents as a diaspora Ukrainian, he even tended bar at the Ukrainian National Home; I strongly suspect Wikipedia is wrong there.

    • Replies: @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    LOL - Fresh from the extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian, and then compounding the error exponentially with more "lessons" .... we have this nonsense of your inability to know or understand the language !

    I'm not going to use 2 hours of time watching this film to find out( another of your pathetic time-wasting attempts?)

    --but I am completely sure only Russian words are said in the scenes you refer to. True I haven't watched or thought about the film this milennium- but I am sure that yet again this is you catastrophically being a fraud with an inability to know or speak Russian or ukrainian


    If someone can prove or disprove what I am thinking about this Deer Hunter film then great! A wedding scene (I think).
    Preferably without any cover up from any tag-team partner, if indeed I am correct again and there is no Ukrainian spoken at all in the film.

    BTW add into this the Hollywood Taras Bulba being an entirely Russian emigree production... and John Wick being an entirely Russian world Belarusian ( I mention this because I know for these sick loser Banderetards, if they wrote him as a ukrop- it would create a national holiday in 404 similar in intensity to 9th May in Russia)
  224. Dzundza was born in Rosenheim, Germany, to a Ukrainian Unterlander father and Polish Galitzianer mother who were forced into factory labour by the Nazis.[

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

    He has an impressive Film and TV resume.

    My mother claimed that she saw Mike Mazurky at an event at our local Ukrainian home in Minneapolis at one time. My 88 year old roommate saw old Mike once or twice at the large Ukrainian Orthodox church in Los Angeles (he attended quite often). This is the same church that Natalie Wood and Jack Palance would attended too.

    • Replies: @AP
    The other wikis say he is half Ukrainian and half Polish.
    , @Mikhail
    NW was of Russian Orthodox Christian background:

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

    GD was great in The Deer Hunter and his stint on Law & Order.
  225. @Mr. Hack

    Dzundza was born in Rosenheim, Germany, to a Ukrainian Unterlander father and Polish Galitzianer mother who were forced into factory labour by the Nazis.[
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Dzundza

    He has an impressive Film and TV resume.

    My mother claimed that she saw Mike Mazurky at an event at our local Ukrainian home in Minneapolis at one time. My 88 year old roommate saw old Mike once or twice at the large Ukrainian Orthodox church in Los Angeles (he attended quite often). This is the same church that Natalie Wood and Jack Palance would attended too.

    https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/[email protected]@._V1_UY317_CR33,0,214,317_AL_.jpg

    The other wikis say he is half Ukrainian and half Polish.

  226. @AP

    In his 666 page book on Ukrainian history, Subtelny makes no mention of him
     
    So Ukrainian nationalists show as little enthusiasm for Rus patriots of the Lithuanian state as do Russian ones?

    But University of Toronto's Encyclopedia of Ukraine has an entry about him:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CO%5CS%5COstrozkyKostiantyn.htm

    Between 1492 and 1494 he distinguished himself during a Lithuanian-Muscovite war, and in 1496–7 he headed an army responsible for defending Right-Bank Ukraine from Tatar attacks. From November 1497 Ostrozky served as grand hetman of Lithuania. He commanded his armies in over thirty (some chroniclers say sixty) victorious battles against the Crimean Tatars or Muscovy. In 1500 he was wounded and taken prisoner by the Muscovites during the battle on the Vedrosh River. Repeatedly entreated to join Muscovite service, in 1506 Ostrozky agreed to swear loyalty to Moscow, but used his first opportunity to escape to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania in 1507. Reinstated as grand hetman, he continued his successful military career. Among his most celebrated victories were those of the 80,000-strong Muscovite army at the Battle of Orsha in 1514 and of the Crimean Tatars at Olshanytsia in the Kyiv region in 1527, after which 25,000 Tatars were taken prisoner and settled near Ostrih. Ostrozky’s military victories earned him considerable fame among his contemporaries. Maciej Stryjkowski referred to him as the ‘second Hannibal’ and the ‘Ruthenian Scipio.’

    Ostrozky served as starosta of Bratslav, Zvenyhorodka, and Vinnytsia from 1497, starosta of Lutsk and marshal of Volhynia from 1507, castellan of Vilnius from 1511, and palatine of Trakai from 1522. One of the five wealthiest magnates in the Lithuanian-Ruthenian state, he was a defender and patron of the Orthodox church. He built numerous churches in Ukraine and Lithuania, including two Orthodox churches in Vilnius and the Trinity Monastery in Ostrih. He generously supported the Kyivan Cave Monastery and was buried in the Dormition Cathedral of the Kyivan Cave Monastery.

    [I suspect the numbers of soldiers are wild overestimates]

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.

    It’s within reason to believe that the simultaneous Polish encouragement of the UNIA and restriction of the OC was done in part to have the Rus folk under their rule to be more in line with Poland than Russia. Subtelny among others doesn’t challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed. It’s also a fact that the Polish attack on Russia involved the destruction of OC structures.

    As for your hero, who you and some others keep propping, there’re exceptions to the rule. Consider those of Jewish background serving Germany in WW II. Somewhat reminded of Chief Buthelezi in apartheid era South Africa. The then South African government used to prop him as a model leader. He did have some homegrown support, but within limits.

    • Replies: @AP

    Subtelny among others doesn’t challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed
     
    It's something Ukrainian and Russian nationalists agree on because it is central to their mythologies.
  227. @AP

    There are Italian travelers in Valachia from the 16th century, which attest that the ‘Valachians’ call themselves ‘Rumuin, hoc est Romanos’
     
    Cool. And there are Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey who call themselves "Rum." After you claim Rome perhaps you can claim the Turkish Black Sea coast as Romanian because names are magic.

    Are there testimonies that at the same time a ‘Ruthenian’ would ask ‘Do you speak Ukrainian’? or calling themselves ‘Ukrainians’?
     
    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s):

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Kiovia_Palatinatus._Beauplan_1664.jpg

    the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    But these are just labels. Clearly by the early 16th century Rusyns from what is now Ukraine considered themselves to be a different people from Muscovites.

    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s): […] the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.

    Even if оукраина referred to the present lands of Ukraine, which may or may not have been so (“at the edge” is hardly specific, or necessarily confined to any one area), the word could have had all kinds of meanings. Over time, words are basically empty containers.

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie (“Mieszkam na Ukrainie”), which would support the idea that Ukraine’s neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Actually the first edition of 'Description d'Ukraine..." was:

    "Description d'Vkraine, qvi sont plvsievrs provinces du Royaume de Pologne. Contenves depvis les confins de la Moscouie, iusques aux limites de la Transilvanie" (Description of Ucraine, which are many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland. Contained from the boundaries of Moscovy up to the borders of Transylvania).
    The neighbors did not see its lands as a 'distinct civilization', but not even as a country.
    , @AP

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie (“Mieszkam na Ukrainie”), which would support the idea that Ukraine’s neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.
     
    I'm not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more "civilized" amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).

    I don't think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don't have their distinct "civilization."

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.

  228. @Mr. Hack
    I'm not sure what these two links have to do with the "Deerhunter" film that we started to discuss? Actually, I'm not quite sure what overall point you're trying to make? That a few Rusyns think that they're actually Russians? If that's the case, I'd like to be the first to inform you that over 1,000,000 inhabitants of Zakarpattya (the "Rusyn" homeland) feel that they're part and parcel of the larger Ukrainian nation, and have no desire to try and form a separate distinct nationality there.

    Further confirms that over the course of time, there’re people from that area who positively identify with Russia. If you check back, I didn’t deny that this view has diminished. Ukraianization has been a reality. Rusyn sources have noted that the Soviets didn’t formally acknowledge a Rusyn identity.

  229. Further confirms that over the course of time, there’re people from that area who positively identify with Russia.

    You can find people everywhere who have strange beliefs about who they are and where they’re from. Psychiatric asylums are full of such people. I say, let them be and believe whatever they want, as long as they don’t organize and try to pollute their society with calls for separation (except for the psychiatric asylums where they belong). 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You're proof of such in conjunction with adhering to a form of Soviet psychology.
  230. @Mr. Hack

    Dzundza was born in Rosenheim, Germany, to a Ukrainian Unterlander father and Polish Galitzianer mother who were forced into factory labour by the Nazis.[
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Dzundza

    He has an impressive Film and TV resume.

    My mother claimed that she saw Mike Mazurky at an event at our local Ukrainian home in Minneapolis at one time. My 88 year old roommate saw old Mike once or twice at the large Ukrainian Orthodox church in Los Angeles (he attended quite often). This is the same church that Natalie Wood and Jack Palance would attended too.

    https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/[email protected]@._V1_UY317_CR33,0,214,317_AL_.jpg

    NW was of Russian Orthodox Christian background:

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

    GD was great in The Deer Hunter and his stint on Law & Order.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I mean I don't really know, not being present at her baptismal, but I have heard from more than one source that she did attend the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Vladimir located in Hollywood California. Some seem to lean towards characterizing her roots as being Ukrainian:

    Natalia Zakharenko is the real name of this Hollywood star actress (“West Side Story” film had 11 Academy Award nominations). Her grandparents had to leave the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine, because of the “Russian Revolution”.

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”
     

    https://u-krane.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/D_3heH2XoAEbqB5.jpg

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

  231. @AnonFromTN

    Just being able to ruin countries around the world without being stopped by them and not relying on nukes is a sign of exceptional military might.
     
    Well, that’s over. Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped. Even Yemen is successfully fighting back against Gulf satrapies, fully backed, armed, and supplied current intelligence by the Empire. Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating. Lately the Empire is only successful with hapless morons with deep inferiority complexes, like Balts, Ukrainians, and Poles. Even there, it owns compradore elites and a few LARPers, but does not rule hearts and minds of the population.

    No, it is not over yet. The situation is better than it used to, but it is not over.

    Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped.

    Just as attempts to cause regime change in Baathist Iraq and Socialist Cuba failed in the 1990s , but that does not mean US dominance in that decade was stronger than ever.

    Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating.

    Mixed results, actually.
    They showed that they can strike back, but that did not save them from crippling sanctions or protected Soleimani.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    They showed that they can strike back, but that did not save them from crippling sanctions or protected Soleimani.
     
    They called the Empire’s bluff and showed it for what it is – bluff. As to Soleimani, there are thousands of murders committed every day all over the world. The only distinction of his case is that this particular crime was committed by a state actor.
  232. @AnonFromTN
    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.

    We don’t say much, but deep down, Russians are absolutely politically incorrect. Say, virtually no Russian would believe that faggotry is normal, the word meaning “gay” is a swearword in Russian, etc. There are tons of jokes about faggots, all of them politically incorrect. The same is true for all other aspects of PC BS, accepted as a new religion in the West (at least by the elites; the majority of ordinary people in the US do not believe in this PC BS, despite massive indoctrination at school and in the MSM).

    As to pay, if you take into account astronomical prices of healthcare, higher education, and rent in the US, as well as the necessity to have a car (and hence insurance), because public transportation is virtually non-existent in most cities, what remains as the disposable income by PPP in Russia is likely greater than half of the US level.

    That is not the major hurdle for the third worlders. What stops them is that in Russia there are no freebies, you have to earn your keep. Those hordes invading Europe fall into three categories. Maybe 5% are real refugees (women, children, and the elderly), about 10-15% are bandits, essentially an invasion army of Islamic crazies (all draft-age males), with the rest being freeloaders, looking for freebies, not the opportunity to work. That’s why they flock to the countries where they can get freebies, avoiding the ones where you have to work to get something. People prepared to do honest work are few and far between, and only those have a chance in Russia and several other Eastern European countries. Their small numbers mean that even if they come, they won’t create culturally isolated ghettos and unsolvable problems associated with these.

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.

    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an “American smile” in Russian. I think the connotation in Russian was slightly worse (i.e. suggesting insincerity), but you would know that better than I do.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something. In Russian culture a person saying this is considered an idiot. When the US companies started hiring Russian staff, they ended up with a lot of idiots. Maybe they figured out Russian conventions by now.

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.
    , @melanf

    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an “American smile” in Russian.
     
    Only the "Hollywood smile". At least so in St. Petersburg
    , @Dmitry
    Germans and Swedish would also notice this when they live or visit America, I don't think it is anything specific for Russians to notice this culturally different attitude in American.

    I also read something funny in a 19th century novel (Henry James) - if I remember correctly (probably not), it is written that Americans girls created confusion in Italy, because all the men thought they were in love with them, when they thought they are just being polite.

  233. @Mikhail
    NW was of Russian Orthodox Christian background:

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

    GD was great in The Deer Hunter and his stint on Law & Order.

    I mean I don’t really know, not being present at her baptismal, but I have heard from more than one source that she did attend the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Vladimir located in Hollywood California. Some seem to lean towards characterizing her roots as being Ukrainian:

    Natalia Zakharenko is the real name of this Hollywood star actress (“West Side Story” film had 11 Academy Award nominations). Her grandparents had to leave the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine, because of the “Russian Revolution”.

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”


    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Russian Orthodox Christian for sure. She did a documentary promoting Russian culture and spoke a very fluent Russian in it as appreciably observed to me by a fluent Russian speaker.

    Thru the years, numerous ROC have attended UOC churches in America. I personally know of such folks who've attended one near me.

    Wouldn't surprise if either she and/or some family members knew Ukrainian to some degree. Her bio notes that her father fought on the side of the Whites. Recall my earlier point that Ukrainian was spoken among some of the Whites.

    On her family origin, consider both sides of her family and the course of history within the Russian Empire. I recall her family having ties to Russia's far east and the Polish part of the Russian Empire.

    Back in college, a Polish friend of mine thought she was Polish. Besides yours truly, he was corrected by someone of a Polish-Russian-Ukrainian background.

  234. @AP

    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously.
     
    No, even before.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    Union of Brest did not happen until 1595.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    This is all a bottomless hole of meaningless parochialism, so let me just state this: whatever was a local identity in the 16th century — and there must have been dozens of them only in Sweden — means nothing in the modern world outside its use as a nation-building propaganda tool.

    • Replies: @AP

    whatever was a local identity in the 16th century — and there must have been dozens of them only in Sweden — means nothing in the modern world outside its use as a nation-building propaganda tool.
     
    Certainly there was no identified "Ukrainian" identity at that time. But there was some sort of Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox "foreigners", not ours.
  235. @Swedish Family

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.
     
    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an "American smile" in Russian. I think the connotation in Russian was slightly worse (i.e. suggesting insincerity), but you would know that better than I do.

    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something. In Russian culture a person saying this is considered an idiot. When the US companies started hiring Russian staff, they ended up with a lot of idiots. Maybe they figured out Russian conventions by now.

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.
     
    I feel a little split on this question. On the one hand, the "American smile" is bad in that it waters down the line between joy and approachability, but on the other, research has shown -- and this fits my own experience -- than even uncalled for smiling lifts the mood of people around you. I'm reminded of one of Michael Wolff's observations about Donald Trump:

    In fact, up close, Trump was not the bombastic and pugilistic man who had stirred rabid crowds on the campaign trail. He was neither angry nor combative. He may have been the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern history, but in person he could seem almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubbed off. Life was sunny. Trump was an optimist—at least about himself. He was charming and full of flattery; he focused on you. He was funny—self-deprecating even. And incredibly energetic—Let’s do it whatever it is, let’s do it.
     

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.
     
    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.
     
    She actually did -- hence my user name! As she explained, it means either polycule or congress involving more than two people. Being Belarusan, she of course didn't put it that bluntly, so I had to look it up after.

    * I think it was -- about an hour by train west of Stockholm.

    , @silviosilver

    Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.
     
    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day. And so what if someone who smiles at you doesn't necessarily want to be your friend? Time is limited, we can't be friends with everybody. At least he's making an effort to signal that he's not hostile and would prefer a smooth interaction over a rough one.

    She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?”
     
    I guess that's possible, but it's also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question. It certainly wouldn't be the first time this has happened. And of course the idea that an American would be bewildered by someone reading for pleasure - yes, even at this late, degraded, diversified date - is purest bullshit.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something.
     
    Yeah dude, this happens all the time. (I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in if you think "I'm wonderful at golf/cooking/chemistry" is a common way of describing one's skill level.)
  236. @Mitleser
    No, it is not over yet. The situation is better than it used to, but it is not over.

    Attempts to turn Syria and Venezuela into Libya flopped.
     
    Just as attempts to cause regime change in Baathist Iraq and Socialist Cuba failed in the 1990s , but that does not mean US dominance in that decade was stronger than ever.

    Spats with NK and Iran ended up being downright humiliating.
     
    Mixed results, actually.
    They showed that they can strike back, but that did not save them from crippling sanctions or protected Soleimani.

    They showed that they can strike back, but that did not save them from crippling sanctions or protected Soleimani.

    They called the Empire’s bluff and showed it for what it is – bluff. As to Soleimani, there are thousands of murders committed every day all over the world. The only distinction of his case is that this particular crime was committed by a state actor.

  237. @Mr. Hack
    I mean I don't really know, not being present at her baptismal, but I have heard from more than one source that she did attend the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Vladimir located in Hollywood California. Some seem to lean towards characterizing her roots as being Ukrainian:

    Natalia Zakharenko is the real name of this Hollywood star actress (“West Side Story” film had 11 Academy Award nominations). Her grandparents had to leave the city of Kharkiv, Ukraine, because of the “Russian Revolution”.

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”
     

    https://u-krane.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/D_3heH2XoAEbqB5.jpg

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    Russian Orthodox Christian for sure. She did a documentary promoting Russian culture and spoke a very fluent Russian in it as appreciably observed to me by a fluent Russian speaker.

    Thru the years, numerous ROC have attended UOC churches in America. I personally know of such folks who’ve attended one near me.

    Wouldn’t surprise if either she and/or some family members knew Ukrainian to some degree. Her bio notes that her father fought on the side of the Whites. Recall my earlier point that Ukrainian was spoken among some of the Whites.

    On her family origin, consider both sides of her family and the course of history within the Russian Empire. I recall her family having ties to Russia’s far east and the Polish part of the Russian Empire.

    Back in college, a Polish friend of mine thought she was Polish. Besides yours truly, he was corrected by someone of a Polish-Russian-Ukrainian background.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Fair enough, I was only quoting the author of her biography, Suzanne Finstad, and I wasn't in attendance at her baptismal as I've already pointed out, as you must have been. :-)

    Perhaps, another one of those murky Ukrainian/Russian (or is it Russian/Ukrainian?) individuals that you like to enlist in your pantheon of "amenables to Russian primacy" sorts. You're correct about her father fighting for the Whites though, but I also remember reading that he was actually a Ukrainian who had to escape to Vladivostok, where he and his wife most likely underwent another waive of Russian "acculturation."

    There's no arguing that her family surname "Zakharchenko" has a Ukrainian sound to it.

  238. AP says:
    @Swedish Family

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    This is all a bottomless hole of meaningless parochialism, so let me just state this: whatever was a local identity in the 16th century -- and there must have been dozens of them only in Sweden -- means nothing in the modern world outside its use as a nation-building propaganda tool.

    whatever was a local identity in the 16th century — and there must have been dozens of them only in Sweden — means nothing in the modern world outside its use as a nation-building propaganda tool.

    Certainly there was no identified “Ukrainian” identity at that time. But there was some sort of Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”, not ours.

  239. @Mikhail

    The bolded part is for Seraphim, who has a fantasy that Unia is responsible for Ukrainians (or Rusyns/Rusnaks) feeling different than or hostile to Russians (or Muscovites) or that such sentiments came after Unia.
     
    It's within reason to believe that the simultaneous Polish encouragement of the UNIA and restriction of the OC was done in part to have the Rus folk under their rule to be more in line with Poland than Russia. Subtelny among others doesn't challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed. It's also a fact that the Polish attack on Russia involved the destruction of OC structures.

    As for your hero, who you and some others keep propping, there're exceptions to the rule. Consider those of Jewish background serving Germany in WW II. Somewhat reminded of Chief Buthelezi in apartheid era South Africa. The then South African government used to prop him as a model leader. He did have some homegrown support, but within limits.

    Subtelny among others doesn’t challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed

    It’s something Ukrainian and Russian nationalists agree on because it is central to their mythologies.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Happens to be quite true. More true than the claim that the Ukrainian language was suppressed in 19th century Russia.

    The suggestion that Subtelny is propping a Russian nationalist myth is way off the mark. Anyone familiar enough with him knows better than to believe that.

  240. @Swedish Family

    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s): [...] the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.
     
    Even if оукраина referred to the present lands of Ukraine, which may or may not have been so ("at the edge" is hardly specific, or necessarily confined to any one area), the word could have had all kinds of meanings. Over time, words are basically empty containers.

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie ("Mieszkam na Ukrainie"), which would support the idea that Ukraine's neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.

    Actually the first edition of ‘Description d’Ukraine…” was:

    “Description d’Vkraine, qvi sont plvsievrs provinces du Royaume de Pologne. Contenves depvis les confins de la Moscouie, iusques aux limites de la Transilvanie” (Description of Ucraine, which are many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland. Contained from the boundaries of Moscovy up to the borders of Transylvania).
    The neighbors did not see its lands as a ‘distinct civilization’, but not even as a country.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    The neighbors did not see its lands as a ‘distinct civilization’, but not even as a country.
     
    Perhaps "the neighbors did not" for they were countries that were trying to enrich themselves at Ukraine's expense by trying to incorporate it into their own domains, but Beauplan himself had absolutely no such problem in viewing Ukraine as a separate "country" and refers to Ukraine as such throughout the whole book. Indeed this was the raison d'etre of him writing this exciting new monograph, apparently something lost on you, "Mr. Erudition" himself. :-)
  241. AP says:
    @Swedish Family

    While the word for Ukraine was first noted in the 12th century (here is a document from the 1660s): [...] the Rusyns or Rusnaks living there did not begin to call themselves Ukrainians until the 1830s.
     
    Even if оукраина referred to the present lands of Ukraine, which may or may not have been so ("at the edge" is hardly specific, or necessarily confined to any one area), the word could have had all kinds of meanings. Over time, words are basically empty containers.

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie ("Mieszkam na Ukrainie"), which would support the idea that Ukraine's neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie (“Mieszkam na Ukrainie”), which would support the idea that Ukraine’s neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.

    I’m not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more “civilized” amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).

    I don’t think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don’t have their distinct “civilization.”

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    I’m not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more “civilized” amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).
     
    Sure. I meant "suggest" in the weak sense of making it more, rather than less, likely. A Pole could quickly check this theory by looking up how Poland referred to her neighbors at the time. I would guess that neighbors like Germany and Sweden were referred to as proper nouns, and not by their location "at the edge," but who knows?

    I don’t think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don’t have their distinct “civilization.”
     
    No, of course not. But I assume we are trying to trace here the origin of Ukrainian nationhood, which must have started somewhere, just like that of the Netherlands.

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.
     
    I would definitely skip Västerås, and probably Uppsala too. Better to get an extra day or two in Stockholm and its surroundings. Swedes will feel differently, but to an American, the Uppsala Castle, say, will just be another castle among very many all over Sweden and Europe.

    I can give you some landmarks and "tourist attractions" to check out later (most you will only need pass by car without booking anything), but if I went on a road trip through Norway and Sweden, I would concentrate on our flora and fauna, which is the true heart and soul of Scandinavia.

    For novelty things to do, I would check out old episodes of the famous Russian travel show Орёл и Решка. Here are some I found with a quick search:



    Sweden
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFTv4cUKqUM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97XXgLi649M
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spUBPcDuqWY
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIh968ACBJ4

    Norway
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnKHtpJiRNo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNbkCLriWKI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxzmVNzr5Hs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RQCoFL5hMk
  242. @AnonFromTN
    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something. In Russian culture a person saying this is considered an idiot. When the US companies started hiring Russian staff, they ended up with a lot of idiots. Maybe they figured out Russian conventions by now.

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.

    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    I feel a little split on this question. On the one hand, the “American smile” is bad in that it waters down the line between joy and approachability, but on the other, research has shown — and this fits my own experience — than even uncalled for smiling lifts the mood of people around you. I’m reminded of one of Michael Wolff’s observations about Donald Trump:

    In fact, up close, Trump was not the bombastic and pugilistic man who had stirred rabid crowds on the campaign trail. He was neither angry nor combative. He may have been the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern history, but in person he could seem almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubbed off. Life was sunny. Trump was an optimist—at least about himself. He was charming and full of flattery; he focused on you. He was funny—self-deprecating even. And incredibly energetic—Let’s do it whatever it is, let’s do it.

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.

    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.

    She actually did — hence my user name! As she explained, it means either polycule or congress involving more than two people. Being Belarusan, she of course didn’t put it that bluntly, so I had to look it up after.

    * I think it was — about an hour by train west of Stockholm.

    • Replies: @AP

    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!
     
    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?

    I have been visiting Moscow for 20 years. The city has improved in almost all ways but one sad way it has gotten worse is that people rarely read novels on the metro anymore. It used to be commonplace. I read my first Russian-language book on the metro - Tatyana Tolstoy's Kys. Now everyone is on their smartphones.
  243. @Seraphim
    Actually the first edition of 'Description d'Ukraine..." was:

    "Description d'Vkraine, qvi sont plvsievrs provinces du Royaume de Pologne. Contenves depvis les confins de la Moscouie, iusques aux limites de la Transilvanie" (Description of Ucraine, which are many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland. Contained from the boundaries of Moscovy up to the borders of Transylvania).
    The neighbors did not see its lands as a 'distinct civilization', but not even as a country.

    The neighbors did not see its lands as a ‘distinct civilization’, but not even as a country.

    Perhaps “the neighbors did not” for they were countries that were trying to enrich themselves at Ukraine’s expense by trying to incorporate it into their own domains, but Beauplan himself had absolutely no such problem in viewing Ukraine as a separate “country” and refers to Ukraine as such throughout the whole book. Indeed this was the raison d’etre of him writing this exciting new monograph, apparently something lost on you, “Mr. Erudition” himself. 🙂

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Now 'many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland' become a 'country'.
    There are variants of the map of Bauplan. The Latin one was entitled:
    "Delineatio generalis Camporum Desertorum vulgo Ukraina : cum adjacentibus provinciis"/General drawing of the desert fields (or wasteland) known as Ukraina, with the adjacent provinces.
  244. @Mikhail
    Russian Orthodox Christian for sure. She did a documentary promoting Russian culture and spoke a very fluent Russian in it as appreciably observed to me by a fluent Russian speaker.

    Thru the years, numerous ROC have attended UOC churches in America. I personally know of such folks who've attended one near me.

    Wouldn't surprise if either she and/or some family members knew Ukrainian to some degree. Her bio notes that her father fought on the side of the Whites. Recall my earlier point that Ukrainian was spoken among some of the Whites.

    On her family origin, consider both sides of her family and the course of history within the Russian Empire. I recall her family having ties to Russia's far east and the Polish part of the Russian Empire.

    Back in college, a Polish friend of mine thought she was Polish. Besides yours truly, he was corrected by someone of a Polish-Russian-Ukrainian background.

    Fair enough, I was only quoting the author of her biography, Suzanne Finstad, and I wasn’t in attendance at her baptismal as I’ve already pointed out, as you must have been. 🙂

    Perhaps, another one of those murky Ukrainian/Russian (or is it Russian/Ukrainian?) individuals that you like to enlist in your pantheon of “amenables to Russian primacy” sorts. You’re correct about her father fighting for the Whites though, but I also remember reading that he was actually a Ukrainian who had to escape to Vladivostok, where he and his wife most likely underwent another waive of Russian “acculturation.”

    There’s no arguing that her family surname “Zakharchenko” has a Ukrainian sound to it.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    True of the slain leader of the Donbass rebels.

    There's plenty of first hand and second hand evidence of her stating an ROC background - once again noting the period when an identity from the territory now known as Ukraine had more of a regional (as opposed to national) relationship with Russia.

    In any event, her familial ties to the territory now known as Ukraine seem distant when compared to other parts of the Russian Empire.

    BTW, plenty of ROCOR regulars with surnames associated as being Ukrainian. One of them I know said that many Russian born Russians initially think she's Ukrainian because of her accented Russian.
    , @Mikhail
    BTW, Finstead's book is referenced on line for acknowledging Wood as being of Russian (not Ukrainian) background.

    As for this:

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    The aforementioned Ukrainian national dress is common enough among rural southern Russians.

  245. @Mr. Hack
    Fair enough, I was only quoting the author of her biography, Suzanne Finstad, and I wasn't in attendance at her baptismal as I've already pointed out, as you must have been. :-)

    Perhaps, another one of those murky Ukrainian/Russian (or is it Russian/Ukrainian?) individuals that you like to enlist in your pantheon of "amenables to Russian primacy" sorts. You're correct about her father fighting for the Whites though, but I also remember reading that he was actually a Ukrainian who had to escape to Vladivostok, where he and his wife most likely underwent another waive of Russian "acculturation."

    There's no arguing that her family surname "Zakharchenko" has a Ukrainian sound to it.

    True of the slain leader of the Donbass rebels.

    There’s plenty of first hand and second hand evidence of her stating an ROC background – once again noting the period when an identity from the territory now known as Ukraine had more of a regional (as opposed to national) relationship with Russia.

    In any event, her familial ties to the territory now known as Ukraine seem distant when compared to other parts of the Russian Empire.

    BTW, plenty of ROCOR regulars with surnames associated as being Ukrainian. One of them I know said that many Russian born Russians initially think she’s Ukrainian because of her accented Russian.

  246. @Mr. Hack

    The neighbors did not see its lands as a ‘distinct civilization’, but not even as a country.
     
    Perhaps "the neighbors did not" for they were countries that were trying to enrich themselves at Ukraine's expense by trying to incorporate it into their own domains, but Beauplan himself had absolutely no such problem in viewing Ukraine as a separate "country" and refers to Ukraine as such throughout the whole book. Indeed this was the raison d'etre of him writing this exciting new monograph, apparently something lost on you, "Mr. Erudition" himself. :-)

    Now ‘many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland’ become a ‘country’.
    There are variants of the map of Bauplan. The Latin one was entitled:
    “Delineatio generalis Camporum Desertorum vulgo Ukraina : cum adjacentibus provinciis”/General drawing of the desert fields (or wasteland) known as Ukraina, with the adjacent provinces.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Beauplan refers to Ukraine as a country many times in his book. It's just too bad that you can't go back in time and inform him that he was wrong. :-(
    , @Mr. Hack

    There are variants of the map of Bauplan.
     
    BTW, his name is spelled "Beauplan" not "Bauplan." A touch of dyslexia, old man? :-) :-)
  247. @Seraphim
    Now 'many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland' become a 'country'.
    There are variants of the map of Bauplan. The Latin one was entitled:
    "Delineatio generalis Camporum Desertorum vulgo Ukraina : cum adjacentibus provinciis"/General drawing of the desert fields (or wasteland) known as Ukraina, with the adjacent provinces.

    Beauplan refers to Ukraine as a country many times in his book. It’s just too bad that you can’t go back in time and inform him that he was wrong. 🙁

  248. @Seraphim
    Now 'many provinces of the Kingdom of Poland' become a 'country'.
    There are variants of the map of Bauplan. The Latin one was entitled:
    "Delineatio generalis Camporum Desertorum vulgo Ukraina : cum adjacentibus provinciis"/General drawing of the desert fields (or wasteland) known as Ukraina, with the adjacent provinces.

    There are variants of the map of Bauplan.

    BTW, his name is spelled “Beauplan” not “Bauplan.” A touch of dyslexia, old man? 🙂 🙂

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    No, this is just a typo.
  249. AP says:
    @Swedish Family

    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.
     
    I feel a little split on this question. On the one hand, the "American smile" is bad in that it waters down the line between joy and approachability, but on the other, research has shown -- and this fits my own experience -- than even uncalled for smiling lifts the mood of people around you. I'm reminded of one of Michael Wolff's observations about Donald Trump:

    In fact, up close, Trump was not the bombastic and pugilistic man who had stirred rabid crowds on the campaign trail. He was neither angry nor combative. He may have been the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern history, but in person he could seem almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubbed off. Life was sunny. Trump was an optimist—at least about himself. He was charming and full of flattery; he focused on you. He was funny—self-deprecating even. And incredibly energetic—Let’s do it whatever it is, let’s do it.
     

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.
     
    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.
     
    She actually did -- hence my user name! As she explained, it means either polycule or congress involving more than two people. Being Belarusan, she of course didn't put it that bluntly, so I had to look it up after.

    * I think it was -- about an hour by train west of Stockholm.

    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!

    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?

    I have been visiting Moscow for 20 years. The city has improved in almost all ways but one sad way it has gotten worse is that people rarely read novels on the metro anymore. It used to be commonplace. I read my first Russian-language book on the metro – Tatyana Tolstoy’s Kys. Now everyone is on their smartphones.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?
     
    And my grandma's birthplace at that! :)
    , @Keypusher
    People can, and do, read novels on their smartphones nowadays.
  250. @AP

    It is them who by the 16-17th centuries who started to consider themselves to be a different people from Muscovites, because of Unia obviously.
     
    No, even before.

    Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1514) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The commander in chief of the Polish-Lithuanian-Rus forces in the war against Moscow was an Orthodox Rus prince, Konstanty Ostrogski:

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

    Union of Brest did not happen until 1595.

    Even before, agreed. Unia was the ‘coronation’ of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the ‘East’ which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of ‘All Rus’. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that’s why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as ‘Rex Russiae’ while the ‘illustrious king’ committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church”. Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric ‘in partibus Russiae’. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians”).
    You admit that ‘Rus’ was no more Orthodox: “Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus”, “Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”. ‘Ukrainians’ are ‘Europeans’, mind you.

    • Replies: @AP

    Unia was the ‘coronation’ of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the ‘East’ which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of ‘All Rus’. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that’s why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as ‘Rex Russiae’ while the ‘illustrious king’ committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church”. Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric ‘in partibus Russiae’. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians”).
     
    Yes, better to be under Mongols than to be linked to Catholic Christians. Under such a philosophy, when the Orthodox people of Tver rose against the Tatars and were mercilessly slaughtered by the Tatars and their Muscovite collaborators, Tver's prince was excommunicated by the Moscow-based Orthodox Church for his rebellion against the Tatar overlords when he moved to Pskov (as were the Orthodox people of Pskov for daring to provide shelter to this prince who had opposed the Mongols).

    Similarly, many Balkanoids claimed to be grateful to have been ruled by Turks because the Turks kept the Catholics out. I think Saker follows this principle also.

    Such sentiments have led you to believe that the one true Church and only Christian Church is limited to the one led by former KGB snitches who literally collaborated with a bloody atheist regime to persecute actual Christians....a strange, twisted and dark path.


    You admit that ‘Rus’ was no more Orthodox: “Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus”, “Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”.
     
    You are twisting my words. I bolded the relevant part of my quote to make it clearer for you. The Chronicles were written by Orthodox people; from 1440 they simply categorized Muscovites as an Orthodox people who were not Rus people, like Moldovans or Bulgarians (as opposed to non-Orthodox people, like Poles). Previously they had considered Muscovites to be Rus people like themselves but after the mid 15th century Muscovites began to be considered foreigners (albeit fellow Orthodox ones).
  251. @AP

    Subtelny among others doesn’t challenge that the OC under Polish rule were suppressed
     
    It's something Ukrainian and Russian nationalists agree on because it is central to their mythologies.

    Happens to be quite true. More true than the claim that the Ukrainian language was suppressed in 19th century Russia.

    The suggestion that Subtelny is propping a Russian nationalist myth is way off the mark. Anyone familiar enough with him knows better than to believe that.

  252. @another anon

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdvxkvB8GLA

    This is old Western dream that is not coming true.
    Imminent Chinese "takeover" of Far East was predicted since 1990's, hadn't happened yet and is not going to happen.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/russia-china-no-war/

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/myth-of-the-yellow-peril/

    This article is from 2009, and China got much richer since then. Chinese have much more options, no one in China dreams about Drang nach North and homesteading in the taiga.

    Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.
     
    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/many-of-russias-republics-are-national-states/

    As AK pointed, Bashkirs already have their constitution that says Bashkiria belongs to Bashkir nation.
    Non-Bashkirs (70% of population) are not making any trouble, because this one sentence in constitution (that no one reads anyway) does not make any difference in real life.
    I predict that the new Russian constitution will have the same effect.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkortostan#Demographics

    productive Germans

     

    When Russia was ran by Germans

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_II_of_Russia#Ancestry

    it ended in complete and total catastrophe. Maybe the fabulous German IQ is not so superior, after all? ;-)

    Romanov rule was the peak of Russian civilization. It has been demographic and cultural decline ever since.

    • Replies: @AP

    Romanov rule was the peak of Russian civilization.
     
    Correct.

    It has been demographic and cultural decline ever since.
     
    No, the 90s were rock bottom. Russia has improved a lot since then. But it has not gotten close to Romanov Russia's peak and unfortunately probably never will.
  253. @Mr. Hack

    There are variants of the map of Bauplan.
     
    BTW, his name is spelled "Beauplan" not "Bauplan." A touch of dyslexia, old man? :-) :-)

    No, this is just a typo.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
  254. @Swedish Family

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.
     
    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an "American smile" in Russian. I think the connotation in Russian was slightly worse (i.e. suggesting insincerity), but you would know that better than I do.

    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an “American smile” in Russian.

    Only the “Hollywood smile”. At least so in St. Petersburg

  255. @AnonFromTN
    Yes, by Russian’s lights this American smile is insincere, because in the Russian cultural zone if you smile, you actually mean it. The same is true in the rest of Europe: people don’t go about with silly meaningless smiles on their faces. Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    There are other funny differences that lead to misunderstandings. When some US companies moved to Russia, they interviewed people they considered hiring. One of my sister-in-law acquaintances went for an interview with Americans and was asked “what do you do for a hobby”. She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?” She repeated her answer, and he repeated the question once more. In the end they never understood each other. Being an American, he could not imagine that a person can read books for the pleasure of it, not for studying something.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something. In Russian culture a person saying this is considered an idiot. When the US companies started hiring Russian staff, they ended up with a lot of idiots. Maybe they figured out Russian conventions by now.

    BTW, that Belorussian girl should have told you that the term “Swedish family” has a meaning in Russian. It is mostly used humorously to describe unconventional groupings, like two guys with one girl, or two girls with one guy.

    Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.

    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day. And so what if someone who smiles at you doesn’t necessarily want to be your friend? Time is limited, we can’t be friends with everybody. At least he’s making an effort to signal that he’s not hostile and would prefer a smooth interaction over a rough one.

    She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?”

    I guess that’s possible, but it’s also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time this has happened. And of course the idea that an American would be bewildered by someone reading for pleasure – yes, even at this late, degraded, diversified date – is purest bullshit.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something.

    Yeah dude, this happens all the time. (I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in if you think “I’m wonderful at golf/cooking/chemistry” is a common way of describing one’s skill level.)

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Wow! Why so much butthurt? I was not talking about good and bad, only about the difference in cultural codes.

    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day.
     
    Where did I say that the smile is bad? Studies showed that when you smile, even if it’s forced, your mood improves, as well as the mood of people around you. It’s just the meaning of a smile is different: nothing (zero, zilch, nada, choose what you like) in the US, something in Europe and Russia.

    I guess that’s possible, but it’s also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question.
     
    Sorry, dude, you underestimate your compatriots. While most Americans don’t speak any language except English, some do, at least they try to. The guy was conducting that interview in what he sincerely believed to be Russian. His disbelief that someone can read books for pleasure was quite genuine.

    I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in
     
    Sorry, have to disappoint you again. My social contacts reflect my environment. Contacts with Russians are maybe ~5% of the total. About 10-15% are with other Europeans, ~10-15% with Chinese and other East Asians, maybe 10% with South Asians (Indians, Sri Lankans, etc.), and the rest with Americans. My collaborations are even more skewed: none with Russian labs, very few with European labs, one with a lab in Canada, the great majority with American labs.

    As to self-praise, this comes from experience. I’ve interviewed many people (>20 with PhD for post-doc positions in my lab, >50 applicants to our grad school aspiring to a PhD) and came to the conclusion that if you want to compare them on a level playing field, you want to divide what Americans say about themselves by 10, what Chinese say about themselves by 3, and compare that to what Europeans (including Russians in the broad sense, i.e., people from former USSR) say about themselves.

    So, I do not see any justification for your butthurt. America has a lot of virtues, but you need to read the cultural codes right to avoid being fooled.

    , @Dmitry
    You will often only notice superficial features of your culture when you have been in a different one.

    A feature of American public culture is a public happiness and projection of smiling, laughing, etc, including to people they do not know. If Americans do not notice this, it is because they are immersed in their culture.

    Of course, for people from different cultures, this can be a culture shock. (Even if you watched every American film and TV series, it is still surprising how friendly real Americans can be, but also how they can walk away just when they are talking to you a second before).

    In Russian public culture, people have their own different idiosyncrasies, which is surprising for foreigners, but no-one in Russia will notice. Although really, Russian public attitudes are more similar to other Northern European cultures, so there is not so much culture shock for anyone travelling from Northern Europe.

    When cultures have some strong differentiation, this is probably not a bad sign - rather an indication of cultural strength, or perhaps national power. Cultures with the most strange idiosyncracies perhaps correlates to the most historically vital ones: like Italy, France, Japan, etc.

  256. @AnonFromTN
    Maybe that chick would be considered attractive in the UK. In Russia, she is way below average.

    In Russia, she is way below average.

    You are trying waaaaay too hard now.

    • Replies: @AP
    He is actually basically right on that one (he is rarely correct). Maybe not "way" but certainly below average.
  257. @Mr. Hack
    Fair enough, I was only quoting the author of her biography, Suzanne Finstad, and I wasn't in attendance at her baptismal as I've already pointed out, as you must have been. :-)

    Perhaps, another one of those murky Ukrainian/Russian (or is it Russian/Ukrainian?) individuals that you like to enlist in your pantheon of "amenables to Russian primacy" sorts. You're correct about her father fighting for the Whites though, but I also remember reading that he was actually a Ukrainian who had to escape to Vladivostok, where he and his wife most likely underwent another waive of Russian "acculturation."

    There's no arguing that her family surname "Zakharchenko" has a Ukrainian sound to it.

    BTW, Finstead’s book is referenced on line for acknowledging Wood as being of Russian (not Ukrainian) background.

    As for this:

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    The aforementioned Ukrainian national dress is common enough among rural southern Russians.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'm not familiar with how somebody out there may or may not have characterized Finstead's understanding of Natalie Wood's ethnicity, however, I am familiar that many feel that her paternal side had a Ukrainian origin. BTW, there seems little doubt that her mother's line was Russian.

    July 20, 1938 in San Francisco was born an actress of Ukrainian descent, Natalie Wood. Her real name is Natalia Zakharenko.

    Her father is a native of Kharkov, Nikolai Zakharenko. His parents moved from Kharkov to Vladivostok in 1917, and when they became US citizens they changed their surname to Gurdin./blockquote>


    https://auction.violity.com/en/new/415-at-the-age-of-8-this-hollywood-actress-of-ukrainian-origin-kept-her-whole-family
     


     
  258. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    Even before, agreed. Unia was the 'coronation' of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the 'East' which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of 'All Rus'. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that's why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as 'Rex Russiae' while the 'illustrious king' committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church". Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric 'in partibus Russiae'. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians").
    You admit that 'Rus' was no more Orthodox: "Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus", "Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”. 'Ukrainians' are 'Europeans', mind you.

    Unia was the ‘coronation’ of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the ‘East’ which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of ‘All Rus’. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that’s why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as ‘Rex Russiae’ while the ‘illustrious king’ committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church”. Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric ‘in partibus Russiae’. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians”).

    Yes, better to be under Mongols than to be linked to Catholic Christians. Under such a philosophy, when the Orthodox people of Tver rose against the Tatars and were mercilessly slaughtered by the Tatars and their Muscovite collaborators, Tver’s prince was excommunicated by the Moscow-based Orthodox Church for his rebellion against the Tatar overlords when he moved to Pskov (as were the Orthodox people of Pskov for daring to provide shelter to this prince who had opposed the Mongols).

    Similarly, many Balkanoids claimed to be grateful to have been ruled by Turks because the Turks kept the Catholics out. I think Saker follows this principle also.

    Such sentiments have led you to believe that the one true Church and only Christian Church is limited to the one led by former KGB snitches who literally collaborated with a bloody atheist regime to persecute actual Christians….a strange, twisted and dark path.

    You admit that ‘Rus’ was no more Orthodox: “Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus”, “Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”.

    You are twisting my words. I bolded the relevant part of my quote to make it clearer for you. The Chronicles were written by Orthodox people; from 1440 they simply categorized Muscovites as an Orthodox people who were not Rus people, like Moldovans or Bulgarians (as opposed to non-Orthodox people, like Poles). Previously they had considered Muscovites to be Rus people like themselves but after the mid 15th century Muscovites began to be considered foreigners (albeit fellow Orthodox ones).

    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Yes, I do see how he's trying to "twist" your words here. He also seems to be master of illusion by being able to omit things that he knows of, that don't support his fantastical views. In my discussion with him about Beauplan's book about Ukraine, he tried very hard to somehow prove that Ukraine was not considered to be a "country." As he appears to be familiar with the book, he was quite disingenuous in failing to point out that Beauplan himself often refers to Ukraine as a country within the book in many different contexts.
    , @Seraphim
    You forgot the 'golden watch' of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!
    But they (like the 'Balkanoids') surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell".
    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.
  259. @silviosilver

    In Russia, she is way below average.
     
    You are trying waaaaay too hard now.

    He is actually basically right on that one (he is rarely correct). Maybe not “way” but certainly below average.

  260. @Peter Akuleyev
    Romanov rule was the peak of Russian civilization. It has been demographic and cultural decline ever since.

    Romanov rule was the peak of Russian civilization.

    Correct.

    It has been demographic and cultural decline ever since.

    No, the 90s were rock bottom. Russia has improved a lot since then. But it has not gotten close to Romanov Russia’s peak and unfortunately probably never will.

  261. @Mikhail
    BTW, Finstead's book is referenced on line for acknowledging Wood as being of Russian (not Ukrainian) background.

    As for this:

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    The aforementioned Ukrainian national dress is common enough among rural southern Russians.

    I’m not familiar with how somebody out there may or may not have characterized Finstead’s understanding of Natalie Wood’s ethnicity, however, I am familiar that many feel that her paternal side had a Ukrainian origin. BTW, there seems little doubt that her mother’s line was Russian.

    July 20, 1938 in San Francisco was born an actress of Ukrainian descent, Natalie Wood. Her real name is Natalia Zakharenko.

    Her father is a native of Kharkov, Nikolai Zakharenko. His parents moved from Kharkov to Vladivostok in 1917, and when they became US citizens they changed their surname to Gurdin./blockquote>

    https://auction.violity.com/en/new/415-at-the-age-of-8-this-hollywood-actress-of-ukrainian-origin-kept-her-whole-family

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Then again, I recall AP saying awhile that Kharkov's Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.

    Reminded of the Kiev born Igor Sikorsky who saw himself as being Russian. National and ethnic identity can be problematical to define/clarify.

    Natalie Wood never did the I'm not Russian, but Ukrainian scene like some others.

  262. @silviosilver

    Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.
     
    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day. And so what if someone who smiles at you doesn't necessarily want to be your friend? Time is limited, we can't be friends with everybody. At least he's making an effort to signal that he's not hostile and would prefer a smooth interaction over a rough one.

    She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?”
     
    I guess that's possible, but it's also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question. It certainly wouldn't be the first time this has happened. And of course the idea that an American would be bewildered by someone reading for pleasure - yes, even at this late, degraded, diversified date - is purest bullshit.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something.
     
    Yeah dude, this happens all the time. (I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in if you think "I'm wonderful at golf/cooking/chemistry" is a common way of describing one's skill level.)

    Wow! Why so much butthurt? I was not talking about good and bad, only about the difference in cultural codes.

    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day.

    Where did I say that the smile is bad? Studies showed that when you smile, even if it’s forced, your mood improves, as well as the mood of people around you. It’s just the meaning of a smile is different: nothing (zero, zilch, nada, choose what you like) in the US, something in Europe and Russia.

    I guess that’s possible, but it’s also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question.

    Sorry, dude, you underestimate your compatriots. While most Americans don’t speak any language except English, some do, at least they try to. The guy was conducting that interview in what he sincerely believed to be Russian. His disbelief that someone can read books for pleasure was quite genuine.

    I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in

    Sorry, have to disappoint you again. My social contacts reflect my environment. Contacts with Russians are maybe ~5% of the total. About 10-15% are with other Europeans, ~10-15% with Chinese and other East Asians, maybe 10% with South Asians (Indians, Sri Lankans, etc.), and the rest with Americans. My collaborations are even more skewed: none with Russian labs, very few with European labs, one with a lab in Canada, the great majority with American labs.

    As to self-praise, this comes from experience. I’ve interviewed many people (>20 with PhD for post-doc positions in my lab, >50 applicants to our grad school aspiring to a PhD) and came to the conclusion that if you want to compare them on a level playing field, you want to divide what Americans say about themselves by 10, what Chinese say about themselves by 3, and compare that to what Europeans (including Russians in the broad sense, i.e., people from former USSR) say about themselves.

    So, I do not see any justification for your butthurt. America has a lot of virtues, but you need to read the cultural codes right to avoid being fooled.

  263. @AP

    Unia was the ‘coronation’ of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the ‘East’ which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of ‘All Rus’. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that’s why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as ‘Rex Russiae’ while the ‘illustrious king’ committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church”. Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric ‘in partibus Russiae’. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians”).
     
    Yes, better to be under Mongols than to be linked to Catholic Christians. Under such a philosophy, when the Orthodox people of Tver rose against the Tatars and were mercilessly slaughtered by the Tatars and their Muscovite collaborators, Tver's prince was excommunicated by the Moscow-based Orthodox Church for his rebellion against the Tatar overlords when he moved to Pskov (as were the Orthodox people of Pskov for daring to provide shelter to this prince who had opposed the Mongols).

    Similarly, many Balkanoids claimed to be grateful to have been ruled by Turks because the Turks kept the Catholics out. I think Saker follows this principle also.

    Such sentiments have led you to believe that the one true Church and only Christian Church is limited to the one led by former KGB snitches who literally collaborated with a bloody atheist regime to persecute actual Christians....a strange, twisted and dark path.


    You admit that ‘Rus’ was no more Orthodox: “Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus”, “Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”.
     
    You are twisting my words. I bolded the relevant part of my quote to make it clearer for you. The Chronicles were written by Orthodox people; from 1440 they simply categorized Muscovites as an Orthodox people who were not Rus people, like Moldovans or Bulgarians (as opposed to non-Orthodox people, like Poles). Previously they had considered Muscovites to be Rus people like themselves but after the mid 15th century Muscovites began to be considered foreigners (albeit fellow Orthodox ones).

    Yes, I do see how he’s trying to “twist” your words here. He also seems to be master of illusion by being able to omit things that he knows of, that don’t support his fantastical views. In my discussion with him about Beauplan’s book about Ukraine, he tried very hard to somehow prove that Ukraine was not considered to be a “country.” As he appears to be familiar with the book, he was quite disingenuous in failing to point out that Beauplan himself often refers to Ukraine as a country within the book in many different contexts.

  264. Putin to Add Noahide Law to Russian Constitution
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/B8MQ4lHsxwg/

  265. @silviosilver

    Having long US experience, I would not consider it insincere from the American point of view: in the US smile does not mean anything, and everybody knows it.
     
    I would take an insincere smile over a sincere scowl any day. And so what if someone who smiles at you doesn't necessarily want to be your friend? Time is limited, we can't be friends with everybody. At least he's making an effort to signal that he's not hostile and would prefer a smooth interaction over a rough one.

    She answered “read books”, which is a pretty common thing in Russia and virtually unheard of in the US. The interviewer said “that’s you studying for something, but what do you do in your free time?”
     
    I guess that's possible, but it's also possible the interviewer was confused by her robotic Russian accent and may have thought she misunderstood the question. It certainly wouldn't be the first time this has happened. And of course the idea that an American would be bewildered by someone reading for pleasure - yes, even at this late, degraded, diversified date - is purest bullshit.

    Another thing is self-praise. In the US it is normal to say “I am great” or “I am wonderful” at something.
     
    Yeah dude, this happens all the time. (I can only imagine what a Russian bubble you must live in if you think "I'm wonderful at golf/cooking/chemistry" is a common way of describing one's skill level.)

    You will often only notice superficial features of your culture when you have been in a different one.

    A feature of American public culture is a public happiness and projection of smiling, laughing, etc, including to people they do not know. If Americans do not notice this, it is because they are immersed in their culture.

    Of course, for people from different cultures, this can be a culture shock. (Even if you watched every American film and TV series, it is still surprising how friendly real Americans can be, but also how they can walk away just when they are talking to you a second before).

    In Russian public culture, people have their own different idiosyncrasies, which is surprising for foreigners, but no-one in Russia will notice. Although really, Russian public attitudes are more similar to other Northern European cultures, so there is not so much culture shock for anyone travelling from Northern Europe.

    When cultures have some strong differentiation, this is probably not a bad sign – rather an indication of cultural strength, or perhaps national power. Cultures with the most strange idiosyncracies perhaps correlates to the most historically vital ones: like Italy, France, Japan, etc.

  266. @Swedish Family

    As a Russian living in the States for the last 29 years, I would say it’s culture. Mind you, in sharp contrast to American, in Russian culture showiness is considered uncouth. For example, in the US, if you have a wide grin in your face, it means exactly nothing, but if you don’t, it means something. In Russia, if you don’t, it means nothing, but if you do, it means something.
     
    A Belarusan girl told me that this is called an "American smile" in Russian. I think the connotation in Russian was slightly worse (i.e. suggesting insincerity), but you would know that better than I do.

    Germans and Swedish would also notice this when they live or visit America, I don’t think it is anything specific for Russians to notice this culturally different attitude in American.

    I also read something funny in a 19th century novel (Henry James) – if I remember correctly (probably not), it is written that Americans girls created confusion in Italy, because all the men thought they were in love with them, when they thought they are just being polite.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Germans and Swedish would also notice this when they live or visit America, I don’t think it is anything specific for Russians to notice this culturally different attitude in American.
     
    Yes, of course. We just don't have a name for it.

    A Swedish journalist once told the story of how after an interview with a famous American rapper (Ice Cube or Ice T, I think it was) the rapper wrote him and said that they should "hang out" next time the journalist visited Los Angeles. This was only common American courtesy on the part of the rapper, of course, but the Swedish journalist took it to mean that they were now something like friends and was bummed out when he learned that it didn't actually mean "hang out," as it would have if a Swede said the same thing.

  267. @AP

    I do note from Wiktionary, however, that Poles too say na Ukrainie (“Mieszkam na Ukrainie”), which would support the idea that Ukraine’s neighbors never saw its lands as a distinct civilization.
     
    I'm not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more "civilized" amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).

    I don't think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don't have their distinct "civilization."

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.

    I’m not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more “civilized” amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).

    Sure. I meant “suggest” in the weak sense of making it more, rather than less, likely. A Pole could quickly check this theory by looking up how Poland referred to her neighbors at the time. I would guess that neighbors like Germany and Sweden were referred to as proper nouns, and not by their location “at the edge,” but who knows?

    I don’t think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don’t have their distinct “civilization.”

    No, of course not. But I assume we are trying to trace here the origin of Ukrainian nationhood, which must have started somewhere, just like that of the Netherlands.

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.

    I would definitely skip Västerås, and probably Uppsala too. Better to get an extra day or two in Stockholm and its surroundings. Swedes will feel differently, but to an American, the Uppsala Castle, say, will just be another castle among very many all over Sweden and Europe.

    I can give you some landmarks and “tourist attractions” to check out later (most you will only need pass by car without booking anything), but if I went on a road trip through Norway and Sweden, I would concentrate on our flora and fauna, which is the true heart and soul of Scandinavia.

    For novelty things to do, I would check out old episodes of the famous Russian travel show Орёл и Решка. Here are some I found with a quick search:

    [MORE]

    Sweden

    Norway

    • Replies: @AP

    I would guess that neighbors like Germany and Sweden were referred to as proper nouns, and not by their location “at the edge,” but who knows?
     
    Poles were referring to Ukrainians are Ruses, as Ukrainians at the time referred to themselves as Rusnaks or Rusyns. Both Rusnaks/Ruysyns and Poles referred to Russians as Moskals. Russians IIRC referred to themselves as Russky and to Ukrainians as Lithuanians or Poles initially, before later getting serious about the idea of annexing them and using the defunct old Rus state as the reason for doing so.

    A Rusnak or Rusyn was no more a Russky than a Romanian is a Roman.

    I think the term Ukrainians didn't start to become popular until the 1830s among educated people (Gogol, even, listed himself as a Ukrainian at a hotel registry in Italy) and filtered down to the general population by the late 19th century.


    I would definitely skip Västerås, and probably Uppsala too. Better to get an extra day or two in Stockholm and its surroundings. Swedes will feel differently, but to an American, the Uppsala Castle, say, will just be another castle among very many all over Sweden and Europe.
     
    Thank you! I will skip Vasteras in that case.

    My wife likes shopping in clothes boutiques, and I figured Uppsala would be good for that. We noticed last summer that Vienna was surprisingly bad for this specific thing. It was all either large multinational chain stores or extremely expensive French or Italian shops. Smaller Austrian cities were much better and more interesting for this purpose. But maybe Sweden is different.


    I would concentrate on our flora and fauna, which is the true heart and soul of Scandinavia.
     
    A week will be spent north of Arctic circle, basically hiking, taking a boat trip, etc.

    Thank you for the videos!

  268. @AP

    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!
     
    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?

    I have been visiting Moscow for 20 years. The city has improved in almost all ways but one sad way it has gotten worse is that people rarely read novels on the metro anymore. It used to be commonplace. I read my first Russian-language book on the metro - Tatyana Tolstoy's Kys. Now everyone is on their smartphones.

    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?

    And my grandma’s birthplace at that! 🙂

  269. @Dmitry
    Germans and Swedish would also notice this when they live or visit America, I don't think it is anything specific for Russians to notice this culturally different attitude in American.

    I also read something funny in a 19th century novel (Henry James) - if I remember correctly (probably not), it is written that Americans girls created confusion in Italy, because all the men thought they were in love with them, when they thought they are just being polite.

    Germans and Swedish would also notice this when they live or visit America, I don’t think it is anything specific for Russians to notice this culturally different attitude in American.

    Yes, of course. We just don’t have a name for it.

    A Swedish journalist once told the story of how after an interview with a famous American rapper (Ice Cube or Ice T, I think it was) the rapper wrote him and said that they should “hang out” next time the journalist visited Los Angeles. This was only common American courtesy on the part of the rapper, of course, but the Swedish journalist took it to mean that they were now something like friends and was bummed out when he learned that it didn’t actually mean “hang out,” as it would have if a Swede said the same thing.

  270. @Mr. Hack
    I'm not familiar with how somebody out there may or may not have characterized Finstead's understanding of Natalie Wood's ethnicity, however, I am familiar that many feel that her paternal side had a Ukrainian origin. BTW, there seems little doubt that her mother's line was Russian.

    July 20, 1938 in San Francisco was born an actress of Ukrainian descent, Natalie Wood. Her real name is Natalia Zakharenko.

    Her father is a native of Kharkov, Nikolai Zakharenko. His parents moved from Kharkov to Vladivostok in 1917, and when they became US citizens they changed their surname to Gurdin./blockquote>


    https://auction.violity.com/en/new/415-at-the-age-of-8-this-hollywood-actress-of-ukrainian-origin-kept-her-whole-family
     


     

    Then again, I recall AP saying awhile that Kharkov’s Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.

    Reminded of the Kiev born Igor Sikorsky who saw himself as being Russian. National and ethnic identity can be problematical to define/clarify.

    Natalie Wood never did the I’m not Russian, but Ukrainian scene like some others.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I don't think that AP ever said that there weren't any Ukrainians fighting under the White banner, your squabble was over the exact amounts.

    As for Natalie Wood, she probably wasn't very nationalistic either way and could (and did) fit in equally comfortably in either a Russian or Ukrainian setting. Actually, it appears that she was most comfortable hobnobbing with her Hollywood friends - from all accounts, she was quite the socialite.
    , @AP

    Kharkov’s Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.
     
    No, those were the Bolsheviks from Kharkiv. A lot of Russians came to the city to work its factories. I don't tho the Whites were strong there. There were, of course, ethnic Russian Whites in Kiev.
  271. @Dmitry

    "Russia for Russians" to be Written Into the Constitution
     
    If anyone is interpreting this literally, it is something like Karlin's sense of humour.

    It seems a bit as the opposite of what is going to be written.

    From a little information available, rather it looks like it will be a statement similar to article 68, but where there is reference to the language of a (mysterious?) statebuilding people, which it seems, it is taboo to name.

    The funny thing from the text which has so far been discussed, is how it makes the taboo look more awkward than before, while accepting that this people whose name cannot be stated is a statebuilding one.

    So perhaps it is necessary stage before there is a text which will state the name of this mysterious statebuilding nationality being referred to.


    senile sovoks
     
    In Soviet times, there was not a taboo on saying Russians. This is a modern invention of recent times.

    Such "terrible" soviet songs at 4:20

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fmd9obCRqo4

    Yes, thanks for clarifying.

    The precise wording (which I did not have access to when writing the post – it was breaking news at the time) is suboptimal, but the identity of the “state-forming people” can now be logically deduced, and translates to russkie. And indeed, their very omission draws additional attention to that reality. So it’s a massive improvement over the 1993 Constitution. https://www.facebook.com/holmogorov.egor/posts/10222702786343816

    In any case, this has been recognized by opponents of the Russian Article:

    Русских кинули, говорите?

    Имеется в виду многонациональный народ, говорите?

    Там понимают все правильно и реагируют соответственно.

    Муфтий Татарстана выступил против поправки о государствообразующем народе

    Муфтий Татарстана Камиль Самигуллин предупредил о “непоправимых последствиях” поправки в Конституцию, которая вводит понятие “государствообразующий народ”. Это понятие содержится в положении о государственном языке России, которым является русский “как язык государствообразующего народа, входящего в союз равноправных народов.”

    “Я не вижу положительных перспектив в отражении в Конституции понятия “государствообразующий народ” применительно к одной единственной нации”, – заявил он через пресс-службу пресс-службу Духовного управления мусульман (ДУМ) Татарстана.

    Though he did kindly suggest a correction, which I actually endorse: https://www.facebook.com/holmogorov.egor/posts/10222702786343816

    Тем временем муфтий провел автокоррекцию:

    “Тогда, возможно, было бы целесообразно в конституции использовать следующий тезис: “выражая волю многонационального народа Российской Федерации и русского народа”. Такой подход подчеркнул бы и многонациональность государства, и его особую роль в судьбе русского народа”, – пояснил муфтий свою позицию”

    Hopefully getting russkie explicitly mentioned in the Constitution thanks to Tatar nationalists getting triggered by “state-forming bearers of the Russian language.” LOL.

    So perhaps it is necessary stage before there is a text which will state the name of this mysterious statebuilding nationality being referred to.

    Indeed.

    ***

    In Soviet times, there was not a taboo on saying Russians. This is a modern invention of recent times.

    Indeed, I pointed out the contrast with the RSFSR Constitution.

  272. @JL
    Yes, when you're one of the richest people in the world and are going to die soon anyway, why not splurge on some messianic vanity project? I don't know what else he will spend his money on in the time he has left, and apparently he is planning on leaving his kids only a low eight-figure inheritance. I imagine both Trump and Steyer were similarly motivated.

    Rather OT for this thread, but Bloomberg had a great ROI on what is (as AP correctly points out) a trivial percentage of his gross wealth. He might not have gotten the Presidency, but he did play a large role in torpedoing Bernie – who would have been much worse for his finances, had he beat Trump, than Biden.

    • Agree: Yevardian, AP
  273. @Peter Akuleyev
    Given that the native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population, and the government‘s continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia (not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East), it is hard to see this constitutional language as much more than a dark joke. Karlin‘s bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens. Not a good move long term.

    … native Muslim population of Russia is increasing far more rapidly than the Christian population

    From a very low base – really, only DICh is problematic from this respect – and fertility rates are declining in the long-term. No reason to believe they will not eventually converge.

    … continued encouragement of immigration from Central Asia

    As I keep pointing out, it is not accompanied by significant Central Asian settlement in Russia.

    not to mention the default Chinese ethnic take over of the Far East

    Laughable nonsense.

    bizarre idea that Tatars and Bashkirs are just going to happily sit in their ethnic preserves and not cause trouble is also humorous.

    What are they going to do? And why?

    Russia has driven out the productive Jewish, German and Polish minorities and is left with Tatars, Kalmyks and Chechens.

    Tatars are highly functional and a net positive in economic terms, Kalmyks are not a major cultural or economic burden either. DIch (Dagestan-Ingushetia-Chechnya) are indeed economic and cultural black holes, but 5 million/146 million isn’t that big of a deal.

  274. AP says:
    @Swedish Family

    I’m not sure how this proves that. Poles were aware of the people living there being Ruses (not Poles) and of them being distinct from Moskals (that is, different from the people to the northeast). Visitors have also contrasted the people living in Ukraine from those living in Russia (generally, to the detriment of the ones in Russia, likely due to Ukraine being more “civilized” amd familiar as a result of being part of Poland).
     
    Sure. I meant "suggest" in the weak sense of making it more, rather than less, likely. A Pole could quickly check this theory by looking up how Poland referred to her neighbors at the time. I would guess that neighbors like Germany and Sweden were referred to as proper nouns, and not by their location "at the edge," but who knows?

    I don’t think that the name of the Netherlands implies the idea that the inhabitants there don’t have their distinct “civilization.”
     
    No, of course not. But I assume we are trying to trace here the origin of Ukrainian nationhood, which must have started somewhere, just like that of the Netherlands.

    On an unrelated note, Swedish Family: are Uppsala and Vesteras worth spending a day each in? I am making reservations for my summer road trip through Scandinavia.
     
    I would definitely skip Västerås, and probably Uppsala too. Better to get an extra day or two in Stockholm and its surroundings. Swedes will feel differently, but to an American, the Uppsala Castle, say, will just be another castle among very many all over Sweden and Europe.

    I can give you some landmarks and "tourist attractions" to check out later (most you will only need pass by car without booking anything), but if I went on a road trip through Norway and Sweden, I would concentrate on our flora and fauna, which is the true heart and soul of Scandinavia.

    For novelty things to do, I would check out old episodes of the famous Russian travel show Орёл и Решка. Here are some I found with a quick search:



    Sweden
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFTv4cUKqUM
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97XXgLi649M
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spUBPcDuqWY
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIh968ACBJ4

    Norway
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnKHtpJiRNo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNbkCLriWKI
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxzmVNzr5Hs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RQCoFL5hMk

    I would guess that neighbors like Germany and Sweden were referred to as proper nouns, and not by their location “at the edge,” but who knows?

    Poles were referring to Ukrainians are Ruses, as Ukrainians at the time referred to themselves as Rusnaks or Rusyns. Both Rusnaks/Ruysyns and Poles referred to Russians as Moskals. Russians IIRC referred to themselves as Russky and to Ukrainians as Lithuanians or Poles initially, before later getting serious about the idea of annexing them and using the defunct old Rus state as the reason for doing so.

    A Rusnak or Rusyn was no more a Russky than a Romanian is a Roman.

    I think the term Ukrainians didn’t start to become popular until the 1830s among educated people (Gogol, even, listed himself as a Ukrainian at a hotel registry in Italy) and filtered down to the general population by the late 19th century.

    I would definitely skip Västerås, and probably Uppsala too. Better to get an extra day or two in Stockholm and its surroundings. Swedes will feel differently, but to an American, the Uppsala Castle, say, will just be another castle among very many all over Sweden and Europe.

    Thank you! I will skip Vasteras in that case.

    My wife likes shopping in clothes boutiques, and I figured Uppsala would be good for that. We noticed last summer that Vienna was surprisingly bad for this specific thing. It was all either large multinational chain stores or extremely expensive French or Italian shops. Smaller Austrian cities were much better and more interesting for this purpose. But maybe Sweden is different.

    I would concentrate on our flora and fauna, which is the true heart and soul of Scandinavia.

    A week will be spent north of Arctic circle, basically hiking, taking a boat trip, etc.

    Thank you for the videos!

  275. @Mikhail
    Then again, I recall AP saying awhile that Kharkov's Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.

    Reminded of the Kiev born Igor Sikorsky who saw himself as being Russian. National and ethnic identity can be problematical to define/clarify.

    Natalie Wood never did the I'm not Russian, but Ukrainian scene like some others.

    I don’t think that AP ever said that there weren’t any Ukrainians fighting under the White banner, your squabble was over the exact amounts.

    As for Natalie Wood, she probably wasn’t very nationalistic either way and could (and did) fit in equally comfortably in either a Russian or Ukrainian setting. Actually, it appears that she was most comfortable hobnobbing with her Hollywood friends – from all accounts, she was quite the socialite.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    NW on more than one occasion said that she was of ROC background never once saying Ukrainian, much unlike Jack Palance.
  276. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    Then again, I recall AP saying awhile that Kharkov's Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.

    Reminded of the Kiev born Igor Sikorsky who saw himself as being Russian. National and ethnic identity can be problematical to define/clarify.

    Natalie Wood never did the I'm not Russian, but Ukrainian scene like some others.

    Kharkov’s Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.

    No, those were the Bolsheviks from Kharkiv. A lot of Russians came to the city to work its factories. I don’t tho the Whites were strong there. There were, of course, ethnic Russian Whites in Kiev.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Ditto Kharkov. The Whites had some success in Kharkov.
  277. @AP

    Unia was the ‘coronation’ of the multi secular effort at Catholicization of the ‘East’ which took advantage of the struggles of the branches of the Rurikids for the title of Grand Prince of ‘All Rus’. The move gained in intensity and scope in the wake of the Fourth Crusade when the authority of the Byzantine Emperor waned. The Popes rushed to fill the vacuum and that’s why Daniel of Galicia was crowned by the Pope as ‘Rex Russiae’ while the ‘illustrious king’ committed himself “to show respect and obedience to the Apostolic See”, to “devoutly adopt and abide by the cult and the rites of the Latin Christians,” by subjecting himself and “all his kingdom” to the Roman Church”. Daniel Romanovich created the first Catholic Bishopric ‘in partibus Russiae’. He even participated in the Prussian crusade in 1222-1223, organized by Rome and led by Bishop Christian against the Skalvians (“Ruthenians with a great army besieged the Scalovians”).
     
    Yes, better to be under Mongols than to be linked to Catholic Christians. Under such a philosophy, when the Orthodox people of Tver rose against the Tatars and were mercilessly slaughtered by the Tatars and their Muscovite collaborators, Tver's prince was excommunicated by the Moscow-based Orthodox Church for his rebellion against the Tatar overlords when he moved to Pskov (as were the Orthodox people of Pskov for daring to provide shelter to this prince who had opposed the Mongols).

    Similarly, many Balkanoids claimed to be grateful to have been ruled by Turks because the Turks kept the Catholics out. I think Saker follows this principle also.

    Such sentiments have led you to believe that the one true Church and only Christian Church is limited to the one led by former KGB snitches who literally collaborated with a bloody atheist regime to persecute actual Christians....a strange, twisted and dark path.


    You admit that ‘Rus’ was no more Orthodox: “Muscovia was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus”, “Rus self-identity and the idea that the Muscovites were Orthodox “foreigners”.
     
    You are twisting my words. I bolded the relevant part of my quote to make it clearer for you. The Chronicles were written by Orthodox people; from 1440 they simply categorized Muscovites as an Orthodox people who were not Rus people, like Moldovans or Bulgarians (as opposed to non-Orthodox people, like Poles). Previously they had considered Muscovites to be Rus people like themselves but after the mid 15th century Muscovites began to be considered foreigners (albeit fellow Orthodox ones).

    You forgot the ‘golden watch’ of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!
    But they (like the ‘Balkanoids’) surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell”.
    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.
     
    So during the Orthodox mass, when we pray for the unity of the whole church, has the Good Lord, in your discussions with him, made it abundantly clear to you, that we're to cease trying to work for such a communion with the "killing" Catholic Germans, Poles and Lithuanians?"

    How about in the church that you worship in, do you pray for or against unity with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church?
    , @AP

    You forgot the ‘golden watch’ of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!
     
    So you compare the $30,000 (or whatever) watch of the KGB-snitch-turned 90s cigarette smuggler-turned Patriarch to the golden domes of Orthodox Churches, in a comment that reads only like a half-joke.

    But they (like the ‘Balkanoids’) surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell”.
     
    The Tver prince was not a Catholic. He was excommunicated by the Moscow Church because he dared stand aganst the Mongol overlords, with whom the Moscow prince was allied. The entire Orthodox population of Pskov was excommunicated for providing shelter to the Tver prince.

    So, to summarize where your personal corruption has led you:

    1. Salvation can only come through a Church led by literal Judases, KGB snitches who participated in the persecution of Christians of the atheist regime they served. Catholics, Orthodox who defy the KGB snitch (including the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria and the Church of Greece, most Ukrainians, and probably the Romanian Church soon) etc. are hellbound. The gates of Heaven are kept by the guy who worked for the Bolsheviks as they persecuted Christians, who then enriched himself off cigarette smuggling in the 90s. *

    2. Serving Muslim Turks and Muslim or heathen Tatars and Mongols is better than allying with Catholics. Like Saker, if forced to choose between integration with the West or coming under Islam, you would choose Islamic servitude.

    You forgot this quote: " “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits."

    Your choice of nom de plume here is a blasphemy, is it not?

    *The Polish government opened its Soviet-era archives. "Seraphim's" hierarch's records are very instructive:

    https://www.rp.pl/artykul/247370-Przeszlosc-arcybiskupa-Sawy.html

    The head of Polish Orthodoxy from 1965 was a conscious and secret collaborator of the Security Service under the pseudonym Jurek – according to files preserved in the Institute of National Remembrance.

    The Security Service conducted the operation against Polish Orthodoxy under the code name “Byzantium”. Her files have been partially preserved.

    There is also a work folder of TW “Jurek” with hand-written denunciations and annotations about receiving remuneration from the SB. Although no other folder has survived, the so-called personnel, in which the commitment to cooperate and receipts for the accepted money was kept, the content of the work folder leaves no doubt that the Orthodox Metropolitan of Warsaw and All Poland was a conscious and secret collaborator of the SB.

    The IPN files show that almost all post-war leaders of Polish Orthodoxy and most of today’s archbishops – diocese leaders were secret collaborators of the SB. The Soviet KGB also took part in the development of the Polish Orthodox Church, sending its agents who penetrated the Orthodox community. Information obtained from colleagues from Poland was forwarded to Moscow.

    This does not mean, however, that the Orthodox church was completely taken over by SB. In the files of the SO (the so-called object matter) of the “Byzantium”, information has been preserved about those who are rebellious towards the clergy, bishops and secular authorities. One of them was the Archbishop of Lodz and Poznan Jerzy (Aleksy Korenistow) – a Russian aristocrat. Although twice after the death of the Orthodox metropolitans he was the guardian of the metropolitan throne, considered to be the introduction to his appointment as the head of the Church, the Security Service effectively blocked his choice.

    The Security Service recruited Archbishop Sawa (secular name Michał Hrycuniak) on May 31, 1965. He was registered under registration number 12348. There was no personal file of TW “Jurek” in which the recruitment process should be described. However, we know from the preserved portfolio that he had contacts with the SB before he was formally recruited. “During the period (to be acquired) 70 meetings were held, which allow us to state that the secret collaborator is loyal, honest and indifferent to the SB authorities,” wrote the first officer leading Colonel Zygmunt Siellaw.

    The acquisition was related to Sawa’s assumption of a function at the Metropolitan Chancellery, corresponding to the post of chancellor of the curia. “The purpose of the acquisition was the need for current information on changes taking place in Orthodoxy, with particular emphasis on foreign contacts and negative socio-political phenomena among clergy and followers,” wrote the introductory note to TW’s “Jurek” folder.

    TW “Jurek” became one of the most important security agents in the Orthodox Church. Many preserved notes show that he has repeatedly initiated meetings to provide information. He informed the SB both in oral form (so-called dictates) and wrote denunciations with his own hand. He also provided the Church’s internal documents and even letters written to the metropolitan with complaints about individual Orthodox priests. He also reported on Catholics and Protestants.
  278. @Seraphim
    You forgot the 'golden watch' of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!
    But they (like the 'Balkanoids') surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell".
    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.

    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.

    So during the Orthodox mass, when we pray for the unity of the whole church, has the Good Lord, in your discussions with him, made it abundantly clear to you, that we’re to cease trying to work for such a communion with the “killing” Catholic Germans, Poles and Lithuanians?”

    How about in the church that you worship in, do you pray for or against unity with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Actually at the Holy Liturgy, we pray for "for the unity of the Faith and for the communion of the Holy Spirit". We cannot pray for 'unity' with those who don't confess our Faith, who fell into heresies, schisms, apostasy, but we pray for their return to the unity of Faith, that with 'one heart and one voice' to confess the Apostolic Creed.
    As we did this very day, the Sunday of Orthodoxy:
    "But seeing the feeble impulses of many, fervently we pray Thee, O all-good Lord: look upon Thy Church and see, that although we have received Thy saving Gospel with gladness, nevertheless the tares of vanity and passions have made it bear little fruit in some, and in others no fruit, and through the multiplication of iniquities some by heresies, others by schism, in opposing the truth of Thy Gospel, apostatize from Thine inheritance, reject Thy grace, and subject themselves to the judgement of Thy most-holy Word. O Most compassionate and all-powerful, be not angry to the end, O Lord! Be merciful, Thy Church prayeth Thee, setting before Thee the author and finisher of our salvation, Jesus Christ, be merciful to us, strengthen us in Thy right faith by Thy might, and unto those that are deceived do Thou enlighten the eyes of their reason by Thy divine light, that they may understand Thy truth: soften their bitterness and open their hearing, that they may know Thy voice and turn to Thee our Saviour.
    Correct, O Lord, the corruptions of others and the life not in accordance with Christian piety: make us all to live holy and undefiled, and so let the saving faith take root in our hearts and remain ever fruitful. Turn not Thy face away from us, O Lord, give us the joy of Thy salvation: and grant, O Lord, to the pastors of Thy Church holy zeal, and dissolve their cares for the salvation and conversion of them that are deceived, with the spirit of Thy Gospel: That all being thus guided may, we attain to where there is the perfection of faith, the fulfilment of hope, and true love: and there with the choirs of the most pure heavenly hosts may we glorify Thee our Lord, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, unto the ages of ages".
    We pray of course for the end of the 'Ukrainian' schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.
  279. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    You forgot the 'golden watch' of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!
    But they (like the 'Balkanoids') surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell".
    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.

    You forgot the ‘golden watch’ of the former KGB snitch. Orthodox Russians, like all barbarians, love the glittering of gold. They cover even the domes of their churches with gold!

    So you compare the $30,000 (or whatever) watch of the KGB-snitch-turned 90s cigarette smuggler-turned Patriarch to the golden domes of Orthodox Churches, in a comment that reads only like a half-joke.

    But they (like the ‘Balkanoids’) surely loved Orthodoxy more than Catholicism, which they always saw as the schism and heresy that always was. They preferred the Mongol domination following the Christ command: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell”.

    The Tver prince was not a Catholic. He was excommunicated by the Moscow Church because he dared stand aganst the Mongol overlords, with whom the Moscow prince was allied. The entire Orthodox population of Pskov was excommunicated for providing shelter to the Tver prince.

    So, to summarize where your personal corruption has led you:

    1. Salvation can only come through a Church led by literal Judases, KGB snitches who participated in the persecution of Christians of the atheist regime they served. Catholics, Orthodox who defy the KGB snitch (including the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria and the Church of Greece, most Ukrainians, and probably the Romanian Church soon) etc. are hellbound. The gates of Heaven are kept by the guy who worked for the Bolsheviks as they persecuted Christians, who then enriched himself off cigarette smuggling in the 90s. *

    2. Serving Muslim Turks and Muslim or heathen Tatars and Mongols is better than allying with Catholics. Like Saker, if forced to choose between integration with the West or coming under Islam, you would choose Islamic servitude.

    You forgot this quote: ” “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits.”

    Your choice of nom de plume here is a blasphemy, is it not?

    *The Polish government opened its Soviet-era archives. “Seraphim’s” hierarch’s records are very instructive:

    https://www.rp.pl/artykul/247370-Przeszlosc-arcybiskupa-Sawy.html

    The head of Polish Orthodoxy from 1965 was a conscious and secret collaborator of the Security Service under the pseudonym Jurek – according to files preserved in the Institute of National Remembrance.

    The Security Service conducted the operation against Polish Orthodoxy under the code name “Byzantium”. Her files have been partially preserved.

    There is also a work folder of TW “Jurek” with hand-written denunciations and annotations about receiving remuneration from the SB. Although no other folder has survived, the so-called personnel, in which the commitment to cooperate and receipts for the accepted money was kept, the content of the work folder leaves no doubt that the Orthodox Metropolitan of Warsaw and All Poland was a conscious and secret collaborator of the SB.

    The IPN files show that almost all post-war leaders of Polish Orthodoxy and most of today’s archbishops – diocese leaders were secret collaborators of the SB. The Soviet KGB also took part in the development of the Polish Orthodox Church, sending its agents who penetrated the Orthodox community. Information obtained from colleagues from Poland was forwarded to Moscow.

    This does not mean, however, that the Orthodox church was completely taken over by SB. In the files of the SO (the so-called object matter) of the “Byzantium”, information has been preserved about those who are rebellious towards the clergy, bishops and secular authorities. One of them was the Archbishop of Lodz and Poznan Jerzy (Aleksy Korenistow) – a Russian aristocrat. Although twice after the death of the Orthodox metropolitans he was the guardian of the metropolitan throne, considered to be the introduction to his appointment as the head of the Church, the Security Service effectively blocked his choice.

    The Security Service recruited Archbishop Sawa (secular name Michał Hrycuniak) on May 31, 1965. He was registered under registration number 12348. There was no personal file of TW “Jurek” in which the recruitment process should be described. However, we know from the preserved portfolio that he had contacts with the SB before he was formally recruited. “During the period (to be acquired) 70 meetings were held, which allow us to state that the secret collaborator is loyal, honest and indifferent to the SB authorities,” wrote the first officer leading Colonel Zygmunt Siellaw.

    The acquisition was related to Sawa’s assumption of a function at the Metropolitan Chancellery, corresponding to the post of chancellor of the curia. “The purpose of the acquisition was the need for current information on changes taking place in Orthodoxy, with particular emphasis on foreign contacts and negative socio-political phenomena among clergy and followers,” wrote the introductory note to TW’s “Jurek” folder.

    TW “Jurek” became one of the most important security agents in the Orthodox Church. Many preserved notes show that he has repeatedly initiated meetings to provide information. He informed the SB both in oral form (so-called dictates) and wrote denunciations with his own hand. He also provided the Church’s internal documents and even letters written to the metropolitan with complaints about individual Orthodox priests. He also reported on Catholics and Protestants.

  280. @AnonFromTN
    When I came to the States, another post-doc in the lab (born and bred in the US) said: look at the money. It says “In God we trust”. That’s the only God we trust in.

    As always with the Americans, there seems to be a lot of BS around what the “founding fathers” intentions were on any given issue in the Constitution.

    Take the Electoral College voting system… all sorts of idiotic claims about it being done to “make elections competitive” and to make sure every state be vigorously campaigned in.

    To me it seems obvious that the system was implemented to reduce the massive chance and probability of corrupt voting over a vast territory (even for the time when US area was just in the North-East , but with too small number of states to make the “forces you to campaign in small and big states” theory just hot air).

    Pretty much an acceptance that a straightforward numerical vote would be a sham of ballot stuffing, bought votes exacerbated by a being a highly federalised country with a dispersed population.

    In other words, exactly what they have projected onto Russia.

    That said, if these scum had forced Ukraine into a similar system – giving the economically important and more heavily populated Novorossiya regions a very decisively high number of electoral college votes (along with Kiev), trading it off with the Banderetards for some concession on another issue- that would have been good.

  281. @AP
    Deer hunter has the actor George Dzundza, who says some words in Ukrainian in the film. Wikipedia claims he is Jewish but he comes to Ukrainian diaspora events and presents as a diaspora Ukrainian, he even tended bar at the Ukrainian National Home; I strongly suspect Wikipedia is wrong there.

    LOL – Fresh from the extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian, and then compounding the error exponentially with more “lessons” …. we have this nonsense of your inability to know or understand the language !

    I’m not going to use 2 hours of time watching this film to find out( another of your pathetic time-wasting attempts?)

    –but I am completely sure only Russian words are said in the scenes you refer to. True I haven’t watched or thought about the film this milennium- but I am sure that yet again this is you catastrophically being a fraud with an inability to know or speak Russian or ukrainian

    If someone can prove or disprove what I am thinking about this Deer Hunter film then great! A wedding scene (I think).
    Preferably without any cover up from any tag-team partner, if indeed I am correct again and there is no Ukrainian spoken at all in the film.

    BTW add into this the Hollywood Taras Bulba being an entirely Russian emigree production… and John Wick being an entirely Russian world Belarusian ( I mention this because I know for these sick loser Banderetards, if they wrote him as a ukrop- it would create a national holiday in 404 similar in intensity to 9th May in Russia)

    • Replies: @AP

    extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian
     
    I taught you the Russian word for "watch."

    Do not make claims about me that are true only of you.
  282. @Mr. Hack
    I don't think that AP ever said that there weren't any Ukrainians fighting under the White banner, your squabble was over the exact amounts.

    As for Natalie Wood, she probably wasn't very nationalistic either way and could (and did) fit in equally comfortably in either a Russian or Ukrainian setting. Actually, it appears that she was most comfortable hobnobbing with her Hollywood friends - from all accounts, she was quite the socialite.

    NW on more than one occasion said that she was of ROC background never once saying Ukrainian, much unlike Jack Palance.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    How in the world would you know that?
    , @Mr. Hack
    Here's a photo of Natalie Wood and her family, where the photographer (not on the payroll of any pesky Banderites, I presume) refers to her mother as being "Russian" and her father as "Ukrainian."

    https://www.closerweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/natalie-wood-2.jpg?fit=1000%2C664

    All in the Family
    Natalie, who landed her first major film role in 1947's Miracle on 34th Street at the age of eight, owed her early success to a driven Russian mother, Maria (pictured far left). "She modeled Natalie on the Shirley Temple template… and it worked," says Ray of Natalie's mother. "[She] saved all kinds of pictures and had [Natalie's] baby shoes. Somewhere along the line, I took a picture of the mother holding the baby shoes." Conversely, Ray recalls Natalie's Ukrainian father Nick, a film prop maker, as quiet. (Also pictured: Natalie’s sister, Lana.)
     
    https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/natalie-wood-a-day-in-the-life-155411/

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharchenkos taking much part in either communities activities.
  283. @Mikhail
    NW on more than one occasion said that she was of ROC background never once saying Ukrainian, much unlike Jack Palance.

    How in the world would you know that?

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Show me the commentary running counyer. Meantime, plenty of source material noting her ROC background which she acknowledged.
  284. @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    LOL - Fresh from the extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian, and then compounding the error exponentially with more "lessons" .... we have this nonsense of your inability to know or understand the language !

    I'm not going to use 2 hours of time watching this film to find out( another of your pathetic time-wasting attempts?)

    --but I am completely sure only Russian words are said in the scenes you refer to. True I haven't watched or thought about the film this milennium- but I am sure that yet again this is you catastrophically being a fraud with an inability to know or speak Russian or ukrainian


    If someone can prove or disprove what I am thinking about this Deer Hunter film then great! A wedding scene (I think).
    Preferably without any cover up from any tag-team partner, if indeed I am correct again and there is no Ukrainian spoken at all in the film.

    BTW add into this the Hollywood Taras Bulba being an entirely Russian emigree production... and John Wick being an entirely Russian world Belarusian ( I mention this because I know for these sick loser Banderetards, if they wrote him as a ukrop- it would create a national holiday in 404 similar in intensity to 9th May in Russia)

    extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian

    I taught you the Russian word for “watch.”

    Do not make claims about me that are true only of you.

    • Replies: @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    LOL- you know it was music to my ears when Karlin attached himself to this nonsensical claim of yours. It is not in dispute that he can speak Russian - for him to go along with your false bilge shows one thing..... that he despises me, because there is absolutely no way he could have thought that wasn't the writings of a Russian speaker.

    BTW - didn't I set you an assignment to watch the Deer Hunter? How is that going?

    Also, did you Internet search " bungalow for sale"? LOL
  285. @Mr. Hack

    Now, of course the Catholic Germans, Poles, to be joined by the Lithuanians, presented themselves as killers of the body and of the soul.
     
    So during the Orthodox mass, when we pray for the unity of the whole church, has the Good Lord, in your discussions with him, made it abundantly clear to you, that we're to cease trying to work for such a communion with the "killing" Catholic Germans, Poles and Lithuanians?"

    How about in the church that you worship in, do you pray for or against unity with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church?

    Actually at the Holy Liturgy, we pray for “for the unity of the Faith and for the communion of the Holy Spirit”. We cannot pray for ‘unity’ with those who don’t confess our Faith, who fell into heresies, schisms, apostasy, but we pray for their return to the unity of Faith, that with ‘one heart and one voice’ to confess the Apostolic Creed.
    As we did this very day, the Sunday of Orthodoxy:
    “But seeing the feeble impulses of many, fervently we pray Thee, O all-good Lord: look upon Thy Church and see, that although we have received Thy saving Gospel with gladness, nevertheless the tares of vanity and passions have made it bear little fruit in some, and in others no fruit, and through the multiplication of iniquities some by heresies, others by schism, in opposing the truth of Thy Gospel, apostatize from Thine inheritance, reject Thy grace, and subject themselves to the judgement of Thy most-holy Word. O Most compassionate and all-powerful, be not angry to the end, O Lord! Be merciful, Thy Church prayeth Thee, setting before Thee the author and finisher of our salvation, Jesus Christ, be merciful to us, strengthen us in Thy right faith by Thy might, and unto those that are deceived do Thou enlighten the eyes of their reason by Thy divine light, that they may understand Thy truth: soften their bitterness and open their hearing, that they may know Thy voice and turn to Thee our Saviour.
    Correct, O Lord, the corruptions of others and the life not in accordance with Christian piety: make us all to live holy and undefiled, and so let the saving faith take root in our hearts and remain ever fruitful. Turn not Thy face away from us, O Lord, give us the joy of Thy salvation: and grant, O Lord, to the pastors of Thy Church holy zeal, and dissolve their cares for the salvation and conversion of them that are deceived, with the spirit of Thy Gospel: That all being thus guided may, we attain to where there is the perfection of faith, the fulfilment of hope, and true love: and there with the choirs of the most pure heavenly hosts may we glorify Thee our Lord, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, unto the ages of ages”.
    We pray of course for the end of the ‘Ukrainian’ schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    We pray of course for the end of the ‘Ukrainian’ schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.
     
    It appears that your Patriarch and his close advisers don't see the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as one that went astray and one that needs to return to the ROC. That everything is "lawful." Apparently your faction has lost sway with Patriarch Daniel. You best get to work and quit fooling around here on the internet blogging with various neophytes and open the Patriach's eyes to the "truth." Looks to me like its just a matter of time before he makes his endorsement official.

    The Romanian Orthodox Church believes the granting of autocephaly to the new Orthodox Church of Ukraine established on the basis of non-canonical religious organizations was lawful, the Greek church news agency Romfea said on Friday.

    According to the article, the Synod of the Romanian Church came to the conclusion that it "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates.
     
    https://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/confessional/orthodox_relations/78902/
  286. @Mikhail
    NW on more than one occasion said that she was of ROC background never once saying Ukrainian, much unlike Jack Palance.

    Here’s a photo of Natalie Wood and her family, where the photographer (not on the payroll of any pesky Banderites, I presume) refers to her mother as being “Russian” and her father as “Ukrainian.”

    https://www.closerweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/natalie-wood-2.jpg?fit=1000%2C664

    All in the Family
    Natalie, who landed her first major film role in 1947’s Miracle on 34th Street at the age of eight, owed her early success to a driven Russian mother, Maria (pictured far left). “She modeled Natalie on the Shirley Temple template… and it worked,” says Ray of Natalie’s mother. “[She] saved all kinds of pictures and had [Natalie’s] baby shoes. Somewhere along the line, I took a picture of the mother holding the baby shoes.” Conversely, Ray recalls Natalie’s Ukrainian father Nick, a film prop maker, as quiet. (Also pictured: Natalie’s sister, Lana.)

    https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/natalie-wood-a-day-in-the-life-155411/

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharchenkos taking much part in either communities activities.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War. His famed daughter identified her ethnic background as Russian.

    She did a film on Russian culture, speaking an intelligible Russian as appreciably noted to me by a fluent Russian speaker, who had a finicky way of commenting about how Russian is spoken.

    Many people of White Russian background involved in orgs like the Russian Nobility Association and Congress of Russian Americans have (besides Russian) other backgrounds - Armenian, Georgian, Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian being among them.

    An example:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1978/02/28/archives/alexandre-tarsaidze-77-czarist-emigre-acquired-own-public-relations.html

    I've one of his books. Very pro-Russian and anti-Communist.

  287. @AP

    Kharkov’s Russian Civil War period pro-White elements were on account of that area having a large Russian population.
     
    No, those were the Bolsheviks from Kharkiv. A lot of Russians came to the city to work its factories. I don't tho the Whites were strong there. There were, of course, ethnic Russian Whites in Kiev.

    Ditto Kharkov. The Whites had some success in Kharkov.

  288. @Mr. Hack
    How in the world would you know that?

    Show me the commentary running counyer. Meantime, plenty of source material noting her ROC background which she acknowledged.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I've already provided 3 links attesting to her Ukrainian roots. I've never stated where she actually received baptismal. I think it's time for you to start showing some links to back up your claims. I actually wouldn't be surprised if she indeed was baptised in an ROC church, I just don't know.
  289. @Seraphim
    Actually at the Holy Liturgy, we pray for "for the unity of the Faith and for the communion of the Holy Spirit". We cannot pray for 'unity' with those who don't confess our Faith, who fell into heresies, schisms, apostasy, but we pray for their return to the unity of Faith, that with 'one heart and one voice' to confess the Apostolic Creed.
    As we did this very day, the Sunday of Orthodoxy:
    "But seeing the feeble impulses of many, fervently we pray Thee, O all-good Lord: look upon Thy Church and see, that although we have received Thy saving Gospel with gladness, nevertheless the tares of vanity and passions have made it bear little fruit in some, and in others no fruit, and through the multiplication of iniquities some by heresies, others by schism, in opposing the truth of Thy Gospel, apostatize from Thine inheritance, reject Thy grace, and subject themselves to the judgement of Thy most-holy Word. O Most compassionate and all-powerful, be not angry to the end, O Lord! Be merciful, Thy Church prayeth Thee, setting before Thee the author and finisher of our salvation, Jesus Christ, be merciful to us, strengthen us in Thy right faith by Thy might, and unto those that are deceived do Thou enlighten the eyes of their reason by Thy divine light, that they may understand Thy truth: soften their bitterness and open their hearing, that they may know Thy voice and turn to Thee our Saviour.
    Correct, O Lord, the corruptions of others and the life not in accordance with Christian piety: make us all to live holy and undefiled, and so let the saving faith take root in our hearts and remain ever fruitful. Turn not Thy face away from us, O Lord, give us the joy of Thy salvation: and grant, O Lord, to the pastors of Thy Church holy zeal, and dissolve their cares for the salvation and conversion of them that are deceived, with the spirit of Thy Gospel: That all being thus guided may, we attain to where there is the perfection of faith, the fulfilment of hope, and true love: and there with the choirs of the most pure heavenly hosts may we glorify Thee our Lord, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, unto the ages of ages".
    We pray of course for the end of the 'Ukrainian' schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.

    We pray of course for the end of the ‘Ukrainian’ schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.

    It appears that your Patriarch and his close advisers don’t see the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as one that went astray and one that needs to return to the ROC. That everything is “lawful.” Apparently your faction has lost sway with Patriarch Daniel. You best get to work and quit fooling around here on the internet blogging with various neophytes and open the Patriach’s eyes to the “truth.” Looks to me like its just a matter of time before he makes his endorsement official.

    The Romanian Orthodox Church believes the granting of autocephaly to the new Orthodox Church of Ukraine established on the basis of non-canonical religious organizations was lawful, the Greek church news agency Romfea said on Friday.

    According to the article, the Synod of the Romanian Church came to the conclusion that it “inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates.

    https://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/confessional/orthodox_relations/78902/

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Of course you read too much in the statement of the Romanian Synod. It says just that : "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates".
    "Concerning the current ecclesiastical situation in the Ukraine the participants also recognised that a pan-Orthodox dialogue is necessary for healing and reconciliation".
  290. @Mikhail
    Show me the commentary running counyer. Meantime, plenty of source material noting her ROC background which she acknowledged.

    I’ve already provided 3 links attesting to her Ukrainian roots. I’ve never stated where she actually received baptismal. I think it’s time for you to start showing some links to back up your claims. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if she indeed was baptised in an ROC church, I just don’t know.

  291. @Mr. Hack
    Here's a photo of Natalie Wood and her family, where the photographer (not on the payroll of any pesky Banderites, I presume) refers to her mother as being "Russian" and her father as "Ukrainian."

    https://www.closerweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/natalie-wood-2.jpg?fit=1000%2C664

    All in the Family
    Natalie, who landed her first major film role in 1947's Miracle on 34th Street at the age of eight, owed her early success to a driven Russian mother, Maria (pictured far left). "She modeled Natalie on the Shirley Temple template… and it worked," says Ray of Natalie's mother. "[She] saved all kinds of pictures and had [Natalie's] baby shoes. Somewhere along the line, I took a picture of the mother holding the baby shoes." Conversely, Ray recalls Natalie's Ukrainian father Nick, a film prop maker, as quiet. (Also pictured: Natalie’s sister, Lana.)
     
    https://www.closerweekly.com/posts/natalie-wood-a-day-in-the-life-155411/

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharchenkos taking much part in either communities activities.

    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War. His famed daughter identified her ethnic background as Russian.

    She did a film on Russian culture, speaking an intelligible Russian as appreciably noted to me by a fluent Russian speaker, who had a finicky way of commenting about how Russian is spoken.

    Many people of White Russian background involved in orgs like the Russian Nobility Association and Congress of Russian Americans have (besides Russian) other backgrounds – Armenian, Georgian, Polish, Belarusian and Ukrainian being among them.

    An example:

    https://www.nytimes.com/1978/02/28/archives/alexandre-tarsaidze-77-czarist-emigre-acquired-own-public-relations.html

    I’ve one of his books. Very pro-Russian and anti-Communist.

  292. • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War.
     
    It was her grandfather who fought for the Whites, not her father.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Natalie-Wood-only-say-she-was-Russian-American-when-her-father-was-actually-Ukrainian-making-her-half-Russian-half-Ukrainian

    This is the only link that you've provided that links Natalie Wood's :strong" Russian identification, It's not even an article, but a one sentence question that doesn't even answer the question that it poses, but leaves that up to a few comments made by people guessing:


    So ... when some people are named as russians, and they were born in period of existance of USSR - its could means that they are Soviet people.
     
    I stand by my original characterization about Natalie Wood's Russian identification:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities.
     
    In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.
  293. An interesting take on this from a Russian perspective:

    https://kornev.livejournal.com/558250.html

    (In Russian)

  294. @Mr. Hack

    We pray of course for the end of the ‘Ukrainian’ schism and the return of those who went astray to the bosom of the Church.
     
    It appears that your Patriarch and his close advisers don't see the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as one that went astray and one that needs to return to the ROC. That everything is "lawful." Apparently your faction has lost sway with Patriarch Daniel. You best get to work and quit fooling around here on the internet blogging with various neophytes and open the Patriach's eyes to the "truth." Looks to me like its just a matter of time before he makes his endorsement official.

    The Romanian Orthodox Church believes the granting of autocephaly to the new Orthodox Church of Ukraine established on the basis of non-canonical religious organizations was lawful, the Greek church news agency Romfea said on Friday.

    According to the article, the Synod of the Romanian Church came to the conclusion that it "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates.
     
    https://risu.org.ua/en/index/all_news/confessional/orthodox_relations/78902/

    Of course you read too much in the statement of the Romanian Synod. It says just that : “inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates”.
    “Concerning the current ecclesiastical situation in the Ukraine the participants also recognised that a pan-Orthodox dialogue is necessary for healing and reconciliation”.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly," is pretty strong language and is hard to misinterpret.
  295. @Mikhail
    Related, the title of the thread is misleading from its content:

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Natalie-Wood-only-say-she-was-Russian-American-when-her-father-was-actually-Ukrainian-making-her-half-Russian-half-Ukrainian

    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War.

    It was her grandfather who fought for the Whites, not her father.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Natalie-Wood-only-say-she-was-Russian-American-when-her-father-was-actually-Ukrainian-making-her-half-Russian-half-Ukrainian

    This is the only link that you’ve provided that links Natalie Wood’s :strong” Russian identification, It’s not even an article, but a one sentence question that doesn’t even answer the question that it poses, but leaves that up to a few comments made by people guessing:

    So … when some people are named as russians, and they were born in period of existance of USSR – its could means that they are Soviet people.

    I stand by my original characterization about Natalie Wood’s Russian identification:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities.

    In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Look Mickey, I'll make this as easy a I can for you to understand. The fact seems to indicate that Natalie Wood's mother was Russian and her father a Ukrainian. Period.
    , @Mikhail
    Her identification with being Russian is quite numerous and clear. Any identification of her having a Ukrainian background is comparatively quite secondary.

    Speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent isn't Surzhyk. Moreover, speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent can be the result of other factors. Someone of White Russian background leaves Russia for another country at a very young age and learns it from people having a Ukrainian accent.
  296. @Seraphim
    Of course you read too much in the statement of the Romanian Synod. It says just that : "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly, but a consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates".
    "Concerning the current ecclesiastical situation in the Ukraine the participants also recognised that a pan-Orthodox dialogue is necessary for healing and reconciliation".

    inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly,” is pretty strong language and is hard to misinterpret.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    "Consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates”, and "pan-orthodox consensus", "according to the Gospel of Christ and the holy Orthodox Canons", "for the whole Ukrainian Church and not just a part", is clear and strong language too. It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.
  297. @Mr. Hack

    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War.
     
    It was her grandfather who fought for the Whites, not her father.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Natalie-Wood-only-say-she-was-Russian-American-when-her-father-was-actually-Ukrainian-making-her-half-Russian-half-Ukrainian

    This is the only link that you've provided that links Natalie Wood's :strong" Russian identification, It's not even an article, but a one sentence question that doesn't even answer the question that it poses, but leaves that up to a few comments made by people guessing:


    So ... when some people are named as russians, and they were born in period of existance of USSR - its could means that they are Soviet people.
     
    I stand by my original characterization about Natalie Wood's Russian identification:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities.
     
    In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.

    Look Mickey, I’ll make this as easy a I can for you to understand. The fact seems to indicate that Natalie Wood’s mother was Russian and her father a Ukrainian. Period.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Her father was born in Vladivostok, far away from what became Ukraine. She identified with being Russian - not Ukrainian.

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

    Refer me to any documentary with her promoting Ukrainian culture and speaking Ukrainian. She did at least one regarding Russia. Her father isn't on any record for saying anything in support of Petliura, or Makhno, with her grandfather having fought on the side of the Whites.

    An interview with NW where she clearly notes a Russian (not Ukrainian) background:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc6UgehvAgI

    In the comments section, I don't see any svidos claiming differently.
  298. @Mr. Hack

    Her father was born in Vladivostok. He fought on the side of the Whites during the Russian Civil War.
     
    It was her grandfather who fought for the Whites, not her father.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Natalie-Wood-only-say-she-was-Russian-American-when-her-father-was-actually-Ukrainian-making-her-half-Russian-half-Ukrainian

    This is the only link that you've provided that links Natalie Wood's :strong" Russian identification, It's not even an article, but a one sentence question that doesn't even answer the question that it poses, but leaves that up to a few comments made by people guessing:


    So ... when some people are named as russians, and they were born in period of existance of USSR - its could means that they are Soviet people.
     
    I stand by my original characterization about Natalie Wood's Russian identification:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities.
     
    In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.

    Her identification with being Russian is quite numerous and clear. Any identification of her having a Ukrainian background is comparatively quite secondary.

    Speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent isn’t Surzhyk. Moreover, speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent can be the result of other factors. Someone of White Russian background leaves Russia for another country at a very young age and learns it from people having a Ukrainian accent.

    • Agree: Mikhail
    • Disagree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Surzhyk is clearly not a Ukrainian accented Russian language:

    https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=MdplXoCkIOWxggek3orIBw&q=surzhyk&oq=surzhyk&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l3j0i30l5j0i5i30l2.914.3116..4852...0.0..0.122.393.6j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i131j0i10.IQddGR-u5Ps#spf=1583733302577
  299. @Mr. Hack
    Look Mickey, I'll make this as easy a I can for you to understand. The fact seems to indicate that Natalie Wood's mother was Russian and her father a Ukrainian. Period.

    Her father was born in Vladivostok, far away from what became Ukraine. She identified with being Russian – not Ukrainian.

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

    Refer me to any documentary with her promoting Ukrainian culture and speaking Ukrainian. She did at least one regarding Russia. Her father isn’t on any record for saying anything in support of Petliura, or Makhno, with her grandfather having fought on the side of the Whites.

    An interview with NW where she clearly notes a Russian (not Ukrainian) background:

    In the comments section, I don’t see any svidos claiming differently.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Okay, so on that particular interview, when she was working on a film where she played the role of a Russian interpreter, she identified with her Russian background. This in no way nullified her father's ethnicity that was Ukrainian.

    BTW, the three links that I've already included that attest to her father's Ukrainian identity, were not written by any of your imaginary "svidos", but by everyday heinz 57 Americans.

    If you're ready to prove that her father's ethnicity was not Ukrainian, bring out your proof.
  300. @AP

    extreme debacle of you proving not even knowing basic Russian
     
    I taught you the Russian word for "watch."

    Do not make claims about me that are true only of you.

    LOL- you know it was music to my ears when Karlin attached himself to this nonsensical claim of yours. It is not in dispute that he can speak Russian – for him to go along with your false bilge shows one thing….. that he despises me, because there is absolutely no way he could have thought that wasn’t the writings of a Russian speaker.

    BTW – didn’t I set you an assignment to watch the Deer Hunter? How is that going?

    Also, did you Internet search ” bungalow for sale”? LOL

    • Replies: @AP
    You don't know the Russian word for watch. Perhaps you are some sort of central Asian pretending to be a Russian, who knows.

    Proof:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/god-truly-does-have-a-sense-of-humor/#comment-3472492

    Your quote: “chas” is “hour” in Russian..i.e a period of time, or in a time, not to mention also meaning “watch/clock”

    Latvian woman had to point out to you that the Russian word for clock is not chas but chasy.

    Also, did you Internet search ” bungalow for sale”? LOL
     
    Russian civil "engineer" doesn't even know what a bungalow is. Claims it has nothing to do with India.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/eurasian-parallels/#comment-3731204

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

    A bungalow is a small house or cottage that is either single-storey or has a second storey built into a sloping roof (usually with dormer windows),[1] and may be surrounded by wide verandas.[1]

    The style is derived from the thatched huts of Bengali farmers.[1] The British altered the style and built bungalows around British India.[1] The first house in England that was classified as a bungalow was built in 1869.[1] In America it was initially used as a vacation architecture, and was most popular between 1900–1918,[2] especially with the Arts and Crafts movement.
  301. @Mr. Hack
    inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly," is pretty strong language and is hard to misinterpret.

    “Consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates”, and “pan-orthodox consensus”, “according to the Gospel of Christ and the holy Orthodox Canons”, “for the whole Ukrainian Church and not just a part”, is clear and strong language too. It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'm not trying to tell Patriarch Daniel how to do his job. He appears to be on the right track.
    , @AP

    It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.
     
    ..yet.

    It states that it "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly" and that the granting was lawful (contrary to Moscow's claims and yours) but wants consensus also.
  302. AP says:
    @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    LOL- you know it was music to my ears when Karlin attached himself to this nonsensical claim of yours. It is not in dispute that he can speak Russian - for him to go along with your false bilge shows one thing..... that he despises me, because there is absolutely no way he could have thought that wasn't the writings of a Russian speaker.

    BTW - didn't I set you an assignment to watch the Deer Hunter? How is that going?

    Also, did you Internet search " bungalow for sale"? LOL

    You don’t know the Russian word for watch. Perhaps you are some sort of central Asian pretending to be a Russian, who knows.

    Proof:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/god-truly-does-have-a-sense-of-humor/#comment-3472492

    Your quote: “chas” is “hour” in Russian..i.e a period of time, or in a time, not to mention also meaning “watch/clock”

    Latvian woman had to point out to you that the Russian word for clock is not chas but chasy.

    Also, did you Internet search ” bungalow for sale”? LOL

    Russian civil “engineer” doesn’t even know what a bungalow is. Claims it has nothing to do with India.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/eurasian-parallels/#comment-3731204

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

    A bungalow is a small house or cottage that is either single-storey or has a second storey built into a sloping roof (usually with dormer windows),[1] and may be surrounded by wide verandas.[1]

    The style is derived from the thatched huts of Bengali farmers.[1] The British altered the style and built bungalows around British India.[1] The first house in England that was classified as a bungalow was built in 1869.[1] In America it was initially used as a vacation architecture, and was most popular between 1900–1918,[2] especially with the Arts and Crafts movement.

  303. @Mikhail
    Her father was born in Vladivostok, far away from what became Ukraine. She identified with being Russian - not Ukrainian.

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

    Refer me to any documentary with her promoting Ukrainian culture and speaking Ukrainian. She did at least one regarding Russia. Her father isn't on any record for saying anything in support of Petliura, or Makhno, with her grandfather having fought on the side of the Whites.

    An interview with NW where she clearly notes a Russian (not Ukrainian) background:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc6UgehvAgI

    In the comments section, I don't see any svidos claiming differently.

    Okay, so on that particular interview, when she was working on a film where she played the role of a Russian interpreter, she identified with her Russian background. This in no way nullified her father’s ethnicity that was Ukrainian.

    BTW, the three links that I’ve already included that attest to her father’s Ukrainian identity, were not written by any of your imaginary “svidos”, but by everyday heinz 57 Americans.

    If you’re ready to prove that her father’s ethnicity was not Ukrainian, bring out your proof.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Show me where her father and herself state a Ukrainian identity. Once again somewhat reminded of Igor Sikorsky.
  304. @Seraphim
    "Consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates”, and "pan-orthodox consensus", "according to the Gospel of Christ and the holy Orthodox Canons", "for the whole Ukrainian Church and not just a part", is clear and strong language too. It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.

    I’m not trying to tell Patriarch Daniel how to do his job. He appears to be on the right track.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    Well, the hierarchs of the Romanian Church are not above temptation. They might fall eventually (God forbid) like the many others:
    "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron" (1 Tim 4:1-2).
  305. @Seraphim
    "Consensus should be achieved between the Ecumenical and Moscow patriarchates”, and "pan-orthodox consensus", "according to the Gospel of Christ and the holy Orthodox Canons", "for the whole Ukrainian Church and not just a part", is clear and strong language too. It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.

    It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.

    ..yet.

    It states that it “inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly” and that the granting was lawful (contrary to Moscow’s claims and yours) but wants consensus also.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    It won't be lawful without the consensus.
  306. @Mr. Hack
    I'm not trying to tell Patriarch Daniel how to do his job. He appears to be on the right track.

    Well, the hierarchs of the Romanian Church are not above temptation. They might fall eventually (God forbid) like the many others:
    “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron” (1 Tim 4:1-2).

    • Replies: @AP
    Just to note, in your world “falling to temptation” means crossing a Judas who owes his career to close collaboration with an anti-Christian atheist Soviet government.
  307. Oh come on, get off of your high horse, your pronouncements sound hollow coming from one who at this thread alone has been identified as being both “disingenuous”and “blasphemous.”

  308. @AP

    It does not recognize the Poroshenko pseudo-Church.
     
    ..yet.

    It states that it "inherently agrees to the granting of autocephaly" and that the granting was lawful (contrary to Moscow's claims and yours) but wants consensus also.

    It won’t be lawful without the consensus.

    • Replies: @AP
    Yours is circular reasoning.

    Moscow claims Ukraine’s Church’s autocephaly is invalid because only Moscow may grant that status. The Romanian Church disagrees, stating Constantinople was correct. But it is waiting for some consensus to be achieved before granting recognition. It has not proclaimed that it will never grant recognition without Moscow’s acquiescence, nor has it turned away from Constantinople.

    And we are back to what your idea ultimately means: the only keys to salvation are in the hands of a KGB snitch who had persecuted Christians for an atheist regime and who then got rich off smuggling cigarettes. In your twisted world, this man determines the fates of tens of millions of souls including that of the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria, the believers in Ukraine, in Greece, etc. Everything we need to know about the validity of your claims can be judged based on their results.
  309. @Mr. Hack
    Okay, so on that particular interview, when she was working on a film where she played the role of a Russian interpreter, she identified with her Russian background. This in no way nullified her father's ethnicity that was Ukrainian.

    BTW, the three links that I've already included that attest to her father's Ukrainian identity, were not written by any of your imaginary "svidos", but by everyday heinz 57 Americans.

    If you're ready to prove that her father's ethnicity was not Ukrainian, bring out your proof.

    Show me where her father and herself state a Ukrainian identity. Once again somewhat reminded of Igor Sikorsky.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I will grant you that Natalie Wood's family most likely was a highly Russified one, although her "Ukrainian accented Russian" was duly noted and she had to undergo some sort of training to rid herself of any such accretions while she was preparing for a film, but there seems to be little doubt, that on her father's side there was a Ukrainian connection:

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.
     
    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/

    This is now the fourth link that I've provided to you showing a Ukrainian connection on her paternal side. If you'll feel better and sleep at night more calmly, then by all means keep deluding yourself that Natalie Wood was of 100% pure Russian ethnic stock. The truth of the matter is that she was an American and not a Russian (nor Ukrainian) acctress. :-)

  310. @Mikhail
    Her identification with being Russian is quite numerous and clear. Any identification of her having a Ukrainian background is comparatively quite secondary.

    Speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent isn't Surzhyk. Moreover, speaking Russian with a Ukrainian accent can be the result of other factors. Someone of White Russian background leaves Russia for another country at a very young age and learns it from people having a Ukrainian accent.

    Surzhyk is clearly not a Ukrainian accented Russian language:

    https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=MdplXoCkIOWxggek3orIBw&q=surzhyk&oq=surzhyk&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l3j0i30l5j0i5i30l2.914.3116..4852…0.0..0.122.393.6j1……0….1..gws-wiz…….0i131j0i10.IQddGR-u5Ps#spf=1583733302577

  311. @Mikhail
    Show me where her father and herself state a Ukrainian identity. Once again somewhat reminded of Igor Sikorsky.

    I will grant you that Natalie Wood’s family most likely was a highly Russified one, although her “Ukrainian accented Russian” was duly noted and she had to undergo some sort of training to rid herself of any such accretions while she was preparing for a film, but there seems to be little doubt, that on her father’s side there was a Ukrainian connection:

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.

    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/

    This is now the fourth link that I’ve provided to you showing a Ukrainian connection on her paternal side. If you’ll feel better and sleep at night more calmly, then by all means keep deluding yourself that Natalie Wood was of 100% pure Russian ethnic stock. The truth of the matter is that she was an American and not a Russian (nor Ukrainian) acctress. 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You provide second hand, likely rehashed supporting info in comparison to what I have noted with links. Wood said she spoke Russian with an American accent. Already noted that speaking Russian with a "Ukrainian accent" might be for a reason other than having a Ukrainian background.

    In the days of her grandfather, Ukrainian as a separate national identity was minimal. Her father was born in Vladivostok, with herself identifying as Russian - not Ukrainian.

    I never denied that she wasn't Russian-American.
  312. AP says:
    @Seraphim
    It won't be lawful without the consensus.

    Yours is circular reasoning.

    Moscow claims Ukraine’s Church’s autocephaly is invalid because only Moscow may grant that status. The Romanian Church disagrees, stating Constantinople was correct. But it is waiting for some consensus to be achieved before granting recognition. It has not proclaimed that it will never grant recognition without Moscow’s acquiescence, nor has it turned away from Constantinople.

    And we are back to what your idea ultimately means: the only keys to salvation are in the hands of a KGB snitch who had persecuted Christians for an atheist regime and who then got rich off smuggling cigarettes. In your twisted world, this man determines the fates of tens of millions of souls including that of the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria, the believers in Ukraine, in Greece, etc. Everything we need to know about the validity of your claims can be judged based on their results.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  313. @Seraphim
    Well, the hierarchs of the Romanian Church are not above temptation. They might fall eventually (God forbid) like the many others:
    "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron" (1 Tim 4:1-2).

    Just to note, in your world “falling to temptation” means crossing a Judas who owes his career to close collaboration with an anti-Christian atheist Soviet government.

  314. @Mr. Hack
    I will grant you that Natalie Wood's family most likely was a highly Russified one, although her "Ukrainian accented Russian" was duly noted and she had to undergo some sort of training to rid herself of any such accretions while she was preparing for a film, but there seems to be little doubt, that on her father's side there was a Ukrainian connection:

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.
     
    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/

    This is now the fourth link that I've provided to you showing a Ukrainian connection on her paternal side. If you'll feel better and sleep at night more calmly, then by all means keep deluding yourself that Natalie Wood was of 100% pure Russian ethnic stock. The truth of the matter is that she was an American and not a Russian (nor Ukrainian) acctress. :-)

    You provide second hand, likely rehashed supporting info in comparison to what I have noted with links. Wood said she spoke Russian with an American accent. Already noted that speaking Russian with a “Ukrainian accent” might be for a reason other than having a Ukrainian background.

    In the days of her grandfather, Ukrainian as a separate national identity was minimal. Her father was born in Vladivostok, with herself identifying as Russian – not Ukrainian.

    I never denied that she wasn’t Russian-American.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I really don't understand why you persist in denying her father's Ukrainian ethnicity? Both of his parents were Ukrainians from Kharkiv, as many researchers and reporters have publicly reported. Even if her father was born in Vladivostok, this fact alone wouldn't preclude a Ukrainian ethnicity that he had acquired from both of his parents. If it would, then analogously so too would Natalie's Russian or Ukrainian ethnicity be preluded by the fact she was born in America. You can't have it both ways, Mickey. Here's yet one more link (#5) that attests to Natalie Wood's father's Ukrainian ethnicity (all of these reporters must be delusional because Mickey Averko doesn't want to believe what's clear as crystal):

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.
     
    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/
  315. @Mikhail
    You provide second hand, likely rehashed supporting info in comparison to what I have noted with links. Wood said she spoke Russian with an American accent. Already noted that speaking Russian with a "Ukrainian accent" might be for a reason other than having a Ukrainian background.

    In the days of her grandfather, Ukrainian as a separate national identity was minimal. Her father was born in Vladivostok, with herself identifying as Russian - not Ukrainian.

    I never denied that she wasn't Russian-American.

    I really don’t understand why you persist in denying her father’s Ukrainian ethnicity? Both of his parents were Ukrainians from Kharkiv, as many researchers and reporters have publicly reported. Even if her father was born in Vladivostok, this fact alone wouldn’t preclude a Ukrainian ethnicity that he had acquired from both of his parents. If it would, then analogously so too would Natalie’s Russian or Ukrainian ethnicity be preluded by the fact she was born in America. You can’t have it both ways, Mickey. Here’s yet one more link (#5) that attests to Natalie Wood’s father’s Ukrainian ethnicity (all of these reporters must be delusional because Mickey Averko doesn’t want to believe what’s clear as crystal):

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.

    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    More second hand which doesn't successfully refute what I said.

    According to one of your sources, her grand parents fled Kharkov during the Russian Revolution. It doesn't say that they were from there. Meantime, it's clearly stated elsewhere that her father was born in Vladivostok, where his family had a business.

    Find me anything where she speaks of having a Ukrainian identity - once again noting how many on that territory saw it (back then) as a regional part of Russia.

    To date, no evidence that both her parents were primarily of a Ukrainian background. Even if so, it's clear that this is quite secondary from her clearly preferred Russian-American identity.

    From what has so far been communicated at this thread, perhaps there's Ukrainian on her father's side. If so, that didn't mean that they saw themselves as separate from Russia. Svido leaning folks (at least some of them) have a tough time accepting this sentiment as acceptable.
  316. @Mr. Hack
    I really don't understand why you persist in denying her father's Ukrainian ethnicity? Both of his parents were Ukrainians from Kharkiv, as many researchers and reporters have publicly reported. Even if her father was born in Vladivostok, this fact alone wouldn't preclude a Ukrainian ethnicity that he had acquired from both of his parents. If it would, then analogously so too would Natalie's Russian or Ukrainian ethnicity be preluded by the fact she was born in America. You can't have it both ways, Mickey. Here's yet one more link (#5) that attests to Natalie Wood's father's Ukrainian ethnicity (all of these reporters must be delusional because Mickey Averko doesn't want to believe what's clear as crystal):

    Natalie Wood was born Natalia Zakharenko in San Francisco, to Russian immigrant parents Maria Stepanovna (née Zudilova, Russian: Мария Степановна Зудилова; 1912–1996) and Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Russian: Николай Степанович Захаренко; c. 1912–1980). Nikolai was a son of two Ukrainians from Kharkiv: Stephan Zakharenko and Eudoxia Sauchenko. Nikolai was born in Vladivostok. As a child, he immigrated with his mother and two brothers to Montreal, Quebec. Later they moved to San Francisco. There, he worked as a day laborer and carpenter.
     
    https://peoplepill.com/people/natalie-wood/

    More second hand which doesn’t successfully refute what I said.

    According to one of your sources, her grand parents fled Kharkov during the Russian Revolution. It doesn’t say that they were from there. Meantime, it’s clearly stated elsewhere that her father was born in Vladivostok, where his family had a business.

    Find me anything where she speaks of having a Ukrainian identity – once again noting how many on that territory saw it (back then) as a regional part of Russia.

    To date, no evidence that both her parents were primarily of a Ukrainian background. Even if so, it’s clear that this is quite secondary from her clearly preferred Russian-American identity.

    From what has so far been communicated at this thread, perhaps there’s Ukrainian on her father’s side. If so, that didn’t mean that they saw themselves as separate from Russia. Svido leaning folks (at least some of them) have a tough time accepting this sentiment as acceptable.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    As I've already pointed out, after doing an exhaustive search of the Zakharenkos, I could not locate even one shred of evidence of this family taking part in any cultural activities of the Russian American or Ukrainian American communities of the Los Angeles area. If you feel that this is a stinging endorsement of the Zakharenkos attachment to their Russian homeland, feel free to hold such views, but for me:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities...In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.
     
  317. @Mikhail
    More second hand which doesn't successfully refute what I said.

    According to one of your sources, her grand parents fled Kharkov during the Russian Revolution. It doesn't say that they were from there. Meantime, it's clearly stated elsewhere that her father was born in Vladivostok, where his family had a business.

    Find me anything where she speaks of having a Ukrainian identity - once again noting how many on that territory saw it (back then) as a regional part of Russia.

    To date, no evidence that both her parents were primarily of a Ukrainian background. Even if so, it's clear that this is quite secondary from her clearly preferred Russian-American identity.

    From what has so far been communicated at this thread, perhaps there's Ukrainian on her father's side. If so, that didn't mean that they saw themselves as separate from Russia. Svido leaning folks (at least some of them) have a tough time accepting this sentiment as acceptable.

    As I’ve already pointed out, after doing an exhaustive search of the Zakharenkos, I could not locate even one shred of evidence of this family taking part in any cultural activities of the Russian American or Ukrainian American communities of the Los Angeles area. If you feel that this is a stinging endorsement of the Zakharenkos attachment to their Russian homeland, feel free to hold such views, but for me:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities…In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    For our own sake, you should take a break and not get so exhausted over this.

    She herself said she's of Russian background - never saying Ukrainian. Once again noting her grandfather fighting on the side of the Whites and her father being born in Vladivostok.

    Regarding one of your rehashes, people of different religious/church backgrounds can from time to time attended services of others they aren't affiliated with or as affiliated with when compared to another congregational grouping.

    If she has any Ukrainian background, it's clearly secondary.

  318. @Mr. Hack
    As I've already pointed out, after doing an exhaustive search of the Zakharenkos, I could not locate even one shred of evidence of this family taking part in any cultural activities of the Russian American or Ukrainian American communities of the Los Angeles area. If you feel that this is a stinging endorsement of the Zakharenkos attachment to their Russian homeland, feel free to hold such views, but for me:

    Other than occasionally attending the Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Hollywood (and probably some of the other Russian Orthodox churches in the area too), after an exhaustive internet search, I could not find any mention of the Zakharenkos taking much part in either communities activities...In other words, her identification as either being of Russian or Ukrainian background was not very strong either way, and aside from occasionally attending one of the various Orthodox churches in the area where she lived and speaking a Ukrainianized version of Russian (most likely some sort of surzhyk), she exhibited the classic signs of full assimilation into her American environment.
     

    For our own sake, you should take a break and not get so exhausted over this.

    She herself said she’s of Russian background – never saying Ukrainian. Once again noting her grandfather fighting on the side of the Whites and her father being born in Vladivostok.

    Regarding one of your rehashes, people of different religious/church backgrounds can from time to time attended services of others they aren’t affiliated with or as affiliated with when compared to another congregational grouping.

    If she has any Ukrainian background, it’s clearly secondary.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I was only trying to help you out, pointing out another Ukrainian who fought on the side of the Whites. Not anymore! :-)
  319. @Mikhail
    For our own sake, you should take a break and not get so exhausted over this.

    She herself said she's of Russian background - never saying Ukrainian. Once again noting her grandfather fighting on the side of the Whites and her father being born in Vladivostok.

    Regarding one of your rehashes, people of different religious/church backgrounds can from time to time attended services of others they aren't affiliated with or as affiliated with when compared to another congregational grouping.

    If she has any Ukrainian background, it's clearly secondary.

    I was only trying to help you out, pointing out another Ukrainian who fought on the side of the Whites. Not anymore! 🙂

  320. Further supporting info detailing NW’s ROC upbringing:

    https://www.today.com/news/natalie-woods-russian-roots-wbna4325330

    &

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2000/03/natalie-wood-s-fatal-voyage

    Excerpt:

    Their 1969 Russian Orthodox wedding was spectacular, held at the Holy Virgin Mary Cathedral in Los Angeles

    That church’s website:

    https://hvmla.org/

  321. https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/natalie-wood-walks-outside-with-her-father-on-the-day-of-her-wedding-picture-id2707271?s=2048×2048

    And here’s a photo of her first marriage site in Scottsdale Arizona where Natalie is walking with her father. Regardless of where she got married, this doesn’t negate her father’s Ukrainian ethnicity. Apparently the whole affair was conducted at the Hotel Ho (I’m not making this up). 🙂

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    That is the "Hotel Valley Ho."
    , @Mikhail
    That link isn't coming up. Meantime, it's specifically on record that she was married in an ROC church as previously noted with supporting details. Further details:

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/47224122

    Still no conclusive evidence of her having a Ukrainian identity, which if evident is clearly secondary to her self professed identity with being of Russian origin.

  322. @Mr. Hack
    https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/natalie-wood-walks-outside-with-her-father-on-the-day-of-her-wedding-picture-id2707271?s=2048x2048

    And here's a photo of her first marriage site in Scottsdale Arizona where Natalie is walking with her father. Regardless of where she got married, this doesn't negate her father's Ukrainian ethnicity. Apparently the whole affair was conducted at the Hotel Ho (I'm not making this up). :-)

    That is the “Hotel Valley Ho.”

  323. @Mr. Hack
    https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/natalie-wood-walks-outside-with-her-father-on-the-day-of-her-wedding-picture-id2707271?s=2048x2048

    And here's a photo of her first marriage site in Scottsdale Arizona where Natalie is walking with her father. Regardless of where she got married, this doesn't negate her father's Ukrainian ethnicity. Apparently the whole affair was conducted at the Hotel Ho (I'm not making this up). :-)

    That link isn’t coming up. Meantime, it’s specifically on record that she was married in an ROC church as previously noted with supporting details. Further details:

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/47224122

    Still no conclusive evidence of her having a Ukrainian identity, which if evident is clearly secondary to her self professed identity with being of Russian origin.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    She was married to Robert Wagner twice (I thought that you were an expert on all things Natalie Wood?).

    Her identifying with her Russian heritage does not nullify her father's Ukrainian ethnicity, and relatedly her own. Do you need her grandparents' birth certificates in order to agree? You're quite the obstinate individual, aren't you?
    , @Mr. Hack
    Here is the Methodist church where the fiery Russian nationalist Natalie Wood held her first wedding ceremony in Scottsdale AZ in 1957:

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/DA_scottsdalemethodistoutside.jpg

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/DA_scottsdalemethodistinside.jpg

    Not a very impressive looking church.

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/wagner_wood.htm

    The rebound marriage was in 1972 and was held apparently at a Russian church - it didn't seem to help the ultimately failed marriage.
  324. @Mikhail
    That link isn't coming up. Meantime, it's specifically on record that she was married in an ROC church as previously noted with supporting details. Further details:

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/47224122

    Still no conclusive evidence of her having a Ukrainian identity, which if evident is clearly secondary to her self professed identity with being of Russian origin.

    She was married to Robert Wagner twice (I thought that you were an expert on all things Natalie Wood?).

    Her identifying with her Russian heritage does not nullify her father’s Ukrainian ethnicity, and relatedly her own. Do you need her grandparents’ birth certificates in order to agree? You’re quite the obstinate individual, aren’t you?

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Nowhere near as obstinate as yourself. Neither of her grandparents had Ukrainian listed on their birth certificate.
  325. @Mikhail
    That link isn't coming up. Meantime, it's specifically on record that she was married in an ROC church as previously noted with supporting details. Further details:

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/47224122

    Still no conclusive evidence of her having a Ukrainian identity, which if evident is clearly secondary to her self professed identity with being of Russian origin.

    Here is the Methodist church where the fiery Russian nationalist Natalie Wood held her first wedding ceremony in Scottsdale AZ in 1957:

    Not a very impressive looking church.

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/wagner_wood.htm

    The rebound marriage was in 1972 and was held apparently at a Russian church – it didn’t seem to help the ultimately failed marriage.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    The ROC one that she was married in looks good. She was never married in a UOC church.
  326. @Mr. Hack
    She was married to Robert Wagner twice (I thought that you were an expert on all things Natalie Wood?).

    Her identifying with her Russian heritage does not nullify her father's Ukrainian ethnicity, and relatedly her own. Do you need her grandparents' birth certificates in order to agree? You're quite the obstinate individual, aren't you?

    Nowhere near as obstinate as yourself. Neither of her grandparents had Ukrainian listed on their birth certificate.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    So why do so many researchers refer to her grandparents as being Ukrainian?
  327. @Mikhail
    Nowhere near as obstinate as yourself. Neither of her grandparents had Ukrainian listed on their birth certificate.

    So why do so many researchers refer to her grandparents as being Ukrainian?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Another misguided researcher?

    Natalie Wood was an American actress who rose to fame as the child artist (at the age of 4) and continued a career full of success until her unfortunate drowning in 1981 at the young age of 41. She was the winner of Golden Globe Awards and nominated multiple times at the Academy Awards.

    Natalie Wood was born as Natalia Nikolaevna Zakharenko on 20th July 1938 in San Francisco, California to immigrant parents- Maria Stepanovna(Mother, Russian) & Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Father, Ukrainian)

    https://celebrityfamilytree.com/i/i/n/a/natalie-wood-with-father-nikolai-zakharenko.jpg

    https://celebrityfamilytree.com/actress/natalie-wood

    , @Mikhail
    Which "so many researchers" and what do they specifically show as proof?
  328. @Mr. Hack
    So why do so many researchers refer to her grandparents as being Ukrainian?

    Another misguided researcher?

    Natalie Wood was an American actress who rose to fame as the child artist (at the age of 4) and continued a career full of success until her unfortunate drowning in 1981 at the young age of 41. She was the winner of Golden Globe Awards and nominated multiple times at the Academy Awards.

    Natalie Wood was born as Natalia Nikolaevna Zakharenko on 20th July 1938 in San Francisco, California to immigrant parents- Maria Stepanovna(Mother, Russian) & Nikolai Stepanovich Zakharenko (Father, Ukrainian)

    https://celebrityfamilytree.com/actress/natalie-wood

  329. @Mr. Hack
    Here is the Methodist church where the fiery Russian nationalist Natalie Wood held her first wedding ceremony in Scottsdale AZ in 1957:

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/DA_scottsdalemethodistoutside.jpg

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/DA_scottsdalemethodistinside.jpg

    Not a very impressive looking church.

    http://doney.net/aroundaz/celebrity/wagner_wood.htm

    The rebound marriage was in 1972 and was held apparently at a Russian church - it didn't seem to help the ultimately failed marriage.

    The ROC one that she was married in looks good. She was never married in a UOC church.

  330. @Mr. Hack
    So why do so many researchers refer to her grandparents as being Ukrainian?

    Which “so many researchers” and what do they specifically show as proof?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    All of the links that I've included allude to either Natalie Wood's father or grandparents being of Ukrainian descent. See comments: #264, #289, #298, #318, 331, all based on the opinions of different researchers.

    In comment #235 in the opinion of a major biographer of Natalie Wood' life, Suzanne Finstad (somebody that you even quoted in one of your comments), Natalie even spoke Ukrainian:

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”
     
    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/
  331. @Mikhail
    Which "so many researchers" and what do they specifically show as proof?

    All of the links that I’ve included allude to either Natalie Wood’s father or grandparents being of Ukrainian descent. See comments: #264, #289, #298, #318, 331, all based on the opinions of different researchers.

    In comment #235 in the opinion of a major biographer of Natalie Wood’ life, Suzanne Finstad (somebody that you even quoted in one of your comments), Natalie even spoke Ukrainian:

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”

    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    I don't offhand believe that I did. In any event, that book on NW seems to contradict another book on her which I linked.

    Nowhere does NW say that she was of Ukrainian background or spoke Russian with a Ukrainian accent. On the contrary, it has been said that she spoke Russian with an American accent. When did she ever speak Ukrainian as claimed in the link you gave?

    The Ukrainian national dress bit is svido nationalist chauvinism, given that dress is popular in the southern parts of Russia - carrying on influence in other parts of Russia. Suggesting that it's exclusively or originally Ukrainian is hokey.

  332. @Mr. Hack
    All of the links that I've included allude to either Natalie Wood's father or grandparents being of Ukrainian descent. See comments: #264, #289, #298, #318, 331, all based on the opinions of different researchers.

    In comment #235 in the opinion of a major biographer of Natalie Wood' life, Suzanne Finstad (somebody that you even quoted in one of your comments), Natalie even spoke Ukrainian:

    Although born in the US, Natalie spoke Ukrainian and even Russian with strong Ukrainian accent. According to “Natasha: The Biography of Natalie Wood” book by Suzanne Finstad, for one of her Hollywood roles she had to “fine-tune her Russian dialect.. to lose her parents’ Ukrainian accent.”
     
    https://u-krane.com/natalie-wood-in-her-ukrainian-national-dress/

    I don’t offhand believe that I did. In any event, that book on NW seems to contradict another book on her which I linked.

    Nowhere does NW say that she was of Ukrainian background or spoke Russian with a Ukrainian accent. On the contrary, it has been said that she spoke Russian with an American accent. When did she ever speak Ukrainian as claimed in the link you gave?

    The Ukrainian national dress bit is svido nationalist chauvinism, given that dress is popular in the southern parts of Russia – carrying on influence in other parts of Russia. Suggesting that it’s exclusively or originally Ukrainian is hokey.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Look, I'm not a researcher or a biographer to answer your questions, I'm only repeating what these folks have written about her. You can believe whatever you want, and if you know more than these professionals do, write your own article or book.
  333. @Mikhail
    I don't offhand believe that I did. In any event, that book on NW seems to contradict another book on her which I linked.

    Nowhere does NW say that she was of Ukrainian background or spoke Russian with a Ukrainian accent. On the contrary, it has been said that she spoke Russian with an American accent. When did she ever speak Ukrainian as claimed in the link you gave?

    The Ukrainian national dress bit is svido nationalist chauvinism, given that dress is popular in the southern parts of Russia - carrying on influence in other parts of Russia. Suggesting that it's exclusively or originally Ukrainian is hokey.

    Look, I’m not a researcher or a biographer to answer your questions, I’m only repeating what these folks have written about her. You can believe whatever you want, and if you know more than these professionals do, write your own article or book.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    I've sensed BS before such has been established. Until given conclusive evidence, I doubt she spoke Ukrainian and some Russian as one of your sources dubiously claims. She never acknowledged such, while having spoken Russian with a described American accent.
  334. @Mr. Hack
    Look, I'm not a researcher or a biographer to answer your questions, I'm only repeating what these folks have written about her. You can believe whatever you want, and if you know more than these professionals do, write your own article or book.

    I’ve sensed BS before such has been established. Until given conclusive evidence, I doubt she spoke Ukrainian and some Russian as one of your sources dubiously claims. She never acknowledged such, while having spoken Russian with a described American accent.

  335. JL says:

    I suggest the two of you get a hotel room together, pop some popcorn, and binge watch Natalie Wood movies until you come to some kind of consensus on this matter.

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.

    But it reminds me of a joke from when I was in school:

    “What kind of wood doesn’t float?”

    “Natalie”

    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.
     
    Looks like one "nobody" cares. :-)

    I have a history of hen pecking Ukrainian/Russian issues with Averko that goes back several years now. I hope this is the last such battle royal for quite some time!
    , @Mikhail
    This exchange serves as a good example of how svido influenced folks spin away from reality.

    I think highly enough of this discussion to the point that I just linked it to some friends with a keen knowledge and intellect on such matters. Here's how one of them replied to the Ukrainianizing of Natalie Wood:

    Total hogwash. I met her sister in California some years ago at the Russian Cathedral in San Francisco. She was reminiscing about her family and Natalie's career. There was nothing "Ukrainian" about it.
     
  336. @JL
    I suggest the two of you get a hotel room together, pop some popcorn, and binge watch Natalie Wood movies until you come to some kind of consensus on this matter.

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.

    But it reminds me of a joke from when I was in school:

    "What kind of wood doesn't float?"

    "Natalie"

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.

    Looks like one “nobody” cares. 🙂

    I have a history of hen pecking Ukrainian/Russian issues with Averko that goes back several years now. I hope this is the last such battle royal for quite some time!

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    On account of you having lost yet again.
  337. @Mr. Hack

    Further confirms that over the course of time, there’re people from that area who positively identify with Russia.
     
    You can find people everywhere who have strange beliefs about who they are and where they're from. Psychiatric asylums are full of such people. I say, let them be and believe whatever they want, as long as they don't organize and try to pollute their society with calls for separation (except for the psychiatric asylums where they belong). :-)

    You’re proof of such in conjunction with adhering to a form of Soviet psychology.

    • Troll: Mr. Hack
  338. @Mr. Hack

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.
     
    Looks like one "nobody" cares. :-)

    I have a history of hen pecking Ukrainian/Russian issues with Averko that goes back several years now. I hope this is the last such battle royal for quite some time!

    On account of you having lost yet again.

    • Disagree: Mr. Hack
  339. @JL
    I suggest the two of you get a hotel room together, pop some popcorn, and binge watch Natalie Wood movies until you come to some kind of consensus on this matter.

    Literally nobody cares about this, not even you two, and there are a lot more pertinent and interesting issues to discuss right now.

    But it reminds me of a joke from when I was in school:

    "What kind of wood doesn't float?"

    "Natalie"

    This exchange serves as a good example of how svido influenced folks spin away from reality.

    I think highly enough of this discussion to the point that I just linked it to some friends with a keen knowledge and intellect on such matters. Here’s how one of them replied to the Ukrainianizing of Natalie Wood:

    Total hogwash. I met her sister in California some years ago at the Russian Cathedral in San Francisco. She was reminiscing about her family and Natalie’s career. There was nothing “Ukrainian” about it.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Look Mickey, the only "svido influnced folk" here is you, a Russo-Svido!

    It's not my fault that you refuse to accept reality, and the opinions of numerous non-Ukrainian reporters and authors, who all happen to believe that on Natalie Wood's paternal side there was a Ukrainian ethnic connection. I suppose that we're to believe that they were all involved in a conspiracy, just to tick you off? I've already told you that if it makes you feel better, believe whatever you want.
  340. @Mikhail
    This exchange serves as a good example of how svido influenced folks spin away from reality.

    I think highly enough of this discussion to the point that I just linked it to some friends with a keen knowledge and intellect on such matters. Here's how one of them replied to the Ukrainianizing of Natalie Wood:

    Total hogwash. I met her sister in California some years ago at the Russian Cathedral in San Francisco. She was reminiscing about her family and Natalie's career. There was nothing "Ukrainian" about it.
     

    Look Mickey, the only “svido influnced folk” here is you, a Russo-Svido!

    It’s not my fault that you refuse to accept reality, and the opinions of numerous non-Ukrainian reporters and authors, who all happen to believe that on Natalie Wood’s paternal side there was a Ukrainian ethnic connection. I suppose that we’re to believe that they were all involved in a conspiracy, just to tick you off? I’ve already told you that if it makes you feel better, believe whatever you want.

    • Troll: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Your feeble minded diversionary attempt from getting intellectually clobbered yet again.
  341. @Mr. Hack
    Look Mickey, the only "svido influnced folk" here is you, a Russo-Svido!

    It's not my fault that you refuse to accept reality, and the opinions of numerous non-Ukrainian reporters and authors, who all happen to believe that on Natalie Wood's paternal side there was a Ukrainian ethnic connection. I suppose that we're to believe that they were all involved in a conspiracy, just to tick you off? I've already told you that if it makes you feel better, believe whatever you want.

    Your feeble minded diversionary attempt from getting intellectually clobbered yet again.

    • Disagree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP
    Naw, you lost as usual. It looks like she was Russian and thought of herself as such, but her father's parents were Ukrainian (I think this was what Mr. Hack was saying, I admit I haven't followed this discussion). Someone whose parents are both from Kharkiv and who both have the surnames -enko is obviously of Ukrainian descent. Therefore, claiming that this man's daughter wasn't of partial Ukrainian descent is just dumb and only someone unfamiliar with Russia and Ukraine would make such a claim.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    That being said, other than for the purpose of proving your stubborn ignorance, this discussion serves no purpose so I won't continue it.

  342. @Mikhail
    Your feeble minded diversionary attempt from getting intellectually clobbered yet again.

    Naw, you lost as usual. It looks like she was Russian and thought of herself as such, but her father’s parents were Ukrainian (I think this was what Mr. Hack was saying, I admit I haven’t followed this discussion). Someone whose parents are both from Kharkiv and who both have the surnames -enko is obviously of Ukrainian descent. Therefore, claiming that this man’s daughter wasn’t of partial Ukrainian descent is just dumb and only someone unfamiliar with Russia and Ukraine would make such a claim.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    That being said, other than for the purpose of proving your stubborn ignorance, this discussion serves no purpose so I won’t continue it.

    • Troll: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Pathetic that you suddenly come in for Hack.

    In line with your propping of a relatively obscure (for much of history) historical figure, who modern day svidos suddenly discovered - someone who was hardly (if at all) mentioned in Subtelny's 666 page book on Ukraine and erroneously suggesting that the Polish attempt to conquer Russia wasn't repressive.

    No one in NW's family is on record for saying they're of Ukrainian background. NW's family relations from generations back most likely didn't see themselves as Ukrainian.


    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.
     
    Ruslana is more Russian than the claim of NW being of part Ukrainian background. In any event, I never denied that NW might've some familial roots to the territory now known as Ukraine.

    Big wow!

    , @Mikhail
    BTW, it's admittedly (on your part) idiotic of yourself to make such matter of fact in tone observations (wrong ones at that), while acknowledging to not having read thru the whole exchange.

    Hack acknowledged my being correct in your prior disagreement that people of origin from the territory now known as Ukraine fought on the White side, with the language of that region of the Russian Empire being known and spoken within White ranks.

    So yeah, your svido babble (albeit comparatively more sugar coated and nuanced than the standard variant) has been demolished.
    , @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    In other words.......she was Russian /Russian world lady- much like anybody from "Ukraine" who is not some failure, 1940s-50s smuggled out by the CIA, UPA member.

    BTW congratulations - 4 cases of coronovirus and 2 deaths for Ukraine (1 an Ukrainian in Italy)
    In other words the "3 cases" are another absurd fake statistic from the ukrop authorities - almost as bad as all those ludicrously fake BS "stats" that you put out.

    Have the authorities got confused and thought that a "great" mortality rate from the disease would be another peremoga to publicise to the world? LOL
  343. @AP
    Naw, you lost as usual. It looks like she was Russian and thought of herself as such, but her father's parents were Ukrainian (I think this was what Mr. Hack was saying, I admit I haven't followed this discussion). Someone whose parents are both from Kharkiv and who both have the surnames -enko is obviously of Ukrainian descent. Therefore, claiming that this man's daughter wasn't of partial Ukrainian descent is just dumb and only someone unfamiliar with Russia and Ukraine would make such a claim.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    That being said, other than for the purpose of proving your stubborn ignorance, this discussion serves no purpose so I won't continue it.

    Pathetic that you suddenly come in for Hack.

    In line with your propping of a relatively obscure (for much of history) historical figure, who modern day svidos suddenly discovered – someone who was hardly (if at all) mentioned in Subtelny’s 666 page book on Ukraine and erroneously suggesting that the Polish attempt to conquer Russia wasn’t repressive.

    No one in NW’s family is on record for saying they’re of Ukrainian background. NW’s family relations from generations back most likely didn’t see themselves as Ukrainian.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    Ruslana is more Russian than the claim of NW being of part Ukrainian background. In any event, I never denied that NW might’ve some familial roots to the territory now known as Ukraine.

    Big wow!

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
  344. @AP
    Naw, you lost as usual. It looks like she was Russian and thought of herself as such, but her father's parents were Ukrainian (I think this was what Mr. Hack was saying, I admit I haven't followed this discussion). Someone whose parents are both from Kharkiv and who both have the surnames -enko is obviously of Ukrainian descent. Therefore, claiming that this man's daughter wasn't of partial Ukrainian descent is just dumb and only someone unfamiliar with Russia and Ukraine would make such a claim.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    That being said, other than for the purpose of proving your stubborn ignorance, this discussion serves no purpose so I won't continue it.

    BTW, it’s admittedly (on your part) idiotic of yourself to make such matter of fact in tone observations (wrong ones at that), while acknowledging to not having read thru the whole exchange.

    Hack acknowledged my being correct in your prior disagreement that people of origin from the territory now known as Ukraine fought on the White side, with the language of that region of the Russian Empire being known and spoken within White ranks.

    So yeah, your svido babble (albeit comparatively more sugar coated and nuanced than the standard variant) has been demolished.

  345. Mickey “the Russian Demolisher” Averkov! 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-dcola-017&hsimp=yhs-017&hspart=dcola&p=iron+sheik+iran+number+one+russia+number+one#id=1&vid=49010d904af681ca4ff1f4ab0dfdcd17&action=click

    Sheik is a Persian Jew who was on the 1968 Iranian Olympic team. The guy you posted was Yugo born to Croat and Uke parents.

  346. @AP
    Naw, you lost as usual. It looks like she was Russian and thought of herself as such, but her father's parents were Ukrainian (I think this was what Mr. Hack was saying, I admit I haven't followed this discussion). Someone whose parents are both from Kharkiv and who both have the surnames -enko is obviously of Ukrainian descent. Therefore, claiming that this man's daughter wasn't of partial Ukrainian descent is just dumb and only someone unfamiliar with Russia and Ukraine would make such a claim.

    She would not be the only Russian of partial non-Russian descent.

    That being said, other than for the purpose of proving your stubborn ignorance, this discussion serves no purpose so I won't continue it.

    In other words…….she was Russian /Russian world lady- much like anybody from “Ukraine” who is not some failure, 1940s-50s smuggled out by the CIA, UPA member.

    BTW congratulations – 4 cases of coronovirus and 2 deaths for Ukraine (1 an Ukrainian in Italy)
    In other words the “3 cases” are another absurd fake statistic from the ukrop authorities – almost as bad as all those ludicrously fake BS “stats” that you put out.

    Have the authorities got confused and thought that a “great” mortality rate from the disease would be another peremoga to publicise to the world? LOL

  347. @Mr. Hack
    https://66.media.tumblr.com/9759b4431915db7307a968e1c3ae6f27/tumblr_pcpmm6cgij1rg89a6o1_1280.jpg

    Mickey "the Russian Demolisher" Averkov! :-)

    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-dcola-017&hsimp=yhs-017&hspart=dcola&p=iron+sheik+iran+number+one+russia+number+one#id=1&vid=49010d904af681ca4ff1f4ab0dfdcd17&action=click

    Sheik is a Persian Jew who was on the 1968 Iranian Olympic team. The guy you posted was Yugo born to Croat and Uke parents.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Another:

    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-dcola-017&hsimp=yhs-017&hspart=dcola&p=iron+sheik+iran+number+one+russia+number+one#id=13&vid=1c3a32cd00cf8778734989f4437b1008&action=view
    , @Mr. Hack
    It's quite obvious that the "Demolisher" identifies most closely with the Russian side of his split personality, therefore (according to your own logic) there's no way that he could possibly be of Ukrainian background. Unless you can provide a signature guaranteed statement to this effect, that either of his parents was Ukrainian, your fantasy and any arguments that you have about his Ukrainian identity have been thoroughly "demolished." No "cherry picking" can save you from this final decree and judgement. :-)
  348. @Mikhail
    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-dcola-017&hsimp=yhs-017&hspart=dcola&p=iron+sheik+iran+number+one+russia+number+one#id=1&vid=49010d904af681ca4ff1f4ab0dfdcd17&action=click

    Sheik is a Persian Jew who was on the 1968 Iranian Olympic team. The guy you posted was Yugo born to Croat and Uke parents.

  349. @Mikhail
    https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-dcola-017&hsimp=yhs-017&hspart=dcola&p=iron+sheik+iran+number+one+russia+number+one#id=1&vid=49010d904af681ca4ff1f4ab0dfdcd17&action=click

    Sheik is a Persian Jew who was on the 1968 Iranian Olympic team. The guy you posted was Yugo born to Croat and Uke parents.

    It’s quite obvious that the “Demolisher” identifies most closely with the Russian side of his split personality, therefore (according to your own logic) there’s no way that he could possibly be of Ukrainian background. Unless you can provide a signature guaranteed statement to this effect, that either of his parents was Ukrainian, your fantasy and any arguments that you have about his Ukrainian identity have been thoroughly “demolished.” No “cherry picking” can save you from this final decree and judgement. 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Humorous sarcasm works when there's some truth to it.

    Upon further review, he was all Hrvat according to Wiki:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Volkoff
  350. @Mr. Hack
    It's quite obvious that the "Demolisher" identifies most closely with the Russian side of his split personality, therefore (according to your own logic) there's no way that he could possibly be of Ukrainian background. Unless you can provide a signature guaranteed statement to this effect, that either of his parents was Ukrainian, your fantasy and any arguments that you have about his Ukrainian identity have been thoroughly "demolished." No "cherry picking" can save you from this final decree and judgement. :-)

    Humorous sarcasm works when there’s some truth to it.

    Upon further review, he was all Hrvat according to Wiki:

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

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    You're the one that seems to be spreading untruths (Volkoff is part Ukrainian) around here. Well, I give you credit for correcting yourself when you're wrong. :-)

    At the same time Mickey, you should know that you find yourself in the best of company. My dear mother also thought that Volkoff was Ukrainian! She thought that he might be one of her long lost relatives after seeing him on TV (a similar sounding last name). Of course he wasn't, she only liked to see various people as being Ukrainian, elevating them, I guess? :-) :-)
  351. @Mikhail
    Humorous sarcasm works when there's some truth to it.

    Upon further review, he was all Hrvat according to Wiki:

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

    You’re the one that seems to be spreading untruths (Volkoff is part Ukrainian) around here. Well, I give you credit for correcting yourself when you’re wrong. 🙂

    At the same time Mickey, you should know that you find yourself in the best of company. My dear mother also thought that Volkoff was Ukrainian! She thought that he might be one of her long lost relatives after seeing him on TV (a similar sounding last name). Of course he wasn’t, she only liked to see various people as being Ukrainian, elevating them, I guess? 🙂 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Yes, I correct myself when wrong which isn't often - like on the subject of Natalie Wood.
  352. @Mr. Hack
    You're the one that seems to be spreading untruths (Volkoff is part Ukrainian) around here. Well, I give you credit for correcting yourself when you're wrong. :-)

    At the same time Mickey, you should know that you find yourself in the best of company. My dear mother also thought that Volkoff was Ukrainian! She thought that he might be one of her long lost relatives after seeing him on TV (a similar sounding last name). Of course he wasn't, she only liked to see various people as being Ukrainian, elevating them, I guess? :-) :-)

    Yes, I correct myself when wrong which isn’t often – like on the subject of Natalie Wood.

  353. @AP

    One of my older brothers once hired a Georgian girl for his company (in STEM, so not some literary scholar), and he told me that rumor was around that on her commute from Västerås* to Stockholm she read actual novels!
     
    Amazing that we both independently and randomly mentioned this city in our posts at nearly the same time. What are the odds?

    I have been visiting Moscow for 20 years. The city has improved in almost all ways but one sad way it has gotten worse is that people rarely read novels on the metro anymore. It used to be commonplace. I read my first Russian-language book on the metro - Tatyana Tolstoy's Kys. Now everyone is on their smartphones.

    People can, and do, read novels on their smartphones nowadays.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS