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
Russiagate Grift Machine Up and Running
🔊 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

Took a few days. It was revving up yesterday. Now it’s in full gear and will now soon be making its way into mainstream discourse.

As I keep saying, Russiagaters are perhaps the most hardcore Americanophobes on this planet. They believe that a few Russian shitpoasters on Twitter intimately control the political behavior of 330 million Americans.

I can barely imagine a more self-degrading national victimization narrative.

But if half of Americans really insist upon it to some extent or another… who am I to argue. It’s ultimately rather flattering to us. Jews reading the Völkischer Beobachter, etc.

 

 
Hide 127 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. Anything to divert blame away from blacks. Russia, China, ANTIFA, Democrat party, “rioters are really white”, etc. The right are trying to direct away from the racial nature of this as much as the left are.

    As an outsider is seems strange to me how even right wing, Trump-supporting Americans are desperately trying to make excuses for blacks, but maybe I underestimate how integral the idea of “racial harmony” and the success of the “melting pot” is to American culture and identity?

  3. neutral says:

    I know that many will want to joke about this, but by now it should be clear that America is run by lunatics and mostly populated by lunatics. These people are becoming ever more unhinged, one can seriously argue that any action is possible for these people to try to continue their cognitive dissonance.

  4. AaronB says:

    As I keep saying, Russiagaters are perhaps the most hardcore Americanophobes on this planet. They believe that a few Russian shitpoasters on Twitter intimately control the political behavior of 330 million Americans.

    I can barely imagine a more self-degrading national victimization narrative.

    Ha ha ha….. 🙂

    It’s ultimately rather flattering to us

    Yup 🙂

  5. Ford thid improve Trump’s chances of election or destroy them? When is he selected as the Republican candidate? Will he make it? His base likes him doubling up.

  6. Ano4 says:

    I’m looking forward for the Protocols of the Elders of Kremlin to be published soon.

    Hell, I should write em myself.

    Could mix some Pelevin, Sorokin and Krylov into the narrative.

    Would blow some American normies ‘ minds.

    Would be a bestseller.

    I would be rich and charge some serious bucks giving shitty interviews on CNN about the occult practices of the Ozero Cooperative Cult (OCC for short).

    But on a second thought, better not.

    Americans are so deluded nowadays, they might believe that stuff and nuke Moscow…

    😁

    • Replies: @another anon
  7. blatnoi says:

    This is good, no? If it was a simple background narrative which not many people bought, but just served as a tool to put pressure on Russia to get better terms on deals, then it would be a good tactic. But while this is believed by more people and is a more loony narrative because they can get away with it than the careful escalation, is going to be more dangerous, ultimately it’s more dangerous to the country that creates the narrative because they are living in fantasy land and are going to make lots of unforced errors and will not think about their opponent in rational terms.

    For Russia it would be some short-term pain from since the US is powerful and it can lash out, but ultimately more long-term gain. As long as they continue to keep cool on the diplomatic front and press advantage whenever they can when the US makes a geopolitical blunder due to the whole insanity thing.

  8. @Ano4

    I’m looking forward for the Protocols of the Elders of Kremlin to be published soon.

    Had been done, back in 18th century.

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

    http://www.antipas.org/commentaries/articles/will_of_peter_the_great.html

    • Replies: @Ano4
  9. JSQ says:

    Any time there is a demonstration anywhere in Eastern Europe against Putin–or anybody associated with Putin–the explanation invariably provided by many of the commenters here is that it was funded/organized by the CIA.

    Maybe Russians and Americans aren’t so different after all…

  10. Ano4 says:
    @another anon

    Very interesting, din’t know about it.

    Thanks.

    It is quite amusing to contemplate knowing that tzar Peter was a fanatic westernizer who utterly thrashed traditional Russian orthodox culture.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  11. utu says:

    What do we have here? A clear case of Schadenfreude and ‘The lady doth protest too much, methinks’. Is there a Latin saying that who rejoices must be a culprit akin to ‘is fecit cui prodest’? How much credit can Russians take? Really nothing? What about the 0.01% that broke the camel back? I am groping for something that Russians could be proud of.

  12. songbird says:
    @neutral

    by now it should be clear that America is run by lunatics and mostly populated by lunatics.

    Lunatics are dynamic and passionate. Americans, even American elites, are primarily passive and apathetic.

  13. “The FBI will be hunting all that down.”

    I wonder if “all that” includes those sinister, shadowy figures bailing all the evildoers out of jail. Sinister, shadowy figures like … Seth Rogan and Steve Carrell and, uh, Joe Biden’s campaign staff.

    Or the sinister, shadowy figures giving professional tips to rioters, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

  14. jsinton says:

    They had to come up with something to replace the COVID narrative now that it looks like a CCP psyops.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/05/29/german-official-leaks-report-denouncing-corona-as-global-false-alarm/

    Russia is always the go-to boogey man these days.

  15. Bilbo says:

    There’s some great content coming out of these riots. Here’s footage of a guy who got his head kicked in yesterday in Portland. The kicker got a good clean kick in at his head, like he was kicking a penalty shot in soccer:

    • Replies: @Bilbo
    , @orionyx
  16. Bilbo says:
    @Bilbo

    Here’s footage of an attempted looter who got dragged under a freight truck:

  17. @JSQ

    US government and certain associated (((individuals))) spent billions of dollars organizing “pro-democracy revolutions” in Eastern Europe . Former US ambassador to Russia wrote several books about it. You should probably google it, and educate yourself.

    I kinda wish Russia was doing the same – it’s relatively low-cost political arson, that can spark a great fire. Every country has some disaffected domestic constituency that can serve as fuel for the fire. But they need someone to organize and direct them. In the US antifa and other direct action groups perform this role, in the Ukraine US agents created a network of “pro-democracy NGOs” and opposition media from scratch.

  18. AP says:

    The Poles have now been offended:

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    , @whahae
  19. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    Proof of Russian involvement.

  20. Alfa158 says:

    How many Russians are looking at this and wondering how the Soviet Union could possibly have lost the Cold War to a country whose cultural and “intellectual” leadership is as stupid, delusional and deranged as this? No system can survive long once it becomes psychotic and disconnects from reality in order to live in its own fantasy world. The Soviet system must have been just as dysfunctional for the US to have won.

  21. whahae says:
    @AP

    The Bourbons are also offended.

    As the heir of #LouisXVI, and attached to the defense of his memory, I do hope that the damage will be repaired and that the statue will be restored. I already thank the Authorities for the measures they will take for that. #Louisville #Louisvilleprotests #Kentucky https://t.co/UHzUrCuSnD— Louis de Bourbon, Duc d’Anjou (@louisducdanjou) May 30, 2020

  22. Just wait till the USA puts ICBM’s in Poland! Then the heat will be fully turned up on the Russians. Maybe Russia can launch first and just put down the sick dog which is the United States.

  23. @Ano4

    tzar Peter was a fanatic westernizer

    The society he was crafting was nothing at all like anything that existed (or could be imagined) in any Western country.

    Communists called him “the first bolshevik”, and that is a lot closer to the mark.

    • Replies: @melanf
    , @Ano4
  24. @Alfa158

    The Soviet Union didn’t “lose” the Cold War. You are making two errors:

    a) There was no “Cold War”, not really. USA/USSR relations were significantly more amicable and constructive than USA/Russia relations today.

    b) The USSR didn’t “lose”, it imploded due to the inextricable conflict between traditional morality and communist balderdash. (Basically, the leadership tried to sit on two chairs at once: uphold patriotism and traditional civic values and proclaim the inerrancy of ‘scientific communism’, even though the latter logically leads to a globohomo one world government.)

    The spark that brought it all down was fundamentalist Islam; the Islamic Soviet republics descended into civil war (well, actually jihad), and the USSR leadership had no mental or legal framework to fix it.

  25. neutral says:
    @Alfa158

    Lets imagine that the USSR “won” the cold war, it would have much bigger racial problems than Russia has now. It would consist of a lot more non whites and would have similar problems that the USA is having now.

    • Replies: @orionyx
  26. melanf says:
    @anonymous coward

    Communists called him (Peter The Great) “the first bolshevik”,

    The Communists of course did not call him “the first bolshevik” and could not call him “the first bolshevik”. For the Communists, Peter was an oppressor of the peasants and workers who brutally suppressed popular uprisings.
    Peter was called “the first Bolshevik” by the poet Maximilian Voloshin (who was not a Communist)

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Thanks: Dieter Kief
    • Replies: @AP
  27. I can barely imagine a more self-degrading national victimization narrative.

    The trope of 30,000 Latvians being responsible for 80 years of policy failure in a supposedly high IQ country of +100 million comes close.

  28. @neutral

    I know that many will want to joke about this, but by now it should be clear that America is run by lunatics and mostly populated by lunatics. These people are becoming ever more unhinged, one can seriously argue that any action is possible for these people to try to continue their cognitive dissonance.

    In an election year both the Russian and Chinese narratives are potentially profitable at the ballot.

  29. 128 says:

    How many SS members in WW2 were former Commies? It may yet be possible to get the white antifa members to have a change of political allegiance, I remember a Tom Clancy novel with a female nazi antagonist who used to be a Red Army Faction member.

    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
  30. Ano4 says:
    @anonymous coward

    He copied all he could from Holland, Germany and England.

    He had westerners as closest advisers and even preferred sleeping with Western women (a German and a Baltic) while he sent his Russian wife to a monastery and then executed their son.

    Communists called him “the first bolshevik”, and that is a lot closer to the mark.

    More like first Trotskyist.

    BTW, Bolsheviks were also westernizers with a deep seated hatred towards what was left of traditional Russian culture and Russian Orthodox faith.

    So yes they were of the same psychological lineage with tzar Peter.

    • Replies: @melanf
  31. melanf says:
    @Ano4

    He copied all he could from Holland, Germany and England.

    This is more of a retelling of legends

    He had westerners as closest advisers and even preferred sleeping with Western women (a German and a Baltic)

    Martha Skavronskaya (Peter’s wife) was of Belarusian origin. In choosing mistresses Peter was a staunch internationalist,

    More like first Trotskyist

    Then perhaps as Trotskyists should be considered Kemal Attatatürk, Henry VIII, Joseph II, politicians of the Meiji restoration, etc.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    , @AP
  32. @melanf

    As if Belarusians (lol) existed in the eighteenth century

    • Replies: @melanf
    , @AP
  33. melanf says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    As if Belarusians (lol) existed in the eighteenth century

    The fair point. But if I write “West Russian origin”, many people will not understand me

  34. Slimer says:
    @Europe Europa

    The Chinese are literally paying off western news outlets to not run negative stories about their people, surpassing the west in research and development, and even recruiting girls from Eastern Europe to work as escorts and models for their elites, and all you idiots can do is sit around obsessing about blacks.

    We know that Jews are the eternal boogeyman, but you can see white influence being upended right before your eyes in this case. Right here, right now, no ifs or buts about it.

    It just goes to show that whites are unconcerned with lost hegemony, or even being subordinate to other races. Their top priority is picking on blacks.

  35. AP says:
    @melanf

    Peter was called “the first Bolshevik” by the poet Maximilian Voloshin (who was not a Communist)

    And IIRC he was referred to as something like that by Spengler.

    • Replies: @melanf
  36. @Alfa158

    The Soviet system must have been just as dysfunctional for the US to have won.

  37. AP says:
    @melanf

    Martha Skavronskaya (Peter’s wife) was of Belarusian origin.

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

    Catherine I (Russian: Екатери́на I Алексе́евна, tr. Yekaterina I Alekseyevna; born Polish: Marta Helena Skowrońska, later known as Marta Samuilovna Skavronskaya

    The life of Catherine I was said by Voltaire to be nearly as extraordinary as that of Peter the Great himself. There are no documents that confirm her origins. Said to have been born on 15 April 1684 (o.s. 5 April),[1] she was originally named Marta Helena Skowrońska. Marta was the daughter of Samuel Skowroński (later spelt Samuil Skavronsky), a Roman Catholic peasant from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth born to Minsker parents, who in 1680 married Dorothea Hahn at Jakobstadt. Her mother is named in at least one source as Elizabeth Moritz, the daughter of a Baltic German woman and there is debate as to whether Moritz’s father was a Swedish officer. It is likely that two stories were conflated, and Swedish sources suggest that the Elizabeth Moritz story is probably incorrect. Some biographies state that Marta’s father was a gravedigger and handyman, while others speculate that he was a runaway landless serf.

    Marta’s parents died of the plague around 1689, leaving five children. According to one of the popular versions, at the age of three Marta was taken by an aunt and sent to Marienburg (the present-day Alūksne in Latvia, near the border with Estonia and Russia) where she was raised by Johann Ernst Glück, a Lutheran pastor and educator who was the first to translate the Bible into Latvian.

    :::::::::::

    So Russian svidomism claims she is a “West Russian.” Her being half-Jewish is interesting.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @melanf
  38. AP says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    They would have been Rusyns or Lytvyns, East Slavic speaking people who were not Muscovites/Great Russians. Many if not most were Greek Catholics, with a Roman Catholic Polish-speaking Rusyn elite. To present these people as “West Russians” is a bit tendentious.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    , @Belarusian Dude
  39. melanf says:
    @AP

    Well, the poet Nikolai Klyuyev on the contrary believed that the Bolsheviks were restoring pre-Petrine Russia destroyed by the bad Peter. Poets (and visionaries like Spengler) are such people that they tend to say a lot of stupid things

    • LOL: Haruto Rat
    • Troll: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
  40. melanf says:
    @AP

    Martha Skavronskaya (Peter’s wife) was of Belarusian origin.

    https://en.wikipedia…

    Wikipedia is a dump. Here (in Russian)
    https://www.litmir.me/br/?b=177905&p=2
    are all the sources about its origin-if you want to explore them. More or less confidently, we can say that Martha’s ancestors were from the territory of modern Belarus (that is, in the 17th-18th century the Western Russian lands under the yoke of Poland), that is, at least genetically, she was not a Baltic.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  41. @Slimer

    The Chinese aren’t burning up American cities at the moment and kicking in the faces of people they are looting.

    Its an unique part of your mental architecture that you can’t get that Europeans(and Asians for that matter) can appreciate a rivalry, but not criminality.

    • Replies: @Slimer
  42. @Europe Europa

    As an outsider is seems strange to me how even right wing, Trump-supporting Americans are desperately trying to make excuses for blacks, but maybe I underestimate how integral the idea of “racial harmony” and the success of the “melting pot” is to American culture and identity?

    It’s a mental illness similar to what used to be known as Battered Wife Syndrome or Battered Person Syndrome. Some might even liken it to Stockholm Syndrom, though the pathologies argue stronger for comparison to BWS.

  43. neutral says:
    @Slimer

    but you can see white influence being upended right before your eyes in this case.

    The jews have been upending white influence for a very long time. I don’t know of any Chinese people who pushed for mass non white immigration, demonized white people, worshiping blacks, push anti white propaganda in the mass media/entertainment – I do however know about a lot of jews who did do these things.

    • Agree: Kent Nationalist
  44. Ano4 says:
    @melanf

    Poets (and visionaries like Spengler) are such people that they tend to say a lot of stupid things

    Are you a poet and visionary?

    Cause you’re clearly writing some pretty stupid stuff.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  45. Ano4 says:
    @melanf

    that is, at least genetically, she was not a Baltic.

    Please define the difference between Baltic and North Western Slavs ‘ genetics…

    I am waiting for a list of SNPs found exclusively in the Balts or conversely only in the Slavs.

    Or maybe you know about mitochondrial haplogroups found only in Baltic women and absent from Slavic ladies?

    What about Y haplogroups?

    BTW did you hear about Balto-Slavic linguistic connection?

    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
    , @melanf
  46. Ano4 says:
    @AP

    Agree for the most part.

    Many if not most were Greek Catholics, with a Roman Catholic Polish-speaking Rusyn elite.

    Not sure about the proportion of the Uniat and Catholic among the peasantry and petty szlachta.

    Might have been majority Orthodox.

    At least my ancestors stayed staunch Orthodox all the way up to XXth century.

    They identified as Polish Orthodox, but were from former Greater Lithuania, modern day Belarus.

    They moved to Malorossia at the end of XVIII/ beginning of XIX century.

    • Replies: @AP
  47. orionyx says:
    @Bilbo

    Don’t all those vicious Blacks doing all that stuff make you just hate Blacks?
    Especially Blacks in whiteface.

  48. orionyx says:
    @neutral

    Lots of non-whites, maybe.
    Blacks, no.
    And the black moiety of the American population is precisely the problem for America – as those European countries so eagerly importing them are to find out in a generation or less. But they’re no more likely to believe their own eyes than most Americans are.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  49. @Ano4

    He’s also a lover

    • LOL: Ano4
  50. @128

    How many SS members in WW2 were former Commies?

    Probably zero due to background checks. Back when Stalin was running things you would have been a complete idiot to trust a “former” communist so they were either interned or put to potato peeling duty.

    It may yet be possible to get the white antifa members to have a change of political allegiance, I remember a Tom Clancy novel with a female nazi antagonist who used to be a Red Army Faction member.

    This is a dumb American meme. “Communists are authoritarian, Nazis are authoritarian but American patriots and liberals love FREEDOM and therefore they are the polar opposite of BOTH communists and fascists.”

    The more sophisticated propaganda version of the meme is to claim that in the communist bloc there was no denazification and that fascists simply switched sides to communism. It’s the reverse of the truth – millions of elite Germans were kicked out of Eastern Europe and there were enormous purges of collaborators whereas in Western Europe a couple of people got hanged, some more were shamed and a lot just switched from exalting blondes to exalting blacks, switched from scapegoating

    It’s in the West where elites were just allowed to switch and that’s why we now have the culture of exalting black phenotypes instead of blondes, scapegoating (non-elite) instead of Jews, praising American war crimes as long as it’s a black/female/homo/etc in charge. A lot of the “antifascists” that we have now could probably easily switch to some racist ideology because they’re really not communists at all, just people signaling that they’re on the side of whoever they perceive to be the big winner.

    I’m not a fan of communists but the old school communists were determined who were willing to stick to their beliefs even when they were not advantageous. They were not just signalers but a cult with a prophetic belief structure about how the whole of society is is going to collapse in revolution and get rebuilt from the ruins according to a totally new recipe. In many countries they were pretty much the only group that actually violently resisted in Nazi-occupied territories. I very much doubt the social justice warriors that we now have would actually do anything at all to resist Hitler if it actually meant a real risk of meeting the firing squad.

  51. @Ano4

    I am waiting for a list of SNPs found exclusively in the Balts or conversely only in the Slavs.

    Or maybe you know about mitochondrial haplogroups found only in Baltic women and absent from Slavic ladies?

    What about Y haplogroups?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N-M231

    Far East Asian origin, very common in Finnic ethnic groups, very low (0-2 %) in most Slavic ethnic groups with the exception of Russians.

    It fits perfectly with the old theory of Baltic origins as a hybrid of Finnic and Indo-European people. Some interaction with Finno-Ugric people separated them from the original proto-Balto-Slavs and they diverged linguistically, with a lot of Finnic loanwords, and gave them a bunch of genes that Slavic branch mostly missed (and Russians later picked up by absorbing Finnic and Baltic people).

    • Replies: @Ano4
  52. melanf says:
    @Ano4

    lease define the difference between Baltic and lease define the difference between Baltic and North Western Slavs ‘ genetics… ‘ genetics…

    “North Western Slavs” – wtf?

    but

    • Replies: @Ano4
  53. @Jaakko Raipala

    The more sophisticated propaganda version of the meme is to claim that in the communist bloc there was no denazification and that fascists simply switched sides to communism. It’s the reverse of the truth – millions of elite Germans were kicked out of Eastern Europe and there were enormous purges of collaborators whereas in Western Europe a couple of people got hanged, some more were shamed and a lot just switched from exalting blondes to exalting blacks, switched from scapegoating

    I’m sure all the Jews Stalin put in charge of the Eastern Bloc countries after WWII couldn’t wait to employ Nazi collaborators.

  54. AP says:
    @Jaakko Raipala

    How many SS members in WW2 were former Commies?

    Probably zero due to background checks

    Those weren’t SS members, but very many of the concentration camp guards were Soviet POWs.

    And of course Soviet turncoats such as Vlasov and Bunyachenko (who had been actively on the Red side during the Civil war) were employed by the Nazis.

  55. Ano4 says:
    @Jaakko Raipala

    Some interaction with Finno-Ugric people separated them from the original proto-Balto-Slavs and they diverged linguistically, with a lot of Finnic loanwords, and gave them a bunch of genes that Slavic branch mostly missed (and Russians later picked up by absorbing Finnic and Baltic people).

    So you confirmed that it is nowadays impossible to separate Baltic populations from North Western Slav/Batic (Wendish) populations.

    The Finno-Ugro-Uralic N haplogroup intrusion is correlated with Akozino-Ananino cultural phenomenon spread at the latest and Seima Turbino cultural phenomenon at the earliest.

    In fact, nobody really knows when Finns and proto Balto-Slavs started intermixing in the modern Baltic states and the modern north western Russian territory.

    It might have happened as early as Corded Ware Culture times.

    https://indo-european.eu/2019/12/intense-but-irregular-nwie-and-indo-iranian-contacts-show-uralic-disintegrated-in-the-west/

    More precisely during its derived Battle Axe culture at the end of the Bronze Age.

    Or it might have happened after the Unetice culture demise.

    This would fit nicely with the divergence between Baltic and Slavonic dated back to around 1400 before present.

    In any case, it was a long time ago.

    You really think that it is still possible to see clear cut genetic differences between Baltic and Slavic populations today?

    And before you answer, I know that there was a haplogroup N dominant bottleneck event in Finland.

    But my discussion with

    melanf

    was not about Finnish Y haplogroups, but about Balto-Slavic ones.

    As they say in Odessa: “these are two big differences “.

    And you might already know that the Rurikid haplogroup Y was mainly also N.

    🙂

    • Replies: @Ano4
  56. Ano4 says:
    @Ano4

    around 1400 before present

    I should have written before AD.

    My mistake.

  57. Enough doom and gloom.
    Something off topic and completelly different.
    I stumbled upon this just recently.

    http://10pesenrosatom.ru/

    Sponsored by Rosatom, (“10песенатомныхгородов” in original) features 10 popular soviet/russian songs performed by, mostly amateur performers, ordinary people aged 4 through 94, with some Russian music stars sprinkled here and there.

    Performers come from “atom” cities and towns from all over Russia – cities with a nuclear power plant nearby (hence the title). Authored by Timur Vedernikov, this work is a true masterpiece.
    If you ask me, it shows the true face of Russia, a beautifull country with incredibly talented people.

    Here are some of the songs.



    Make sure you watch all 10 pieces – every single one is a masterpiece.
    The best part are the perfomer’s faces – I see only “shiny happy people”.
    It’s a pity that that the video clips don’t have more than 500k views each on average.
    Why Russians here don’t bother to show this more to the world is beyond me.
    I hope this will help change it just a little.
    Enjoy.

    • Replies: @inertial
    , @Belarusian Dude
  58. AP says:
    @Ano4

    Not sure about the proportion of the Uniat and Catholic among the peasantry and petty szlachta.

    IIRC it was roughly 50/50 until the Russians shut down the Greek Catholic Church following an anti-Russian insurrection. A lot of the peasants may not have known the difference, it was not some sort of a “national Church” as was the case later in Galicia.

    At least my ancestors stayed staunch Orthodox all the way up to XXth century.

    They identified as Polish Orthodox, but were from former Greater Lithuania, modern day Belarus.

    They moved to Malorossia at the end of XVIII/ beginning of XIX century.

    Heh. One of my ancestral families were also from Belarus. The famous ones who stayed in Minsk became Catholic and Polonized. Our branch were Greek Catholics who moved to Galicia and mixed with the local Rusyn gentry. They were Polish speaking and ideologically Russophiles from the early until the late until the late 19th century. Ironically some of them switched to speaking an East Slavic language only when they became Ukrainian nationalists; despite their Russophile ideology the elders spoke Polish and German (there were memoirs about how the parents were scandalized to hear their children speak the peasant language).

  59. Ano4 says:

    parents were scandalized to hear their children speak the peasant language

    The mother of my grandfather spoke Polish, Russian and Ukrainian.

    My grandfather spoke both Russian and Ukrainian perfectly and understood some Polish.

    His family members who live in modern Ukraine speak Russian and Ukrainian and self-identify as Ukrainian.

    Those who live in the Russian federation self-identify as Russians and speak only Russian.

    Interestingly, my grandfather born before the revolution was identified as Russian in his birth certificate, but his younger brother born after the Revolution was identified as Ukrainian by the Soviet authorities.

    The family lived in Eastern Ukraine at the time, near Donetsk.

    After the Revolution some of them moved to Russia for studies and work and stayed there.

    Some of the Ukrainian branch moved to Western Ukraine during the Civil War. One of the cousins there joined the Ukrainian nationalists fighting Soviet Army after 1945.

    Among those who went living in Russia, all male members served in the Red Army during the World War II.

    For me they all one family, national and political divisions not withstanding.

    This is the way I see Eastern Slavs in general: divided by history, but a very closely related population.

    If it was not for Soviet Revolution, they would probably be one nation today with regional differences similar to the difference between a Frenchman from Pas de Calais and a Frenchman from Marseilles.

    And they would probably be some 400 million of them occupying a vast territory between Brest Litovsk and Vladivostok.

    Instead of that, they are now less than 200 million people, divided by boundaries, drifting apart and even killing each other in Eastern Ukraine.

    This is a total disgrace…

    • Replies: @AP
  60. @JSQ

    That’s because they were, and they can almost always be tracked back to actual organizations like IRI or NED. But Russia does not operate a huge international fake “civil society” NGO network like the USA does. Instead, the russiagate conspiracy alleges that the American population was brainwashed by a handful of low quality boomer-tier facebook memes that were posted from a Russian IP.

  61. AP says:
    @Ano4

    One of my Galician grandparents was from a Russophile family who were Russophiles until the bitter end. An aunt and uncle from this family in Lviv poisoned themselves in 1939, rather than live under the anti-Russian Soviets. From this family, until the Revolution, every generation had people moving to Russia, so I have distant Russian cousins, one of whom was famous in the arts (I won’t identify them to avoid doxxing myself and identifying relatives). The current generation in Ukraine are almost all Ukrainian patriots.

    An interesting thing to note: Russian nationalists claim, and there is some truth to this, that the Ukrainian national idea in Galicia was an Austrian creation because the Austrians were pushing it. What they often do not realize is that Russophilia was also and to no less of an extent pushed by the Hapsburgs. The “default” position in Galicia had been loyalty to the PLC. So for example, during anti-Russian insurrections, Rusyns from Galicia would voluntarily cross the border and fight alongside their Polish and Rusyn brothers against the Muscovites. This could have been dangerous when the Galician Rusyns wavered about helping Napoleon. Austria and Russia were allied and the Hapsburgs encouraged Russophilia and an anti-Polish orientation in order to break up the ties between the the two Slavic peoples living in Galicia. Only after Austria and Russia became rivals did the Austrian wake up to the danger of having a “Russian” population at the Russian border and change to supporting a Ukrainian national idea, which became dominant by the time of World War I. But then after the war, Poland supported the Russophiles because they were the weaker party, in order to pursue a divide and conquer approach towards their East Slavic subjects. It’s a convoluted history.

    This is the way I see Eastern Slavs in general: divided by history, but a very closely related population.

    It’s a problem with nationalism that also caused mass bloodshed between European
    peoples who weren’t so closely related.

    If it was not for Soviet Revolution, they would probably be one nation today with regional differences similar to the difference between a Frenchman from Pas de Calais and a Frenchman from Marseilles.

    By that time it was much too late. Most Ukrainians voting for Ukrainian parties in 1917 (prior to the Soviet Revolution) did not occur out of the blue. Also it was not realistic, as Little Russians simply were not Great Russians. Trying to turn them into such and cracking down on the Little Russians was an error that led to a fatal backlash. The realistic thing to do would have been to support an identity of Little Russians and Great Russians analogous to Cantonese Chinese and Mandarin Chinese. Instead, spooked by the Polish rebellions, the Russian authorities persecuted the Little Russians, banned their language, banished their scholars. Maybe, had Russia asked for and annexed Galicia rather than Warsaw after the Napoleonic Wars, it would have worked out anyways. But the rough approach had the opposite effect that was effectively used by the Austrians. Galicia provided a place of exile for bitter ex-Little Russians and a fairly large population where their dreams could come true on a mass scale and could be refined and exported back to the motherland.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    , @Mikhail
  62. inertial says:
    @Simpleguest

    Second that. A few months ago Youtube suggested me one of these videos and I ended up watching all 20. But note that, aside from 1 or 2 traditional folk songs, all of their songs are from the Soviet era. There is nothing newer than the 1980s. Think of this for a moment – what does it say about the culture?

  63. Ano4 says:
    @AP

    I think you offer an interesting perspective.

    Thanks.

    • Thanks: AP
  64. Mikhail says: • Website

    Awhile back at these threads, I noted Mandarin and Cantonese, relative to Russian and Ukrainian, in reply to the suggestion that separate languages by default make for separate nations.

    A Chinese friend had noted to me, there’s a standardized Chinese, explaining why China isn’t listed as an officially bilingual country:

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

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

    https://www.uottawa.ca/clmc/55-bilingual-countries-world

    At issue are countries recognizing some regional languages, short of recognizing them for full nationwide use.

    https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/most-multilingual-countries-in-the-world.html

  65. Mikhail says:
    @AP

    By that time it was much too late. Most Ukrainians voting for Ukrainian parties in 1917 (prior to the Soviet Revolution) did not occur out of the blue. Also it was not realistic, as Little Russians simply were not Great Russians. Trying to turn them into such and cracking down on the Little Russians was an error that led to a fatal backlash. The realistic thing to do would have been to support an identity of Little Russians and Great Russians analogous to Cantonese Chinese and Mandarin Chinese. Instead, spooked by the Polish rebellions, the Russian authorities persecuted the Little Russians, banned their language, banished their scholars. Maybe, had Russia asked for and annexed Galicia rather than Warsaw after the Napoleonic Wars, it would have worked out anyways. But the rough approach had the opposite effect that was effectively used by the Austrians. Galicia provided a place of exile for bitter ex-Little Russians and a fairly large population where their dreams could come true on a mass scale and could be refined and exported back to the motherland.

    The pre-Soviet Russian census openly noted a different non-Great Russian characterization and language:

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

    In the late 1870s, there were Russian Empire restrictions put on Little Russian language material coming from Austria-Hungary. A pro-Russian element in a Russian Empire based Little Russian organization had complained to the authorities about the aforementioned anti-Russian content that led to the restrictive measure which (according to at least one source) had ended by 1905.

    During the Russian Civil War, Denikin advocated Little Russian usage at a regional level.

    BTW, the Russians weren’t spooked by the Polish rebellions relative to Little Russia (modern day Ukraine). Poles joined Napoleon in large numbers unlike the Little Russians who by and large were pro-Russian. The Habsburgites were if anything spooked, by the friendly reception Russian forces received (en route to Hungary) from Little Russians in the then Austrian Empire. (Russia made the mistake of assisting the Habsbugites in putting down the Hungarian rebellion.)

    • Replies: @AP
  66. melanf says:
    @Ano4

    What do the Wends have to do with Martha Skavronsky?

    • Replies: @Ano4
  67. If Russians weren’t cucks they’d capitalize upon this business by falsifying proofs not sufficient to get the grift machine going harder, but not sufficient proofs to actually make anything conclusive possible to be said thus further dividing American society and plunging it further into chaos as rhetoric changes to sophistry. Alas Russians are in fact cucks.

  68. @Simpleguest

    This one has a black guy in it. It is in fact doom and gloom.

    • Replies: @Simpleguest
  69. @AP

    While I don’t fundamentally disagree with your points throughout this threads of proto Ukrainians and proto Belarusians being already a people distinct from Russians rather than just geographic identities like Muscovites and Novgorodians, Lytvyn is a modernist term of pure LARP with no place in history and sane historiography and is frankly just as insulting as saying Belarusians are just confused Russians.

    • Replies: @AP
  70. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    The pre-Soviet Russian census openly noted a different non-Great Russian characterization and language:

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

    Yes, it did.

    In the late 1870s, there were Russian Empire restrictions put on Little Russian language material coming from Austria-Hungary.

    It also banned publication within Russia and scuttled the work of Little Russian scholars within the Russian Empire. Ironically many of these had been loyal to the Tsar and to Russia. They disliked Poles and Jews and were proud Little Russians who worked hard to standardize the Little Russian language. This work was essentially shut down and many of them were forced into exile in Siberia (not as prisoners, as they committed no crimes, but were given academic posts and not allowed to work on Little Russian topics. Some continued to be loyal to Russia and even snitched on their colleagues, but many of them became anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalists and found a welcome home in Austria to continue their work.

    BTW, the Russians weren’t spooked by the Polish rebellions relative to Little Russia (modern day Ukraine).

    The crackdown occurred after the rebellion of 1863, of course. The Polish rebels made overtures to Ukrainians (their proclamation: “‘Ruskyi narode!”) but had a minimal response from the Little Russian activists. However it was enough to scare the Russian authorities to implement (Great) Russification. Actually there was a conflict within the Russian government about how to deal with the Little Russians. Some Russian officials such as the Minister of Education who had published Little Russian textbooks viewed them as allies and patriots, but others were suspicious and overruled the ones who had been friendly to the Little Russians. They argued that the Little Russians would inevitably rebel like Poles did, so better to snuff out the movement and thoroughly assimilate the people. This idea was supported by some local Little Russians who had conflicts with their colleagues.

    So in 1863 there was the secret decree from the Minister of Internal Affairs that banned publication of Little Russian educational and religious literature (while permitting certain fiction). In 1876 almost all literature plus public speech (i.e. church sermons, theater, even concerts with Little Russian songs) were banned, as was the importation of Little Russian materials from abroad. Literature and theater were reinstated in 1881.

    According to Russian historian George Vernadsky, ““Under the influence of the reckless orders of the Russian government, which constrained the development of the Ukrainian language and culture within Russia, the center of the Ukrainian movement after 1876 moved to Western Ukraine, which was then part of Austria-Hungary … If not for the Ems decree of 1876, then there would be no need for Ukrainians to create the Austrian “irridentia” and the focus of the Ukrainian cultural movement would be Kiev, not Lviv. ”

    Poles joined Napoleon in large numbers unlike the Little Russians who by and large were pro-Russian.

    For the most part, Napoleon didn’t go through Ukraine or even near it. However, Rusyns from Galicia, before they became Russophiles, were sending support to the Poles in 1831.

    As for Napoleon’s war, Encyclopedia of Ukraine notes:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CN%5CA%5CNapoleonBonaparte.htm

    [MORE]

    Because Napoleon’s 1812 invasion of Russia was directed at the conquest of Moscow, western Volhynia was the only Ukrainian region occupied by his Grande Armée. There Napoleon’s Austrian, Saxon, and Polish allies engaged the Russian Third Army commanded by A. Tormasov. During the Napoleonic invasion Ukraine supplied to the Russian military much of its grain, fodder, and horses, and 22 Ukrainian Cossack cavalry regiments and a huge Ukrainian levy en masse (nearly 75,000 men) fought in the Russian ranks (see Ukrainian regiments in 1812). The Ukrainian gentry, however, organized the levy reluctantly. At their assemblies in Chernihiv and Poltava they resolved to lower the number of recruits from 4 to 1 per 100 inhabitants, and they unwillingly donated money to Russia’s military cause. Other Ukrainian notables (eg, Archbishop Varlaam Shyshatsky) even openly supported Napoleon’s invasion and were later punished as a result. During the ill-fated winter retreat of Napoleon’s army, attempts to penetrate from Belarus into the gubernias of Left-Bank Ukraine were effectively thwarted by Ukrainian forces. The Ukrainian gentry became alarmed at Napoleon’s Polish plans and in the end remained loyal to Russia. Napoleon’s interest in Ukraine (which prompted the commissioning of Charles-Louis Lesur’s 1813 history of the Cossacks) and plans for a second invasion of Russia were laid to rest after the rout of his army by Russia, Prussia, Austria, and Britain in 1813–15 and his forced abdication and exile.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  71. AP says:
    @Belarusian Dude

    Lytvyn is a modernist term of pure LARP with no place in history and sane historiography.

    Ru-wiki disagrees:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%8B

  72. @Europe Europa

    Alot of the rioters are white, though.

    Watch some streams. In Boston, Minneapolis, NYC, DC, >50% were white. In blackety areas there are more blacks.

    Obviously i don’t have any data to back it up. But from observation whites are causing alot of damage.

    • Replies: @Znzn
  73. @Slimer

    It’s pretty obvious that China will overtake the USA.

    However I don’t see exactly what this has to do with the black problem.

    The USA has many, many problems. Caused by many, many people.

    • Replies: @Jatt Arya
  74. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    It also banned publication within Russia and scuttled the work of Little Russian scholars within the Russian Empire. Ironically many of these had been loyal to the Tsar and to Russia.

    Like who? Subtelny and other sources specifically name the pro-Russian Little Russian, who complained to the authorities about anti-Russian material coming from Austria-Hungary in the Little Russian language. No mention of that Little Russian getting persecuted.

    The crackdown occurred after the rebellion of 1863, of course. The Polish rebels made overtures to Ukrainians (their proclamation: “‘Ruskyi narode!”) but had a minimal response from the Little Russian activists. However it was enough to scare the Russian authorities to implement (Great) Russification. Actually there was a conflict within the Russian government about how to deal with the Little Russians. Some Russian officials such as the Minister of Education who had published Little Russian textbooks viewed them as allies and patriots, but others were suspicious and overruled the ones who had been friendly to the Little Russians. They argued that the Little Russians would inevitably rebel like Poles did, so better to snuff out the movement and thoroughly assimilate the people. This idea was supported by some local Little Russians who had conflicts with their colleagues.

    Little Russians showed little support for the Polish uprising in the early 1830s. An 1848 Czech organized Slav Congress in Prague saw bitter division between the Poles and Ukrainians. (Subtelny page 248 in his Ukraine A History.) Subtelny characterizes the number of Ukrainians supporting the 1863 Polish insurrection as minimal. Subtelny also notes bitter fights between Poles and Ukrainians at Lviv University in the late 1890s and early 1900s, as well as efforts to Polonize that and other institutions.

    The 1905 Russian Empire census result suggest that the restrictions on the Little Russian language weren’t so significant.

    It’s not a great surprise that the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse came under the command of the Russian Whites, while being treated as a foreign force in that alliance, which included (among Galician Ukrainian circles) open talk of uniting with Russia after the hypothetical defeat of the Reds.

    Aspects like this are downplayed on account of sovok and svido influences. In more present times, it became fashionable in svido circles to pretty much equate Russian with Communist, as well as well as speaking negatively of the Russian Whites – something exhibited in Bernadine Bailey’s pro-Bandera/pro-Captive Nations Committee book.

    Rather interestingly, a number of the Galician Ukrainian Army remained on the territory of what became the USSR, with a noticeable number of Petliura’s forces ending up in Galicia.

    From George Vernadsky (not second hand), I’d like to see a direct verified accounting of this:

    According to Russian historian George Vernadsky, ““Under the influence of the reckless orders of the Russian government, which constrained the development of the Ukrainian language and culture within Russia, the center of the Ukrainian movement after 1876 moved to Western Ukraine, which was then part of Austria-Hungary … If not for the Ems decree of 1876, then there would be no need for Ukrainians to create the Austrian “irridentia” and the focus of the Ukrainian cultural movement would be Kiev, not Lviv.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    , @AP
  75. @Belarusian Dude

    This one has a black guy in it. It is in fact doom and gloom.

    Dude, that was just an awful thing to say.

    Here is something just for you – Отава Ё.

    • Replies: @Belarusian Dude
  76. Slimer says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    There’s a 60 minutes episode where the reporter spends the greater part of an hour oohing and ahhing over a gang of professional thieves from Serbia or some such county. Then there’s white promotion of mafia culture, along with their deification of pedophiles and mass shooters. It’s fair to say that Europeans have quite an appreciation for their own criminality.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  77. Ano4 says:
    @melanf

    You were writing about genetics.

    You mentioned that Martha could not be genetically Baltic because she was born on modern Belarus territory.

    I challenged you to find any meaningful genetic differences between Slavs and Balts.

    You replied with a moronic graph, supposedly showing genetic differences between different ethnocultural groups in modern Russian Federation.

    And you asked an even more moronic question about who “North Western Slavs” that I referred to as nearly impossible to distinguish from the Balts on a genetics basis are.

    The Wends are these Slavs.

    They are most probably identical to the major ancestral population component to both the modern day Baltic Lithuanians and Slavic White Russians.

    That is why I strongly argue about the impossibility to genetically separate modern Slavic populations from White Russia and Baltic populations from the Baltic states.

    Especially when female genetics are concerned, as mitochondrial haplogroups are less subjected to bottleneck effects than male Y haplogroups.

    Bottom line: Martha was ethnically a Ruthenian or Lithuanian, she was culturally a Germanized Baltic and while she was culturally very different from Muscovite Russians, she was most probably genetically quite close to the modern Balto-Slavic populations.

    Populations that form a genetic continuum going back thousands of years all the way to CWC archeological complex.

    Now you understand?

    Cause if not, I quit.

    I strongly suggest you educate yourself about genetics of the concerned populations.

    Study history of Balto-Slavic people.

    And also about linguistic relationships of Indo-European languages.

    Be well.

  78. Ano4 says:
    @Mikhail

    Very interesting.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  79. White Americans are mostly spineless, thin-skinned people who can’t accept the racial nature of these riots and will blame white ANTIFAs, Russian agents, ChiComs, etc, basically anything but the racial animus that exists in their country.

    White Americans love to do the gun-toting, “tough guy” act but really they are such spineless, cowardly people lacking in moral fibre. That’s why the blacks walk all over them.

  80. Znzn says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    Most of the looters are black? As opposed to rioters? Whites riot over politics, while blacks just steal?

  81. @neutral

    The US run by lunatics…. And the instinct to joke…. Sorry, can’t resist: Trump standing outside a nailed up DC church posing with a Bible. A Bible he holds in 101 different positions for the media’s camera convenience….
    Now that was a joke !

  82. @Slimer

    Projecting your love of criminality in others is cute but only revealing of your own inadequacies in the end.

  83. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    Like who? Subtelny and other sources specifically name the pro-Russian Little Russian, who complained to the authorities about anti-Russian material coming from Austria-Hungary in the Little Russian language. No mention of that Little Russian getting persecuted.

    I recommend this book about these events:

    Pavlo Chubinsky started off as a staunch loyalist of the Tsar, who opposed the Polish and Polonized nobility. But he was a Little Russian activist; when the Russian government turned against Little Rusisans and chose a policy of assimilation, he was sent out of Ukraine to Arkhanghelsk and St. Petersburg where he did things like study the Nenets people and the taiga. He would write the song that eventually became Ukraine’s national anthem.

    Little Russians showed little support for the Polish uprising in the early 1830s.

    The large Uniate Church (accounting for probably about half of the Eastern Christians on those territories) supported the rebels and as a result of the rebellion was banned.

    An 1848 Czech organized Slav Congress in Prague saw bitter division between the Poles and Ukrainians. (Subtelny page 248 in his Ukraine A History.)

    At the same time, the future Russophile leader in Galicia Naumovich was organizing on behalf of the Poles.

    Subtelny characterizes the number of Ukrainians supporting the 1863 Polish insurrection as minimal. Subtelny also notes bitter fights between Poles and Ukrainians at Lviv University in the late 1890s and early 1900s, as well as efforts to Polonize that and other institutions.

    By then Galicia had gone Russophile and then Ukrainophile.

    It’s not a great surprise that the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse came under the command of the Russian Whites

    In the early 20th century Galicians were not as hostile towards Russians as towards Poles. However you make too much of this: they were suffering from a typhoid epidemic and could get Western medical aide through an alliance. It was a short one.

    From George Vernadsky (not second hand), I’d like to see a direct verified accounting of this:

    According to Russian historian George Vernadsky, ““Under the influence of the reckless orders of the Russian government, which constrained the development of the Ukrainian language and culture within Russia, the center of the Ukrainian movement after 1876 moved to Western Ukraine, which was then part of Austria-Hungary … If not for the Ems decree of 1876, then there would be no need for Ukrainians to create the Austrian “irridentia” and the focus of the Ukrainian cultural movement would be Kiev, not Lviv.

    Vernadsky:

    https://www.academia.edu/1202058/%D0%93%D0%B5%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%92%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%A1%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%8E_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B1%D1%8F_%D1%83%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B5%D0%BC_%D0%B8_%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE_Ab_Imperio_2006_4_347-369_

  84. @Simpleguest

    How? It shows Russians are falling for the some multiculturalism bullshit that people globally are with the go-ahead of the gov’t.

  85. Mikhail says:

    In the early 20th century Galicians were not as hostile towards Russians as towards Poles. However you make too much of this: they were suffering from a typhoid epidemic and could get Western medical aide through an alliance. It was a short one.

    You downplay the noticeable Galician Ukrainian antagonism towards the Poles. Somewhat reminded of the Russia watcher out there, who assumes that because there’s anti-Russian sentiment in present day Galicia and because that area had been linked to Poland, that Galician Ukrainians are pro-Polish. That certainly wasn’t true in WW II and prior.

    The Galician Ukrainians went to the Whites upon getting drift of Petliura’s deal with Pilsudski that would cede all of Galicia to Poland in exchange for Poland recognizing a Ukrainian state comprised of only former Russian Empire territory.

    The White-Galician Ukrainian alliance was short on account of the length of the Russian Civil War from when that alliance was made.

    The typhoid epidemic involved others who didn’t make any moves attributed to going to one side over the other for the benefit of gaining greater medical supplies. Subtelny doesn’t mention the typhoid epidemic as a reason for the Galaican-Ukrianian alliance. You’re making too much of that as a factor for the White-Galician Ukrainian alliance.

    Pavlo Chubinsky started off as a staunch loyalist of the Tsar, who opposed the Polish and Polonized nobility.

    English Wiki and Subtelny make no mention of Chubinsky ever being especially pro-Russian Empire.

    I’ve Vernadsky’s History of Russia. His English Wiki bio is in line with that book:

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

    In his book, he makes no mention of Russification or the Ems decree of 1876. Once again noting the extensive use of Little Russian, acknowledged in a Russian Empire census, which indicates a language that wasn’t so brutally suppressed.

    The title of Faith Hillis’ book suggests crackpot history: Right Bank Ukraine and the Invention of the Russian Nation. So, Russia is some kind of invention unlike Ukraine.

    • Replies: @AP
  86. @Jaakko Raipala

    The more sophisticated propaganda version of the meme is to claim that in the communist bloc there was no denazification and that fascists simply switched sides to communism.

    Not a meme at all, but documented cases, along with names and ranks:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-02771R000100300003-2.pdf

    What you’re missing is that Communism is a Christian heresy. As with all variants of Christianity, conversion is possible. Communists require extended rituals with a bit more rigor than mere baptism, but the kind of lineage-related qualifications required by the Nazis are foreign to to them.

    • Agree: AP
  87. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    You downplay the noticeable Galician Ukrainian antagonism towards the Poles. Somewhat reminded of the Russia watcher out there, who assumes that because there’s anti-Russian sentiment in present day Galicia and because that area had been linked to Poland, that Galician Ukrainians are pro-Polish. That certainly wasn’t true in WW II and prior.

    Every sentence here is wrong.

    English Wiki and Subtelny make no mention of Chubinsky ever being especially pro-Russian Empire.

    Russian wiki is much more detailed, and Subtelny is a nationalist.

    The title of Faith Hillis’ book suggests crackpot history: Right Bank Ukraine and the Invention of the Russian Nation. So, Russia is some kind of invention unlike Ukraine.

    You failed to accurately read the book’s title and your conclusion follows that failure.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  88. Jatt Arya says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    However I don’t see exactly what this has to do with the black problem.

    I am writing a dissertation on the concept of cope it will explain such people||

  89. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    Not at all, as you once again project your shortcoming of not accurately grasping a given situation to someone else.

    A book titled to something along the lines of Russia and the Invention of Ukraine, would be decried by the PC svido (sugar coated version) leaning North American establishment academia.

    An overview of Hillis’ book:

    In Children of Rus’, Faith Hillis recovers an all but forgotten chapter in the history of the tsarist empire and its southwestern borderlands. The right bank, or west side, of the Dnieper River―which today is located at the heart of the independent state of Ukraine―was one of the Russian empire’s last territorial acquisitions, annexed only in the late eighteenth century. Yet over the course of the long nineteenth century, this newly acquired region nearly a thousand miles from Moscow and St. Petersburg generated a powerful Russian nationalist movement. Claiming to restore the ancient customs of the East Slavs, the southwest’s Russian nationalists sought to empower the ordinary Orthodox residents of the borderlands and to diminish the influence of their non-Orthodox minorities.

    Right-bank Ukraine would seem unlikely terrain to nourish a Russian nationalist imagination. It was among the empire’s most diverse corners, with few of its residents speaking Russian as their native language or identifying with the culture of the Great Russian interior. Nevertheless, as Hillis shows, by the late nineteenth century, Russian nationalists had established a strong foothold in the southwest’s culture and educated society; in the first decade of the twentieth, they secured a leading role in local mass politics. By 1910, with help from sympathetic officials in St. Petersburg, right-bank activists expanded their sights beyond the borderlands, hoping to spread their nationalizing agenda across the empire.

    Exploring why and how the empire’s southwestern borderlands produced its most organized and politically successful Russian nationalist movement, Hillis puts forth a bold new interpretation of state-society relations under tsarism as she reconstructs the role that a peripheral region played in attempting to define the essential characteristics of the Russian people and their state.

    Along with the book’s title, the above excerpt is written in a way to downplay the premise that Russia, Ukraine and Belarus have a centuries long historical/cultural basis for being one nation – something which they (at least to a good extent) had. So there’s no misunderstanding, this point doesn’t deny the present existence of three separate internationally recognized states who each link their history to Rus. Rather, it’s to note why they were one, without giving credence to the simplistic inaccuracy that it was along the lines of a foreign usurper having no cultural/historical affinity with the other territories – with that usurper having to mostly rely on brute force and a reeducation process to get its way.

    Prior to the Mongol subjugation, the territory of Rus, comprising much of modern Russia was emerging as the strongest of the Rus territories. During and following the Mongol subjugation period, this aspect became greater, in conjunction with that part of Rus being the most independent of foreign influence.

    You can belittle the following as an anecdote. Someone I know recollected to me what his father told him. Circa early 1900s, his father from the Habsburgite portion of what became Ukraine would converse at the border with Cossack and Cherkess patrol about the day when Russia would be reunited. When that person’s father arrived in the US, he reconverted to the Orthodox Church. That recollection jives with the friendly reception Russian forces received en route to Hungary (in the late 1840s) by the ancestors of modern day Ukrainians in the Austrian Empire.

    In your latest answer, you conveniently provide no comeback to your stated absurdity that the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse, was more motivated to come under the command of the Russian Whites, for the purpose of receiving much better healthcare, when compared to the actual primary reason having to do with Petliura selling out all of Ukraine to Poland.

    Subtelny was a P0lish born Ukrainian historian, who wasn’t pro-Russian. In fact, I saw a tape of him at a North American based gathering, where he lobbied for a Polish-Ukrainian alliance against Russia. Subtelny has his shortcomings that include his not respecting the fact that a good number of those (in the US and elsewhere) going back to the Orthodox Church from the Greek Catholic variant did so on their own free will, as opposed to getting manipulated by the Russian Orthodox Church.

    • Replies: @AP
  90. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    Along with the book’s title, the above excerpt is written in a way to downplay the premise that Russia, Ukraine and Belarus have a centuries long historical/cultural basis for being one nation

    This was obviously not the book’s focus, which was the Russian nationalist movement in Ukraine.

    In your latest answer, you conveniently provide no comeback to your stated absurdity that the Galician Ukrainian Army en masse, was more motivated to come under the command of the Russian Whites, for the purpose of receiving much better healthcare, when compared to the actual primary reason having to do with Petliura selling out all of Ukraine to Poland.

    I wrote: “In the early 20th century Galicians were not as hostile towards Russians as towards Poles.However you make too much of this: they were suffering from a typhoid epidemic and could get Western medical aide through an alliance.”

    There is a nice and very well referenced Russian wiki page about this brief alliance.

    The terms were:

    1. The Galician army in its entirety with the rear units passed to the side of the Volunteer Army .
    2. The Galician army was withdrawn to the rear of the Volunteer Army to rest and receive medical care for all patients with typhoid.
    3. The troops of the Galician army should not have been used in future battles against the army of the Ukrainian Peoples Republic (Petliura).
    4. The ZUNR government passed under the care of the Volunteer Army and moved to Odessa .
    5. Representatives of the Volunteer Army were sent to the Initial Team of the Galician Army to resolve all issues of an operational, administrative and economic nature
    6. The protocol came into force from the moment of its signing, and from that moment the Galician army was obliged to comply with the orders of the Volunteer Army.
    7. Since November 6, the army was concentrated in the area of ​​Pogrebishche-Lipovets.
    8. Questions of the internal life of the Galician army and questions of relations of ZUNR with other states passed into the competence of General Denikin.
    9. Between the initial command of the Galician army and the headquarters of Lieutenant General Schilling, a telegraph communication was established.

    As a result of the treaty a lot of Galician soldiers received medical care in Odessa.

    Treaty was signed in early November 1919, the entire White forces in this region fell apart in late January 1920. Odessa itself was captured February 8th. Some of the Galicians signed an armistice with the Reds in February 1920.

    So in conclusion:

    1. Galicians hated Poles but didn’t mind Denikin too much.
    2. Incapacitation due to typhus and seeking help for it played a central role in their alliance with Denikin.
    3. Alliance was short-lived.

    So, exactly as I stated.

    Subtelny was a P0lish born Ukrainian historian, who wasn’t pro-Russian.

    Of course. He was a Ukrainian nationalist. Are you implying I wrote something different?

  91. Mikhail says: • Website

    Nothing you posted indicates that medical treatment super-ceded the Galician Ukrainian disdain for the manner of Petliura’s agreement with Pilsudski – recognizing all of Galicia to Poland.

    The timing of the Petliura-Pilsudski agreement, relative to the Galician Ukrainian-White agreement (occurring shortly thereafter) underscores this point, as acknowledged by Subtelny, Lehovich, Kenez and a host of others.

    The White-Galician Ukriian alliance was short lived on account of the Russian Civil War’s duration.

  92. They believe that a few Russian shitpoasters on Twitter intimately control the political behavior of 330 million Americans.

    That is not what “Russiagaters” believe. They believe that Donald Trump has been doing business with “Russian” (in reality Soviet Jewish) organized crime figures for decades. People like Felix Slater. These people are intimately connected with the crime syndicate led by Vladimir Putin that controls the Russian government. Trump is heavily indebted to Russian crime syndicates as they saved him from bankruptcy. Putin and his allies helped Trump win the election through various means with Russian financed “troll farms” being one of the most minor elements. Russia channeled millions of dollars into US political organizations like the NRA to help Trump win, financed WikiLeaks, and even supported Sanders in order to attack the neoliberal/neocon anti-Russian establishment from both sides. Russia has also spent millions of dollars investing in districts of key allies like Dana Rohrabacher and Mitch McConnell. Do China and Israel (and even the UK) carry out similar activities in the US? No doubt. But no US Presidential candidate is directly indebted to the Chinese and Israelis the way Trump literally owes millions of dollars (via Deutsche Bank) to Russia. That is what makes Trump a puppet in a sense. Whether you find Russian support for Trump particularly egregious probably depends how you feel about the Putin regime. Since I see Putin as a Sovok grifter more interested in enriching himself and his cronies than in building a strong Russia, I tend to see his support for Trump as part of the general rise to power of mafia-like crime structures taking over national governments in Europe. Berlusconi was one of the first to take over a “democratic” country, but this sort of McMafia corruption is spreading like a contagion.

    • Agree: utu
    • LOL: JL
    • Replies: @Ano4
    , @neutral
    , @JL
  93. Ano4 says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    You are partially correct in describing Putin and his circle as an organized crime group.

    This is what the fall of USSR was all about: corrupt Nomenklatura and Special Services uniting strengths with the grey zone informal economic actors and organized crime.

    These are the forces that have really brought Soviet system down in a controlled demolition fashion.

    People tend to focus more on nationalism and religious differences to explain the USSR demise.

    Or they focus more on external players and the “convergence and coexistence ” illusion that was promoted by the globalists since late 60ies as being the cause of Soviets giving up.

    Some even think that war in Afghanistan was the straw breaking the Soviet camel’s back.

    But really, these are minor issues.

    The true and most important issue was the nearly total corruption of Soviet political/managerial class.

    Putin and his circle are the direct byproduct of this corruption.

    As are all other powerful groups in other parts of former USSR, with the possible exception of the Baltic States.

    Where I think you might be wrong is when you seem to imply that this type of mafia state becoming the norm is a recent social development.

    I don’t know if you really believe that it started with Berlusconi’s Italy, or if you referring to it is a rhetorical figure.

    I would personally consider that a State is historically speaking always an expression of a contract/balance between elite clans.

    And that these elite clans are basically very little different from organized crime cartels.

    A State is therefore always an organized crime type social construct enforcing brutal racketeering on the human populations under its control.

    Putin and his friends are doing it in a more honest manner than Western elites do.

    That’s the only difference.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  94. Ano4 says:
    @Mikhail

    I believe there are always two sides to a story.

    You and AP are clearly very knowledgeable about the whole Russian/Ukrainian/Polish conundrum.

    You are both probably honest in your convictions.

    Both of you present the two opposing views on the subject because you are probably a Russophile and he is a Polonophile (if we could use such an expression).

    The truth is probably somewhere in between.

    I personally think the whole Ukrainian question is a bloody mess and a total disaster that goes back to the Mongol invasion and the developments affecting Eastern Slavs since the advent of the two opposite poles of Muscovy and Greater Lithuania.

    From my point of view the Eastern Slavic populations: Rus/Rusyn/Ruthenians, a genetic and linguistic continuum built during some 500 years, was broken by the intrusion of Lithuanian Balts and Mongols/Tatars.

    Polish intervention and Teutonic Knights activity being aggravating factors imposed on the traumatizing agony of the Rus.

    Rus has never healed since.

    Russian Empire tried to heal this trauma, but unfortunately failed to do so.

    One of the reasons of this failure probably being the artificial Westernized form adapted by Empire’s elites in their Empire building efforts.

    The Slavic population under the Westernized Imperial elites of both Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov and the Habsburg Empires were largely treated as colonized peones.

    They were bound to try to rebel, which they did on a regular basis, leading to some very unfortunate events in the XXth century.

    We live today in the aftermath of these events.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  95. Mikhail says:
    @Ano4

    I believe there are always two sides to a story.

    You and AP are clearly very knowledgeable about the whole Russian/Ukrainian/Polish conundrum.

    You are both probably honest in your convictions.

    Both of you present the two opposing views on the subject because you are probably a Russophile and he is a Polonophile (if we could use such an expression).

    The truth is probably somewhere in between.

    Facts are facts. The matter of claiming that the White-Galician Ukrainian agreement was primarily influenced by gaining medical access is quite unsubstantiated and dubious for the reasons explained. An American academic book titled Right Bank Ukraine and the Invention of Russia is indicative of a PC academic status quo which would decry a book titled along the lines of Russia and the Invention of Ukraine.

    Of possible interest, if not already known:

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

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Ano4
  96. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    Facts are facts. The matter of claiming that the White-Galician Ukrainian agreement was primarily influenced by gaining medical access

    Facts are facts. Provision of medical care was literally the second point of the agreement.

    An American academic book titled Right Bank Ukraine and the Invention of Russia is indicative of a PC academic status quo which would decry a book titled along the lines of Russia and the Invention of Ukraine.

    This is the second time you have failed to even read the book’s title correctly and have made an erroneous argument based on that failure.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  97. neutral says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    That is not what “Russiagaters” believe.

    No, this is exactly what they believe, or more accurately what they are making the average dim witted American commoner believe. What you wrote there is way too advanced to sell to an audience that only ingests comic book stories of good vs evil geopolitics.

  98. @Ano4

    I agree with you on your analysis of how the Soviet Union fell apart. I disagree with you that

    Putin and his friends are doing it in a more honest manner than Western elites do.

    Not sure about that. Putin and his friends (also Orban, Kaczynski, etc.) pretend to be nationalists, defenders of Christianity, defenders of morality against the global homosexual conspiracy, anti-immigrant, etc. etc. But their actions show that for the most part that is all just talk to keep the masses happy while the clans rob as much as they can. Merkel, Trudeau, et al. are far more open and honest about their actual intentions.

    Berlusconi is one of the earliest Western “populists” to recognize that democracies were very easy to rob. For the most part Western Elites (and Asian elites) have run their countries more on the aristocrat/land owner model than the mafia model. The advantage of the former for ordinary citizens is that the aristocrat model invests in the future. Aristocratic elites assume they can pass fortunes on to their descendants and that it is in their interest to let the legal system provide some appearance of impartiality, which will then defend their property rights and their estates. They also understand the basic market principle that letting other people get rich doesn’t make me (the elite) poorer, as long as I can tax them and squeeze campaign contributions out of them, much like a land owner collecting his percent of the harvest. The mafia model sees all independent market activity and wealth creation as an implicit threat.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Ano4
  99. Ano4 says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

    I agree for the most part, except that I have come to the conclusion that the aristocracy was simply a more refined form of mafia and mafia a most degenerate form of aristocracy.

    Also, the technological high income societies have more riches to share, which allows their elites to give a dog a bone and play it cool.

    Fact is we as primates are inherently hierarchical.

    Add to that the selfish gene aspect and that explains 70% of the lust for power.

    The 30% that remains is probably psychopathological.

    All the idealist/religious/philosophical narrative is just to keep the lambs silent while they’re fleeced or even butchered and eaten.

    I acknowledge that this is a very cynical outlook that I have developed, but I feel rather peaceful about it.

    Reality doesn’t disappoint me as much as when I was younger and more inclined towards idealistic dreaming.

  100. Ano4 says:
    @Mikhail

    I have read about Russian Solidarism a few years ago.

    They might have had some great ideas.

    But all these White Emigrants’ theories are outdated by now.

    The Soviet Union demise was way better prophesied and described by George Orwell’s Animal Farm than by any political doctrines.

    I have lived through the Soviet regime’s fall, I was there and I understand now after many years of thinking that what people declare is of lesser importance than how they act it out.

    Russian Empire is dead.

    USSR is dead.

    The West has won, although I feel that this victory will be short lived and the West will fall.

    Eastern Slavs are definitely divided,

    Their population being at most half of what it might have been if Russian Empire avoided its’ dissolution and probably at least 25% lower than if USSR remained.

    Demography is destiny, while ideologies are mostly verbiage.

    It would have been much better if there was no Revolution, but once the revolution was done, we would have been way better without Perestroika.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    , @Simpleguest
  101. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    Facts are facts. Provision of medical care was literally the second point of the agreement.

    Which you twist to mean something else. Were they without any medical care beforehand? Just how many of them were in dire need of it? Subtelny, Lehovich and Kenez reference the actual main factor without mention of what you claim to the contrary.

    Your ongoing failure is to acknowledge a well premised observation, which I’ll not repeat. Much like your bogus claim that Krasnov and Bandera weren’t Nazi collaborators unlike Vlasov.

    • Replies: @AP
  102. @Ano4

    Methink gentleman whines too much.

    Here are some numbers for you.
    The biggest owners of real estate on this planet are Anglo-Saxons with some 28 milion sq. km of land mass. Second biggest owners are Eastern Slavs with some 18 milion sq. km (if we add countres of the Euroasian Economic Union that goes up to close to 20 milion sq. km.)

    Now, demographics is destiny, but even greater destiny is real estate defended with nuclear missiles.
    Demography can change easily, changing geography is a bit more difficult.

    What is stopping you from having big families. What more do you expect from Putin? Tour the country and make babies himself?

    What a f****g bunch of whining idiots.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  103. Ano4 says:
    @Simpleguest

    What is stopping you from having big families.

    But I have a big family.

    What do you think 4 in my moniker stands for?

    Now, about territory, the territory belongs to the people who own legal rights on it and are able to enforce these rights.

    Do Eastern Slavs collectively own the territory on which they live on a legal basis?

    The answer of course is a resounding No.

    Also, Tsarist Empire, just prior to 1914 was way bigger than Russia today.

    What will prevent modern Russia to shrink even more?

    You will?

    Of course you won’t.

    BTW how many kids did you sire?

    LOL

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @Simpleguest
  104. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    Facts are facts. Provision of medical care was literally the second point of the agreement.

    Which you twist to mean something else. Were they without any medical care beforehand?

    I twist nothing. I listed the provisions of the agreement. Number 2 on the list was providing medical care for typhus.

    Encyclopedia of Ukraine, University of Toronto Press:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CU%5CK%5CUkrainianGalicianArmy.htm

    “Because of a severe shortage of medical personnel and supplies, medical care deteriorated quickly, and by the end of 1919 the army fell victim to typhus.”

    The print version states 90% of the soldiers of the Ukrainian Galician Army were stricken with typhus and 25,000 died.

    Subtelny, Lehovich and Kenez reference the actual main factor without mention of what you claim to the contrary.

    Subtleny wrote a book about Ukrainian history from prehistoric times. Such a detail would be unnecessary.

    Your ongoing failure is to acknowledge a well premised observation

    Readers can judge who has “failed” in this exchange.

    Much like your bogus claim that Krasnov and Bandera weren’t Nazi collaborators unlike Vlasov.

    You, a supporter of Vlasov, are bringing up your old failure.

    Definition of collaborate:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    (1) One does not apply. None of these people joint-published papers with Nazi scientists.

    (2). Vlasov was a Soviet citizen and indeed helped create the USSR by fighting for the Reds during the Russian Civil War. He became a Soviet general. Thus, by switching sides and fighting for the Nazis he was assisting an enemy of his country. He was, by definition, a collaborator.

    Krasnov was a White general who never took Soviet citizenship. His country was Russia, which ceased to exist. He was always a sworn enemy of the USSR that destroyed Russia. Thus, by assisting the Nazis he was not assisting the enemy of his country, that had eased to exist. He was a Nazi ally, not a collaborator.

    Likewise with Bandera – a Nazi ally, but not a collaborator.

    You speak neither Russian nor Ukrainian and are trying to prove that your English is shaky, also.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    , @Rattus Norwegius
  105. JL says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Cool story, only you leave out what Russia actually gained by any of this. How has getting Trump elected helped Russia or Putin?

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  106. @JL

    How has Putin gained by this? Well, the obvious ones –

    1. No Clinton lecturing Russian about human rights abuses or democracy

    2. No US covert support for “democratic” movements in Russia

    3. Free hand in Syria

    4. Fracturing NATO. Trump has created a huge wedge between Europeans and the US and is viewed with disgust or derision by most European leaders. That hasn’t resulted in a formal lifting of sanctions, but informally a lot of Europeans are treating Russia’s annexation of Crimea and informal annexation of the Donbass as faits accomplis. Russia has used US withdrawal and lack of prestige to massively increase its influence in countries like Italy, France and Netherlands. Germany, because Merkel is a former East German who doesn’t trust the Russians, has been harder to crack, although German business leaders tend to be pro-Russian for economic reasons.

    5. General perception globally thanks to Trump’s erratic behavior and divisiveness that the US is now a declining power unable and unwilling to use its influence abroad and domestically fractured. That plays well into internal Russian messaging that the US is not an example to be emulated and that Russians should be glad they have Putin who preserves stability.

    6. The increasing hostility between China and the US is a bonus. But whether Putin and team really thought Trump would cause that is unanswerable.

    7. Trump is pro-coal and pro-oil. That might seem to be a problem as the US under Obama became a major competitor with Russian in natural gas, and Trump is very supportive of America First in the natural gas industry. But in reality the Russians see alternative energy as a far greater threat. Russia has competitive technology in coal, oil and gas, but has no real capabilities in solar or wind power. A long term global shift out of fossil fuels would be disastrous for Russia.

    And who knows what business side deals Putin and the clans have made with Trump and family. That is probably where the real action is, and that will never come to light.

    • Replies: @JL
  107. JL says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    1. Both Clinton, and the neocon controlled US foreign policy apparatus as a whole, have continued to harangue Russia on these issues.

    2. See point 1, this has gone on, unabated, throughout the Trump presidency.

    3. Russia does not have any more of a free hand in Syria vis-a-vis the US than it did before Trump became president. Regardless, Israel and Turkey are far bigger problems for Russia in Syria than the US. Granted, Clinton could have started a world war with Russia in Syria had she gone through with her insane plans, but hardly Russia alone is the beneficiary of that not happening.

    4. Any fracturing is merely cosmetic in nature, Russia has gained nothing from any European country due to Trump’s perceived belligerence. Russia’s attempts to sew division within Europe would have continued regardless of who won the US election, and they would have been equally unsuccessful.

    Just as an obvious example, how to explain the aggressive sanctioning of NS 2? Would Clinton have refrained from these sanctions, or would she have gone ahead and faced the same weak opposition from Merkel and Co? Would you have considered that divisive?

    5. You have TDS and are therefore reversing causality. Trump was elected because the US is a declining power, with polarization, divisiveness, and less ability and will to project power abroad. The idea that Russia would concoct an elaborate scheme for the purpose of internal messaging is absurd. To wit, all Russia has to do for this is to broadcast the truth.

    6. You already stated yourself why this is not plausible.

    7. Again, you answered yourself in your statement why this makes no sense.

    In conclusion, all you have is a bunch of evidence-free suppositions, just like all the other delusional Russiagaters. Granted, yours are a bit more sophisticated, but no more realistic. It would be nice if there was a thorough investigation of all these suspicions and allegations, perhaps by a qualified special counsel with unlimited resources at his disposal. Oh, wait…

    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  108. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    You really are quite the dope, regardless of your having any multilingual capability. Once again, collaborate means to cooperate or work with in varying forms. Hence, it’s sheer idiocy for you to say that Vlasov is a Nazi collaborator unlike Krasnov or Bandera, because the latter two never identified with the USSR, unlike the first aforementioned.

    On a tangential note, the word collaborator can be used in a quite loaded way where a faulty bias and hypocrisy are at play. One can say that Stalin collaborated with Hitler. The same could be said about a number of Western heads of states.

    The latest link from you doesn’t successfully refute the main underlying reason for the Galician Ukrainian Army-White agreement, which came about shortly after it became clear that Petliura was willing to agree to have all of Galicia go to Poland, in exchange for Polish support of a pro-Polish Ukrainian puppet state consisting of former Russian Empire territory. Subtelny, Lehovich and Kenez describe the Galician Ukrainian Army of that period as a well disciplined fighting force, with no mention of a mass sickness significantly limiting its capability.

    On another point you bring up, Russia continued to exist in the Soviet Union as one of numerous republics. That point doesn’t necessarily go against the view that the USSR wasn’t good for Russia.

  109. @orionyx

    The Caucasian and Muslim populations are not as dysfunctional as America’s black population, but they pose a far greater threat to the survival of the Russian Federation than blacks do to the US. Blacks in the US are fairly easily manipulated, and used as pawns by white people to further their own agendas. The minorities in Russia, particularly the Chechens, Tatars and Bashkirs, are often more intelligent, more unified, and less likely to have socially dysfunctional drug and alcohol habits than ethnic Russians and they are quite capable of taking control. To some extent this is already happening.

    • Replies: @JL
  110. JL says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Russia of 1999 is calling, Peter, it wants its domestic politics back.

  111. @JL

    It would be nice if there was a thorough investigation of all these suspicions and allegations, perhaps by a qualified special counsel with unlimited resources at his disposal.

    Yes, there was, and he concluded there was Russian involvement. He didn’t prove collusion, since he claimed that wasn’t his “mandate”, but the circumstantial evidence is pretty damning. Like most “debunkers”, you probably haven’t actually read the Mueller report, you are just regurgitating spin. Go read the report and make up your mind, rather than swallowing the sort of nonsense the White House keeps putting out.

    Even if I take every one of your rebuttals at face value, the conclusion is, what, Putin preferred Clinton? If Russia hasn’t gotten everything it wanted, that is because Russia is a very weak country today with a population less than Bangladesh and an economy heavily dependent on commodities. Does Russia still own Crimea? Yes it does. Does the world care about that anymore? Not really.

    Anyway, just some of the more obvious points – no one cares if Clinton and the neocons harangue Russia. No one. They are completely irrelevant. Putin cares about Hillary about as much as he cares about my blogposts. How is that not a win for Putin that the American neocon movement has been sidelined? Now obviously their own stupidity had a lot to do with it, but it would have been silly for Putin not to have given them a little push.

    Point 5 demonstrates that you do not speak Russian or watch Russian media. Trump has been a boon to Russian state propaganda since the day he was elected.

    Point 7 – you’re missing the point. Short term American competition in oil and gas (and the fight to stop NS2) is an annoyance to Russia, but still far better for Russia than a concerted effort to move away from fossil fuels would be.

    • Troll: Anatoly Karlin
  112. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Europe Europa

    As an outsider is seems strange to me how even right wing, Trump-supporting Americans are desperately trying to make excuses for blacks, but maybe I underestimate how integral the idea of “racial harmony” and the success of the “melting pot” is to American culture and identity?

    It’s not so much that they want to divert blame from blacks. They just don’t want to admit that America’s problems might be self-inflicted. And Trump supporters are desperate to divert blame away from Trump’s failures.

  113. @AP

    I think that most people believe that cooperation is as good as collaboration. Arguing otherwise is just semantics.

    Vlasov cooperated with the Nazis, and so did Bandera.

    • Replies: @AP
    , @Simpleguest
  114. AP says:
    @Rattus Norwegius

    I think that most people believe that cooperation is as good as collaboration. Arguing otherwise is just semantics.

    It’s about being accurate. Not all cooperation is collaboration. Quisling was a collaborator. Mussolini was not (until, perhaps, the last month).

  115. Mikhail says: • Website

    It’s about being accurate. Not all cooperation is collaboration. Quisling was a collaborator. Mussolini was not (until, perhaps, the last month).

    In your case, it’s not being able to comprehend when wrong.

    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/article/staging-friendship-mussolini-and-hitler-in-germany-in-1937/580ADB154BFE491EF915A591660C255D

    In September 1937, Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler met in Germany. Millions of ostensibly enthusiastic Germans welcomed the Duce. Here were the world’s first two fascist dictators, purportedly united in solidarity, representing the ‘115 million’ Germans and Italians against the Western powers and Bolshevism. Most historians have dismissed the 1937 dictators’ encounter as insignificant because no concrete political decisions were made. In contrast, I explore this meeting in terms of the confluence of culture and politics and argue that the meeting was highly significant. Its choreography combined rituals of traditional state visits with a new emphasis on the personality of both leaders and their alleged ‘friendship’, emblematic of the ‘friendship’ between the Italian and German peoples. Seen through this lens, the meeting pioneered a new style of face-to-face diplomacy, which challenged the culture of liberal internationalism and represented the aim of Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany to create a New Order in Europe. At the same time, analysis of this meeting reveals some deep-seated tensions between both regimes, an observation that has significant implications for the study of fascist international collaboration.

    Related:

    http://www.ww2inprague.com/articles/nazism-vs-fascism

    Difference Between Fascism and Nazism

    Nazism is considered to be one form of fascism.

    • Replies: @AP
  116. @Rattus Norwegius

    I think that most people believe that cooperation is as good as collaboration. Arguing otherwise is just semantics.
    Vlasov cooperated with the Nazis, and so did Bandera.

    To cooperate means “to operate in union with others”
    To collaborate, on the other hand, means “to labor (work) in union with others”

    I think the difference is obvious/ sarc. off.

    But, seriously here are more accurate definittions:

    collaborate= 1. to work together with somebody in order to achieve a single shared goal.
    collaborate= 2. to help the enemy who has taken control of your country during a war.

    cooperate=1. to work with other people by achieving one’s own goals as part of a common goal.
    cooperate=2. to be helpful by doing what somebody asks you to do.

    So, I’d say it’s a draw: Vlasov and Bandera simultanously both cooperated and collaborated with the Nazis.

    • Replies: @AP
  117. @Ano4

    But I have a big family.

    What do you think 4 in my moniker stands for?

    Good for you, and I say this without a hint of irony.
    Unless, the number is there just to differentiate you from other anon posters, you being Anon#4. But, I wasn’t refering to you personally.

    Living space, or “lebensraum”, is rather important. As we know well, Hitler was willing to risk the entire German Volk for a living space. Eastern Slavs have plenty of “lebensraum”. Russian Czarist Empire was bigger, but imperial overreach surely must have been one of the reasons for its downfall.

    Only Anglos own more, at least for now. Speaking of owning, Anglos don’t, for example, own Mexico. They may exert control over it, but they don’t own it. France controls big chunks of Africa but they don’t own them, either.
    Anglos, like Eastern Slavs, also live in separate countries (we know which ones) but act as one when needed. Perhaps Slavs really just don’t have the self-esteem and killer insticts they do.
    Slavs are good at lamenting, though.

    After listing the events from the past, which are already well known, it would be interesting to hear from you where do you stand regarding the future? Where shall Eastern Slavs go from here?

    Finally, I am not Russian, I don’t live in Russia and I will not prevent it from dissapearing. I just feel that we all have a stake in its destiny.

  118. Ano4 says:

    After listing the events from the past, which are already well known, it would be interesting to hear from you where do you stand regarding the future? Where shall Eastern Slavs go from here?

    These are good questions.

    My personal opinion is that Russians as a nation are exhausted by the terrible century they went through.

    Russian population was massively reduced, and also disproportionately negatively affected in the most gifted and courageous segments of society.

    Russia needs to restore its human capital.

    It would be best for Russians to center on themselves and on harmonizing the interests of the different ethnic groups forming the Russian Federation instead of keeping trying to play geopolitical games.

    As you pointed out, Russia is already big enough, and I would also add that it is rich enough from the point of view of natural resources.

    If they mind their own business in their own land instead of caring about what the West thinks or does, Russians might outlive the West, which has its own problems.

    About Eastern Slavs, I agree with you that Slavs in general are very good at lamenting/bickering and not that good at uniting.

    Absence of Slavic unity is a historical feature, Slavs sided with their enemies against each other since earliest historically recognized times.

    For the Slavs to survive as an ethnic and cultural phenomenon, this lack of unity should be mitigated by the understanding of both common roots and common interests.

    Slavs are diverse, but they need not antagonize each other.

    If enough people of Slavic descent understand this, then there might be a better future for them.

    Otherwise their numbers will keep on declining, their culture will keep on losing ground to globalised verbiage and one day they will reach the point beyond which they will no longer play any significant role in the world affairs.

    A very important thing would be to avoid any war between Slavic populations.

    The current mess in Eastern Ukraine should be fixed as soon as possible.

  119. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    In that case “collaboration” was used in order to describe creating a mutual project together. Neither Bandera nor Krasnov were creating a mutual project with the Nazis. They were cooperating for the sake of their own goals. When Bandera and Krasnov are falsely described as collaborators it is because they supposedly betrayed the USSR, which is false. Only Vlasov did so.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  120. AP says:
    @Simpleguest

    collaborate= 1. to work together with somebody in order to achieve a single shared goal.
    collaborate= 2. to help the enemy who has taken control of your country during a war.

    cooperate=1. to work with other people by achieving one’s own goals as part of a common goal.
    cooperate=2. to be helpful by doing what somebody asks you to do.

    Link?

    Definition 1 of collaborate refers to a mutual project, and is typically an intellectual endeavor such as an academic paper, or staging a play.

    Merriam-Webster (which is, American English):

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    “to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.”

    Definition 2 of collaborate is the one typically used during wars.

    Again, Merriam-Webster:

    to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

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

    In order for collaboration to occur, the cooperation must be in order to assist the enemy of one’s own country. The USSR was not Bandera’s country. He was never its citizen. Indeed, the USSR was the enemy of Bandera’s country. Same with Krasnov and the other exiled Whites who aligned themselves with the Nazis. None of them were collaborators. Vlasov, however, was. He was a Soviet citizen and Soviet general.

    So according to how this word is defined in American English, Vlasov both cooperated and collaborated with the Nazis. Bandera cooperated but did not collaborate with the Nazis.

    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
  121. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    In that case “collaboration” was used in order to describe creating a mutual project together. Neither Bandera nor Krasnov were creating a mutual project with the Nazis. They were cooperating for the sake of their own goals. When Bandera and Krasnov are falsely described as collaborators it is because they supposedly betrayed the USSR, which is false. Only Vlasov did so.

    You’ve really blown it here, with some others chiming in agreement with me. They don’t offhand appear to have a bias one way or the other for our respective differences.

    Vlasov wasn’t a Nazi. He sought a strong Russia with Nazi support. Bandera and Krasov sought Nazi support as well to achieve their objectives.

  122. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AP

    The use of cooperate and collaborate applies just as well to Krasnov and Bandera, relative to Vlasov, regardless of the fact that Vlasov had been in a formal Soviet position unlike the other two.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS