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
Ukro-Khazars Trying to Appropriate Russian Culture
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

Kievan Rus was a historiographic term invented by 19th century historians in the Russian Empire. The people in Rus’ (“na Rusi”), or the Russian lands (“Russkaya zemlya”), from Galicia to Vladimir-Suzdal called themselves “Rus.”

“Rossiya” is nothing more than than Greek for Rus’ (“Ruthenia” in Latin).

That cleared up, I really don’t really understand what these svidomy are mad about anyway, they have their “Khazaria” after all. Both in CK3, and offline.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Humor, Svidomy, Ukraine, Video Games 
Hide 199 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. Why did Rossiya prevail over something like Rusiya?

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    @Korenchkin

    Rusiya is Arabic?

  3. “Rossiya” is nothing more than than Greek for Rus’ (“Ruthenia” in Latin).

    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name? Although English is the best substitute for a lingua francua that the modern world has, you wouldn’t expect the Kremlin to wake up one day and promulgate a new name to replace the current one “Rosija” to “Rasha” now would you? And although there were some Greek clergy to be found within, the Rus did, after all, accept the Slavic translation of the gospels…

    • Troll: AltanBakshi
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    @Mr. Hack

    Rasha sounds like the name of a black or perhaps Indian girl whom some adventurous player fucked last night! :D

    , @Yevardian
    @Mr. Hack

    Well, Рашка is often sarcastically used online as a disparaging term for Russia on runet, you must be aware of this.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    , @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?
     
    I don't know, you tell me. After all you are the one insisting on using Ukraine (an exonym) to describe Rus lands. Why would you do that?

    😉

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  4. @Mr. Hack

    “Rossiya” is nothing more than than Greek for Rus’ (“Ruthenia” in Latin).
     
    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name? Although English is the best substitute for a lingua francua that the modern world has, you wouldn't expect the Kremlin to wake up one day and promulgate a new name to replace the current one "Rosija" to "Rasha" now would you? And although there were some Greek clergy to be found within, the Rus did, after all, accept the Slavic translation of the gospels...

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @Yevardian, @Ano4

    Rasha sounds like the name of a black or perhaps Indian girl whom some adventurous player fucked last night! 😀

  5. Since I was a kid, I’ve always appreciated this famous game board map of the world. Russia is gone and all carved up, how did that happen? 🙂

    • Replies: @Dreadilk
    @Mr. Hack

    Cope

  6. Ukraine is game to you?

    BTW, where is Poland?

    • Replies: @Epigon
    @inertial

    These are formable Empires - entities not in existence when the game starts
    Duchies and Kingdoms are (quasi-)historical - though the map is a joke at the usual locations - Croatia being absolutely ridiculous, Rus’ being depicted as fictional, non-connected entities etc.

  7. CK3 is out? Nice!

    I look forward to new and improved mechanics for sleeping with your daughters in law and murdering your bastard children.

    • LOL: Haruto Rat
  8. Just when I was about to start up a new CK2 game….

    • Agree: mal
  9. @Mr. Hack

    “Rossiya” is nothing more than than Greek for Rus’ (“Ruthenia” in Latin).
     
    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name? Although English is the best substitute for a lingua francua that the modern world has, you wouldn't expect the Kremlin to wake up one day and promulgate a new name to replace the current one "Rosija" to "Rasha" now would you? And although there were some Greek clergy to be found within, the Rus did, after all, accept the Slavic translation of the gospels...

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @Yevardian, @Ano4

    Well, Рашка is often sarcastically used online as a disparaging term for Russia on runet, you must be aware of this.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Yevardian


    Well, Рашка is often sarcastically used online as a disparaging term for Russia on runet
     
    In fact, “Рашка” is a small town in Serbia. Just shows the educational level of those who use this word.
  10. Anatoly, who is running the czar.tv Twitter account?
    Whoever it is, they are batshit insane.

    As in, blaming Serbs for 1999 bombing which turned Primakov’s plane and “cost Russian blood and gold”.

    By gold – they mean Western loans amounting to $15 B.

    I have met anti-Serb Russians before, but blaming Serbs for anti-Russian disposition of US, UK and NATO is a mental disease.

    • Agree: AnonFromTN, Denis
  11. @Mr. Hack
    Since I was a kid, I've always appreciated this famous game board map of the world. Russia is gone and all carved up, how did that happen? :-)

    https://i.redd.it/hqttv91vvxry.jpg

    Replies: @Dreadilk

    Cope

    • Agree: AltanBakshi
  12. @inertial
    Ukraine is game to you?

    BTW, where is Poland?

    Replies: @Epigon

    These are formable Empires – entities not in existence when the game starts
    Duchies and Kingdoms are (quasi-)historical – though the map is a joke at the usual locations – Croatia being absolutely ridiculous, Rus’ being depicted as fictional, non-connected entities etc.

  13. @Yevardian
    @Mr. Hack

    Well, Рашка is often sarcastically used online as a disparaging term for Russia on runet, you must be aware of this.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Well, Рашка is often sarcastically used online as a disparaging term for Russia on runet

    In fact, “Рашка” is a small town in Serbia. Just shows the educational level of those who use this word.

  14. The rather funny thing is that said twitter account is from a media group working exclusively in Russian, soft doublethink that merits the h-word.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Belarusian Dude

    Welcome back. You okay?

    Replies: @Belarusian Dude

  15. Kievan Rus was a historiographic term invented by 19th century historians in the Russian Empire. The people in Rus’ (“na Rusi”), or the Russian lands (“Russkaya zemlya”), from Galicia to Vladimir-Suzdal called themselves “Rus.”

    If you are going to be precise with respect to self-identity, just as “Kieven Rus” was not used in those times, so the people did not call themselves “Rus.” People in Ukraine called themselves Rusyns or Rusnaks, those in Russia IIRC called themselves Russky as they do now.* Interestingly, historically the Rusyns or Rusnaks in Ukraine considered themselves to be “Rus” people but felt that the Rus people of what is now Russia were foreigners and called them Moskali. Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle for example described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovy was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1517) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. So each considered the other to be foreign. The idea of one people was resurrected later.

    *A parallel to Romanians, people of Rome, and Romansch ethnic group of Switzerland using similar names for themselves.

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    Enough of your lies you Judah among the Rus!


    After Kuntsevich’s death, persecutions against the Orthodox became so ubiquitous and intolerable that Metropolitan Job of Kiev in 1625 applied to Tsar Michael of Moscow to receive Little Russia as part of Russia. He was refused at the time, since Russia, only recently freed from Polish incursions, did not want to go to war with Poland over this issue.

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html
     

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

  16. @Belarusian Dude
    The rather funny thing is that said twitter account is from a media group working exclusively in Russian, soft doublethink that merits the h-word.

    Replies: @AP

    Welcome back. You okay?

    • Replies: @Belarusian Dude
    @AP

    Yes, following developments on all sides of the happenings my only further participation in the happenings of this country will be of personal interest and gain. I met one of your countrymen recently out here, nice fellow from Lvov, much like myself he didn't have any strong ideological convictions and just came here to observe from curiosity after accidentally falling asleep on one of the bus vans to a relative's village and getting too far. Its always nice to meet a fellow apath.

  17. @AP

    Kievan Rus was a historiographic term invented by 19th century historians in the Russian Empire. The people in Rus’ (“na Rusi”), or the Russian lands (“Russkaya zemlya”), from Galicia to Vladimir-Suzdal called themselves “Rus.”
     
    If you are going to be precise with respect to self-identity, just as "Kieven Rus" was not used in those times, so the people did not call themselves "Rus." People in Ukraine called themselves Rusyns or Rusnaks, those in Russia IIRC called themselves Russky as they do now.* Interestingly, historically the Rusyns or Rusnaks in Ukraine considered themselves to be "Rus" people but felt that the Rus people of what is now Russia were foreigners and called them Moskali. Starting from the 1440s the Volhynian Chronicle for example described territory of Grand Duchy of Lithuania as “all the Rus lands” and Russia as Muscovy. In a list of different lands, Muscovy was categorized alongside Bulgaria and Moldavia as Orthodox, but not Rus. The Battle of Orsha (1517) was described in the Volhynian Chronicle as a battle of Lithuanians and Rus against Muscovites. The Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. So each considered the other to be foreign. The idea of one people was resurrected later.


    *A parallel to Romanians, people of Rome, and Romansch ethnic group of Switzerland using similar names for themselves.

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    Enough of your lies you Judah among the Rus!

    After Kuntsevich’s death, persecutions against the Orthodox became so ubiquitous and intolerable that Metropolitan Job of Kiev in 1625 applied to Tsar Michael of Moscow to receive Little Russia as part of Russia. He was refused at the time, since Russia, only recently freed from Polish incursions, did not want to go to war with Poland over this issue.

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @AltanBakshi

    Oh I meant Judas among the Rus, not Judah, a Freudian slip mayhaps?

    Replies: @AP

    , @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Enough of your lies
     
    Name a single false statement in my comment, or retract your claim. So far you have excused mass murder of Rus people but have not been dishonest. Did you know that 1625 came after 1440?

    From your source (a Russian one, not bad for theological information but take with a big grain of salt with respect to Russian-Ukrainian issues):

    "The Unia council likewise anathematized the Orthodox council and triumphantly signed the act of Unia, which had been already ratified by the Polish king. They pronounced a thunderous rebuke against all the Orthodox—saying that their bishops were in disobedience and had betrayed their Church, that the Greek exarchs were spies for the Turkish sultan"

    LOL. Hmm...sound familiar?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Denis

  18. “Rossia” was the term used also in Latin documents. Ex. The ‘Bendery Constitution’ of the ‘Zaporozhian Host’ and of ‘Rossiaca gens’ of Pylyp Orlyk:

    “Pacta et constitutiones legum libertatumque exercitus Zaporoviensis”:

    Exercitu Zaporoviensi genteque Rossiaca protectione Imperii Moscovitici dedisse et libere se subdidisse…
    erigendis ecclesiis exercendisque in artibus liberalibus filiis Rossiacis dilatetur…
    Propter vero majorem authoritatem primariae in Parva Rossia sedis Metropolitanae Kiiovensis faciliorique in Spiritualibus regimine…
    Parva Rossia, patria nostra…
    Metropolis Urbs Rossiae, Kiiovia…

    The ‘Constitution’ differentiates between the Cossacks, who are the descendants of the Khazars, and the ‘Rossiaca gens’, Russians.
    “Ita et gentem strenuam antiquamque Cosaticam, antea nominatam Cossaricam, prius exaltaverat immoritura gloria, amplo dominio et factis heroicis…
    Anyhow, the country is emphatically called ‘Parva Rossia’ by the locals. ‘Ruthenia’ was a scholarly Latinizing term ‘Rusia sive Ruthenia’ used by foreigners.

    Raška (in Latin Rascia) was the medieval region from which the Serbian realm grew. Raška is in the Kotor region. Stefan Nemanja, the “founder” of Serbia, started as župan of Raška. Soon after Raška (Rascia) became an exonym for Serbia in western sources (Papacy, German, Italian, French etc.) often in conjunction with Serbia (Servia et Rascia).

    • Thanks: Ano4
    • Replies: @AP
    @Seraphim

    And then there was "History of the Rus or Little Russia", written sometime between 1795 and 1810. It was widely circulated among the nobility of what is now Ukraine. It's secret author may have been Catherine II's chancellor, Alexander Bezborodko.

    Text here:

    http://izbornyk.org.ua/istrus/istrus02.htm

    “Восточныхъ Славянъ называли Скиθами или Скиттами по кочевой жизни и по частому переселенію съ мЂста на мЂсто; Полуденныхъ Сарматами по острымъ ящуринымъ глазамъ съ прижмуркою; и Русами или Русняками по волосамъ; СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ; а въ срединЂ отъ тЂхъ живущихъ по родоначальникамъ ихъ, потомкамъ Афетовымъ, называли: по Князю Русу, Роксоланами и Россами, а по Князю Мосоху, кочевавшему при рЂкЂ Моск†и давшему ей сіе названіе, Москвитами и Мосхами: отъ чего впослЂдствіи и Царство ихъ получило названіе Московскаго и наконецъ Россійскаго.”

    Rough translation : Eastern Slavs were called Scyffians or Scythians with a nomadic life and frequent moves, Sarmatians with sharp squinting eyes, and Rus or Rusnaks by their hair, Variags along the sea were named for their predation and ambushes…and in the middle living the descendants of Afetov, who were called Prince of Rus Poksoliany or Rossy, and by the Prince Mosokh, nomads along the Moskva River also known as Moskvyty and Moskh, from whom was descended a Tsardom that obtained the name Muscovy and eventually Russian.

    Later:

    “Bладимирское на КлязьмЂ и наконецъ Московское по городу МосквЂ. Но и тЂ Княжества, славилися первенствомъ свіоимъ по 1238 годъ; а съ сего года нашествіе войною Мунгальскихъ Татаръ, подъ начальствомъ Хана ихъ Батыя, внука Чингис-Ханова, всЂ Княжества удЂльныя и великія разрушило почти до основанія; города ихъ и селенія разорены и многіе сожжены; Князья и воинства избиты, а оставшіесь разсЂялись по отдаленнымъ СЂвернымъ провинціямъ, и съ сего времени большая часть Рускихъ Княжествъ подпали Татарскому игу. И хотя Княжества опять возстановлены, но пребывали они съ Князьями своими въ подданст†Татарскихъ Хановъ, которые, взимая дань съ народа, поставляли въ нихъ Князей и ихъ перемЂняли по своему произволенію, что продолжалось по 1462 годъ, въ который Князь Московскій Иванъ Васильевичь, Третій сего имени, пользуясь слабостію Татаръ, изнемогшихъ междоусобными войнами и раздЂлами, отказалъ Хану Ахмату отъ ежегодной дани съ народа и отъ своего повиновенія; а внукъ сего Князя, Иванъ Васильевичь Четвертый, названный Грозный, совокупивъ многія Княжества Рускія во едино, въ 1547 году переименовалъ себя изъ Князя Царемъ и Самодержцемъ Московскимъ, и съ того времяни навсегда уже Царство Московское и его владЂтели симъ названіемъ титуловались, съ переименованіемъ наконецъ Царства Московскаго на Россійское, которое, для различія отъ Чермной и БЂлой Руси, называлось Великою Россіею; тЂ же обЂ Руси вмЂстЂ названы тогда Малою Россіею.”

    I’ll just translate the end, about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia, which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia.”

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being "true Rus" and Russians being Muscovites can first be definitively found in this document, even though the term Ukrainian was not used and Little Russian was used instead.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Seraphim, @Gerard-Mandela

    , @Zimriel
    @Seraphim

    Huh, "Servia et Rascia". Endonym-and-exonym. Just like the legal Norman "Null & Void".

  19. @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    Enough of your lies you Judah among the Rus!


    After Kuntsevich’s death, persecutions against the Orthodox became so ubiquitous and intolerable that Metropolitan Job of Kiev in 1625 applied to Tsar Michael of Moscow to receive Little Russia as part of Russia. He was refused at the time, since Russia, only recently freed from Polish incursions, did not want to go to war with Poland over this issue.

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html
     

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

    Oh I meant Judas among the Rus, not Judah, a Freudian slip mayhaps?

    • Troll: Mr. Hack, Zimriel
    • Replies: @AP
    @AltanBakshi

    Sorry. someone excusing and justifying mass murder of Rus people throughout history, and promoting Soviet "achievements" has no right to consider anyone else a Judas among Rus.

  20. @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    Enough of your lies you Judah among the Rus!


    After Kuntsevich’s death, persecutions against the Orthodox became so ubiquitous and intolerable that Metropolitan Job of Kiev in 1625 applied to Tsar Michael of Moscow to receive Little Russia as part of Russia. He was refused at the time, since Russia, only recently freed from Polish incursions, did not want to go to war with Poland over this issue.

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html
     

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

    Enough of your lies

    Name a single false statement in my comment, or retract your claim. So far you have excused mass murder of Rus people but have not been dishonest. Did you know that 1625 came after 1440?

    From your source (a Russian one, not bad for theological information but take with a big grain of salt with respect to Russian-Ukrainian issues):

    “The Unia council likewise anathematized the Orthodox council and triumphantly signed the act of Unia, which had been already ratified by the Polish king. They pronounced a thunderous rebuke against all the Orthodox—saying that their bishops were in disobedience and had betrayed their Church, that the Greek exarchs were spies for the Turkish sultan”

    LOL. Hmm…sound familiar?

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    Yes your words are not false, but your heart is. But what else one can expect from the bastard child of the Catholic Church?

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects than the Lithuania of the Union and Lithuania of Jesuits.

    Its clear that majority of Ukrainians were against Unia, so too were the Cossacks. Although you may think that for now Ukrainian nation is united, one day these fault lines will create an earthquake.

    I was somewhat busy and didnt answer your last reply, but you said that you care of the survival of the Ukrainian culture, and that I dont care, that somehow Ukrainian culture would be lost if Ukraine would be a part of the Russia. What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia? But you fear that Ukrainian culture is not strong or different enough to survive under Russia. That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian. Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Denis
    @AP


    Name a single false statement in my comment
     
    I've got one, in your comment you claimed that the Russians/Rus/Muscovites in the past "often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians".

    Is there any evidence whatsoever for the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians? I find this doubtful, given the relatively great ethnic distance between Lithuanians and Rus.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

  21. @AltanBakshi
    @AltanBakshi

    Oh I meant Judas among the Rus, not Judah, a Freudian slip mayhaps?

    Replies: @AP

    Sorry. someone excusing and justifying mass murder of Rus people throughout history, and promoting Soviet “achievements” has no right to consider anyone else a Judas among Rus.

  22. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Enough of your lies
     
    Name a single false statement in my comment, or retract your claim. So far you have excused mass murder of Rus people but have not been dishonest. Did you know that 1625 came after 1440?

    From your source (a Russian one, not bad for theological information but take with a big grain of salt with respect to Russian-Ukrainian issues):

    "The Unia council likewise anathematized the Orthodox council and triumphantly signed the act of Unia, which had been already ratified by the Polish king. They pronounced a thunderous rebuke against all the Orthodox—saying that their bishops were in disobedience and had betrayed their Church, that the Greek exarchs were spies for the Turkish sultan"

    LOL. Hmm...sound familiar?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Denis

    Yes your words are not false, but your heart is. But what else one can expect from the bastard child of the Catholic Church?

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects than the Lithuania of the Union and Lithuania of Jesuits.

    Its clear that majority of Ukrainians were against Unia, so too were the Cossacks. Although you may think that for now Ukrainian nation is united, one day these fault lines will create an earthquake.

    I was somewhat busy and didnt answer your last reply, but you said that you care of the survival of the Ukrainian culture, and that I dont care, that somehow Ukrainian culture would be lost if Ukraine would be a part of the Russia. What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia? But you fear that Ukrainian culture is not strong or different enough to survive under Russia. That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian. Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.

    • Agree: Denis
    • Replies: @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Yes your words are not false,
     
    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is
     
    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects
     
    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    "Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila."

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky's destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).


    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?
     
    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.
     
    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.
     
    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly "security." They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @AltanBakshi, @Simpleguest, @Mr. Hack

  23. @Seraphim
    "Rossia" was the term used also in Latin documents. Ex. The 'Bendery Constitution' of the 'Zaporozhian Host' and of 'Rossiaca gens' of Pylyp Orlyk:

    "Pacta et constitutiones legum libertatumque exercitus Zaporoviensis":

    Exercitu Zaporoviensi genteque Rossiaca protectione Imperii Moscovitici dedisse et libere se subdidisse...
    erigendis ecclesiis exercendisque in artibus liberalibus filiis Rossiacis dilatetur...
    Propter vero majorem authoritatem primariae in Parva Rossia sedis Metropolitanae Kiiovensis faciliorique in Spiritualibus regimine...
    Parva Rossia, patria nostra...
    Metropolis Urbs Rossiae, Kiiovia...

    The 'Constitution' differentiates between the Cossacks, who are the descendants of the Khazars, and the 'Rossiaca gens', Russians.
    "Ita et gentem strenuam antiquamque Cosaticam, antea nominatam Cossaricam, prius exaltaverat immoritura gloria, amplo dominio et factis heroicis...
    Anyhow, the country is emphatically called 'Parva Rossia' by the locals. 'Ruthenia' was a scholarly Latinizing term 'Rusia sive Ruthenia' used by foreigners.

    Raška (in Latin Rascia) was the medieval region from which the Serbian realm grew. Raška is in the Kotor region. Stefan Nemanja, the "founder" of Serbia, started as župan of Raška. Soon after Raška (Rascia) became an exonym for Serbia in western sources (Papacy, German, Italian, French etc.) often in conjunction with Serbia (Servia et Rascia).

    Replies: @AP, @Zimriel

    And then there was “History of the Rus or Little Russia”, written sometime between 1795 and 1810. It was widely circulated among the nobility of what is now Ukraine. It’s secret author may have been Catherine II’s chancellor, Alexander Bezborodko.

    Text here:

    http://izbornyk.org.ua/istrus/istrus02.htm

    “Восточныхъ Славянъ называли Скиθами или Скиттами по кочевой жизни и по частому переселенію съ мЂста на мЂсто; Полуденныхъ Сарматами по острымъ ящуринымъ глазамъ съ прижмуркою; и Русами или Русняками по волосамъ; СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ; а въ срединЂ отъ тЂхъ живущихъ по родоначальникамъ ихъ, потомкамъ Афетовымъ, называли: по Князю Русу, Роксоланами и Россами, а по Князю Мосоху, кочевавшему при рЂкЂ Моск†и давшему ей сіе названіе, Москвитами и Мосхами: отъ чего впослЂдствіи и Царство ихъ получило названіе Московскаго и наконецъ Россійскаго.”

    Rough translation : Eastern Slavs were called Scyffians or Scythians with a nomadic life and frequent moves, Sarmatians with sharp squinting eyes, and Rus or Rusnaks by their hair, Variags along the sea were named for their predation and ambushes…and in the middle living the descendants of Afetov, who were called Prince of Rus Poksoliany or Rossy, and by the Prince Mosokh, nomads along the Moskva River also known as Moskvyty and Moskh, from whom was descended a Tsardom that obtained the name Muscovy and eventually Russian.

    Later:

    “Bладимирское на КлязьмЂ и наконецъ Московское по городу МосквЂ. Но и тЂ Княжества, славилися первенствомъ свіоимъ по 1238 годъ; а съ сего года нашествіе войною Мунгальскихъ Татаръ, подъ начальствомъ Хана ихъ Батыя, внука Чингис-Ханова, всЂ Княжества удЂльныя и великія разрушило почти до основанія; города ихъ и селенія разорены и многіе сожжены; Князья и воинства избиты, а оставшіесь разсЂялись по отдаленнымъ СЂвернымъ провинціямъ, и съ сего времени большая часть Рускихъ Княжествъ подпали Татарскому игу. И хотя Княжества опять возстановлены, но пребывали они съ Князьями своими въ подданст†Татарскихъ Хановъ, которые, взимая дань съ народа, поставляли въ нихъ Князей и ихъ перемЂняли по своему произволенію, что продолжалось по 1462 годъ, въ который Князь Московскій Иванъ Васильевичь, Третій сего имени, пользуясь слабостію Татаръ, изнемогшихъ междоусобными войнами и раздЂлами, отказалъ Хану Ахмату отъ ежегодной дани съ народа и отъ своего повиновенія; а внукъ сего Князя, Иванъ Васильевичь Четвертый, названный Грозный, совокупивъ многія Княжества Рускія во едино, въ 1547 году переименовалъ себя изъ Князя Царемъ и Самодержцемъ Московскимъ, и съ того времяни навсегда уже Царство Московское и его владЂтели симъ названіемъ титуловались, съ переименованіемъ наконецъ Царства Московскаго на Россійское, которое, для различія отъ Чермной и БЂлой Руси, называлось Великою Россіею; тЂ же обЂ Руси вмЂстЂ названы тогда Малою Россіею.”

    I’ll just translate the end, about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia, which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia.”

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites can first be definitively found in this document, even though the term Ukrainian was not used and Little Russian was used instead.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ
     
    Thanks AP for this outstanding quote that I have not been aware of.
    , @Seraphim
    @AP

    Apparently not everyone took the История русов или Малой России as Gospel truth.
    It is from your link (Google translated):
    "Despite the wide popularity of the work in the 19th and early 20th centuries, even Ukrainian historians, in particular Nikolai Kostomarov, noted gross exaggerations in it, and often distortion of facts (for example, about the behavior of the Swedish occupation forces in Ukraine at the beginning of the 18th century). Many historians have recognized the History of the Rus as an unreliable source [5] [6]. So, the historian GF Karpov in 1870 called the "History of the Rus" a pamphlet, and warned against trusting the facts stated in it.
    Nikolay Kostomarov, who had been studying the history of Ukraine all his life, only in his declining years came to the clear conclusion that there is “a lot of infidelity in the History of the Rus, and therefore, at that time, having corresponded many times and passing from hand to hand according to different lists, produced harmful scientifically influence, because it spread false views on the past of Little Russia ”[8]. He also noted: “I was significantly damaged by the trust shown by such a murky source as“ History of the Rus ”” [9].
    On the other hand, there is the opinion of Polish historians, with whom the Polish historian Tadeusz Korzhon agreed in principle, that "History of the Rus" is not a true chronicle, but "an evil political libel, calculated on the complete ignorance of the Russian public and literature."

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    , @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP


    which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia
     
    "Velikaya" and "Malo" follow a multi-millenium tradition of naming places purely by reference to geography feature, without separating the state and certainly not even hinting at separating the peoples/ethnicity you demented idiot (Karlin - I am self-regulating here, and will only used "idiot" , quite deserved, only once).

    "Greater" and "Little", "Superior" and "Inferior", "Prima" and "Secunda" . They have always been used for naming places within a country, particularly during Roman era

    Germania Superior and Germania Inferior, I think there was a Greater Britannia and Inferior Britannia in roman era, Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior, even a Greater Poland, Upper Mesopotamia and Lower Mesopotamia and many others. In none of those place names was there even a hint of separation of people/ethnicity/ or creation of a different state.Most of these other places have a millennium of years more civilisation than Russian world, so the naming evolution in Russian-world perfectly aligns with that fact.

    All the time in your non-life dedicated to disingenuous amateur-level, amateur fake history ( based on your own edits to Wikipedia) could not have teached you this? LOL


    about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia
     

    WTF? That demented,disingenuous garbage omits the fact that the particular prince or the "they" is Ivan Grozny - one of the most famous and successful people in history and founder of the modern Russian state. His name has far more recognition and importance in Ukraine and to modern Ukraine and Ukrainians ( Just like other Russians as Nevsky, Vladimir the Great and many others) than the random hobos off the street, sadist scum losers of minimal or even zero interest to true Ukrainians, that you promote(based solely on just copying and pasting wikipedia BS and no actual knowledge or inner conviction) . The structure of a Russian state comes from his vision and success of his leadership. His success made it a time when Russia greatly expanded - making further sense to geographically name places within the area of the same people into Great Russia and Little Russia

    Ukrainian nationalist

     

    LOL.... or as they are usually known as ....bored-out-of their minds liberast Saint Petersburg intellectuals, or late 19th/early 20th century Austrian Intelligence services or sub-human,CIA-smuggled, Banderite diaspora of zero significance

    ideas

     

    LOL - "ideas" imply some sort of thinking process. These are not ideas

    For the Bandera- diaspora, things are so bad for them - that Steven Segal, Gerard Depardieu and even Roy Jones Junior all classify as superior patriots of Russia, than the bastard Bandera diaspora are of Ukraine. They are that non-patriotic to the land of their (subhuman, sub-roma ancestral crimes)that all the high-profile Banderatards follow the same pattern of: creating problem, get appointed to a big job in ukrop elite , corrupt AND highly incompetent at the same time ..... before all then f**king off immediately back to America after failure. It's hugely embarrassing that Steven Seagal, Monson and Depardieu are still there and even doing some positive things and work - while as Yarasko, Suprun and the rest of these freaks exited quicker than they arrived.


    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites
     
    Your BS is based on he joke Volynia- Galicia vision.It has no basis because:

    It's bastard region ,a bastard that exists now with a different religion - making any lineal connection of being "true Rus" amazingly idiotic, traitorous and effectively ending any argument before it has even started

    No connection to black soil of Ukraine - one of the main components of historic national identity,
    zero connection to Cossacks,
    zero connection to black sea,or black sea coastline
    zero connection to crossing the Dnieper,or going near it alot, or even using it for anything practical
    zero connection to any ukrop naval tradition
    zero connection to any ukrop currency

    Except for that it's "great" LOL

    For all those points mentioned above, Russia is intrinsically connected or immersed in these essential pillars of modern Ukrainian state, to the point that it is the same thing .Galicia–Volhynia and Khokholism in general has absolute zero connection.

    It's hugely ironic - the most western region of "Ukraine", not only is the least Eastern, meaning against russia.....it's the least "western" part of the entire Slavic World. LOL - that's somethiing that should be impossible, completely illogical...but that is the sad, farcical reality


    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites
     
    Let's see now ( God, this is retarded)

    Novgorod is the "Abraham" of Russian world
    Kievan Rus or let's say Kiev is the " Moses" of it
    Muscovy but let's say Moscow, with direct lineal heritage to Novgorod and Kievan Rus is the "Jacob", Ivan Grozny is probably the King David or Solomon.

    So Russian land is integrally connected to past, present and future of modern Ukrainian state

    Galicia in all this is probably not even the fallen angel ( the Devil), it's the ( aborted) bastard child

    Modern, subhuman, NATO funded Ukrop "nationalism" is based on the nonsense derived from Galicia–Volhynia - an area now that has been more times invaded, discarded and used than a 2 dollar whore. This complete absence of lineal heritage makes any calling it the "successor" as "true Rus" completely dumb. That's without going through the retardation of effectively claiming that Saint Petersburg or Sochi must then not be Russian...and the further retardation claiming that Muscovy is separate because of invasion - when no region has lost it's ancestral roots more, been invaded more and been reject of 3 different empires, than Galicia.


    I’ll just translate the end
     
    HAHAHAHAHAHAH - why do you keep up with this farce?

    Replies: @AP

  24. @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    Yes your words are not false, but your heart is. But what else one can expect from the bastard child of the Catholic Church?

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects than the Lithuania of the Union and Lithuania of Jesuits.

    Its clear that majority of Ukrainians were against Unia, so too were the Cossacks. Although you may think that for now Ukrainian nation is united, one day these fault lines will create an earthquake.

    I was somewhat busy and didnt answer your last reply, but you said that you care of the survival of the Ukrainian culture, and that I dont care, that somehow Ukrainian culture would be lost if Ukraine would be a part of the Russia. What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia? But you fear that Ukrainian culture is not strong or different enough to survive under Russia. That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian. Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.

    Replies: @AP

    Yes your words are not false,

    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is

    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects

    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    “Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila.”

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky’s destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).

    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?

    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.

    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.

    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly “security.” They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    @AP

    Do you think that making Ukrainian a second official language of all of Russia (even in the days of the Russian Empire) would have been far superior, AP?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

    , @AltanBakshi
    @AP


    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.
     
    So Kalmyks, Chechens and people of Kuban should choose the same road as Ukrainian nation and strive to be independent at any cost. Poor Kalmyks suffered much more because of Soviet rule than the Ukrainians.

    For some reason your view of Soviet Union lacks nuance.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Simpleguest
    @AP


    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly “security.” They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.
     
    I am disappointed at the level of immaturity exhibited here.

    Long time ago when Soviet Union still existed, we all thought that Russians (as we used to call everyone living east of Czechoslovakia) are mature people capable of, first, building an empire and than rebuilding it as a nuclear superpower capable of leading the world on par with USA.
    Shame.

    Imagine if Germans start bickering about the Thirty Year's War of the 17th century.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

    , @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Khmelnitsky's usage of Tatar auxiliary troops wasn't anything new and was a practice used before and after his reign as Hetman. It wasn't really that much different than when Rus princess in Southern Rus used nomadic tribes like the Pechenegs in their warring squabbles too. In Khmelnitsky's case, they weren't very reliable and a scourge as you point out, but in later years, as in Vyhovky's time they were quite useful as in the rout of the more massive Muscovite troops at Konotop. Tatar alliances, fortunately or not, were an important part of the political and military world within Ukraine at that time.

  25. @Korenchkin
    Why did Rossiya prevail over something like Rusiya?

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    Rusiya is Arabic?

  26. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Yes your words are not false,
     
    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is
     
    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects
     
    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    "Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila."

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky's destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).


    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?
     
    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.
     
    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.
     
    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly "security." They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @AltanBakshi, @Simpleguest, @Mr. Hack

    Do you think that making Ukrainian a second official language of all of Russia (even in the days of the Russian Empire) would have been far superior, AP?

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. XYZ

    I have a faint memory that I have seen somewhere Nikolai II recognizing Ukrainians in some letter written by him during his last years..

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    , @AP
    @Mr. XYZ

    It would have been more humane and would have had a much better chance of preserving the political unity of the Rus people. In that case Russia would have been like China, with Ukraine being Cantonese and Great Russia being Mandarin.

    There was a strong Little Russian movement in Ukraine in the mid 19th century. Its adherents were local patriots who believed that Little Russians rather than Muscovites were the principal heirs of Rus (see the essay I posted the link to above), standardized a literary Little Russian language and planned to introduce mass education in it; but they were also loyal to the Tsar and to the idea of a single Rus state. They were also anti-Polish and anti-Catholic, opposed to the local Polish nobles and Jews. Ironically, due to familiarity with Polish nationalists, this local Russian nationalism was perhaps more developed at the time than in Russia itself.

    The Russian authorities considered two approaches to them. The local government officials such as Governor-General Dondukov-Korsakov were friendly towards Little Russians, seeing them as loyal patriots, but officials in Moscow such as interior minister Pyotr Valuyev were spooked by the Polish uprising and decided that any deviation from Great Russianism was dangerous and should be destroyed. The anti-Little Russian approach prevailed and Little Russianism was shut down and persecuted. The result was the opposite of what was hoped for. A single Great Russian identity was neither achieved nor consolidated. Instead, Little Russians became bitter anti-Russian Ukrainians. Their project was achieved on a mass scale when they went into exile in Galicia (previously Galicia had been pro-Russian too) but even within the Russian Empire there was primarily resentment towards Great Russians and as I had written earlier there was no pro-Russian loyalty in Ukraine when it was needed, during the Revolution. Ukrainian nationalists easily won the elections in the Russian election of 1917 on Ukrainian lands. The all-Rus identity was historically rather brief to begin with and did not have a very stable foundation, but it may have been viable on Little Russian/Great Russian terms. Great Russian chauvinists successfully destroyed it.

    Putin's adventures in Crimea and Donbas continue the effective Russian tradition of Ukrainian nation-building. Good arguments can be made that this may be worth it, but it is still so.

  27. @Mr. XYZ
    @AP

    Do you think that making Ukrainian a second official language of all of Russia (even in the days of the Russian Empire) would have been far superior, AP?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

    I have a faint memory that I have seen somewhere Nikolai II recognizing Ukrainians in some letter written by him during his last years..

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    Well there you have it, proof positive that Ukraine and Russia, Ukrainians and Russians are indeed two separate countries and nationalities. :-)

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

  28. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Yes your words are not false,
     
    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is
     
    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects
     
    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    "Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila."

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky's destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).


    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?
     
    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.
     
    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.
     
    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly "security." They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @AltanBakshi, @Simpleguest, @Mr. Hack

    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    So Kalmyks, Chechens and people of Kuban should choose the same road as Ukrainian nation and strive to be independent at any cost. Poor Kalmyks suffered much more because of Soviet rule than the Ukrainians.

    For some reason your view of Soviet Union lacks nuance.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    So Kalmyks, Chechens and people of Kuban should choose the same road as Ukrainian nation and strive to be independent at any cost. Poor Kalmyks suffered much more because of Soviet rule than the Ukrainians.
     
    Kalmyks and Kuban Cossacks did fine under Moscow historically; only under Stalin did they have problems. Also their geographic situation makes things a bit more difficult. Chechens would be better off on their own (and Russia would be better off without them).
  29. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Yes your words are not false,
     
    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is
     
    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects
     
    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    "Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila."

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky's destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).


    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?
     
    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.
     
    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.
     
    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly "security." They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @AltanBakshi, @Simpleguest, @Mr. Hack

    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly “security.” They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    I am disappointed at the level of immaturity exhibited here.

    Long time ago when Soviet Union still existed, we all thought that Russians (as we used to call everyone living east of Czechoslovakia) are mature people capable of, first, building an empire and than rebuilding it as a nuclear superpower capable of leading the world on par with USA.
    Shame.

    Imagine if Germans start bickering about the Thirty Year’s War of the 17th century.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Simpleguest

    Different Slav ethnic groups in general are most adept at infighting and betraying each other. I have no idea why this is the case, but historically speaking it is undeniable that their German neighbors are much more aware of their general ethnic interests than Slavs have ever been. Starting in the VIIIth century CE the Wends allied to their Germanic neighbors against other Wendish tribes. To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other. The only way the Slavs can work together is under strong centralizing Imperial rule. This was achieved in Russia because of the example set by the Golden Horde. Of note, by the XIX century the Holstein Gottorp Romanovs were mainly German and so was a large part of the Russian nobility and bureaucrats. Also a great deal of Russian aristocracy had Turkic roots.

    Replies: @Zimriel, @Curmudgeon

    , @AP
    @Simpleguest

    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century. And in the 21st century, nowadays, over 50% of Russians support the man who did this, and Russian nationalists such as out Altanbakshi still proclaim that if only they could get their hands on the people of Galicia they would send them to Central Asia.

    So no thanks with the unity. Or with Soviet nostalgia which may be good for distant simpletons but not for people who have to live with that type of rule.

    Replies: @Simpleguest

  30. @Mr. Hack

    “Rossiya” is nothing more than than Greek for Rus’ (“Ruthenia” in Latin).
     
    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name? Although English is the best substitute for a lingua francua that the modern world has, you wouldn't expect the Kremlin to wake up one day and promulgate a new name to replace the current one "Rosija" to "Rasha" now would you? And although there were some Greek clergy to be found within, the Rus did, after all, accept the Slavic translation of the gospels...

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @Yevardian, @Ano4

    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?

    I don’t know, you tell me. After all you are the one insisting on using Ukraine (an exonym) to describe Rus lands. Why would you do that?

    😉

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    The term "Ukraine" isn't a foreign exonym used to describe the Ukrainian lands, but a local one first encountered within the Hypatian chronicle in the 12th century. It wasn't until the 1840's that the exonym "Ukraine" however, started to gain greater usage by the locals in Central Ukrainian territories, by intellectuals and literary men who favored this newer (older) term in order to help differentiate their nation from that of the "Rosijani" or "Moskali" to the north.

    Since you asked, please try to answer my original question:


    Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?
     
    And to make things clearer for you, I'm referring to Rosija and Rosijany, not Ukrainians and Ukraine. :-)

    Replies: @Ano4

  31. @AP
    @Seraphim

    And then there was "History of the Rus or Little Russia", written sometime between 1795 and 1810. It was widely circulated among the nobility of what is now Ukraine. It's secret author may have been Catherine II's chancellor, Alexander Bezborodko.

    Text here:

    http://izbornyk.org.ua/istrus/istrus02.htm

    “Восточныхъ Славянъ называли Скиθами или Скиттами по кочевой жизни и по частому переселенію съ мЂста на мЂсто; Полуденныхъ Сарматами по острымъ ящуринымъ глазамъ съ прижмуркою; и Русами или Русняками по волосамъ; СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ; а въ срединЂ отъ тЂхъ живущихъ по родоначальникамъ ихъ, потомкамъ Афетовымъ, называли: по Князю Русу, Роксоланами и Россами, а по Князю Мосоху, кочевавшему при рЂкЂ Моск†и давшему ей сіе названіе, Москвитами и Мосхами: отъ чего впослЂдствіи и Царство ихъ получило названіе Московскаго и наконецъ Россійскаго.”

    Rough translation : Eastern Slavs were called Scyffians or Scythians with a nomadic life and frequent moves, Sarmatians with sharp squinting eyes, and Rus or Rusnaks by their hair, Variags along the sea were named for their predation and ambushes…and in the middle living the descendants of Afetov, who were called Prince of Rus Poksoliany or Rossy, and by the Prince Mosokh, nomads along the Moskva River also known as Moskvyty and Moskh, from whom was descended a Tsardom that obtained the name Muscovy and eventually Russian.

    Later:

    “Bладимирское на КлязьмЂ и наконецъ Московское по городу МосквЂ. Но и тЂ Княжества, славилися первенствомъ свіоимъ по 1238 годъ; а съ сего года нашествіе войною Мунгальскихъ Татаръ, подъ начальствомъ Хана ихъ Батыя, внука Чингис-Ханова, всЂ Княжества удЂльныя и великія разрушило почти до основанія; города ихъ и селенія разорены и многіе сожжены; Князья и воинства избиты, а оставшіесь разсЂялись по отдаленнымъ СЂвернымъ провинціямъ, и съ сего времени большая часть Рускихъ Княжествъ подпали Татарскому игу. И хотя Княжества опять возстановлены, но пребывали они съ Князьями своими въ подданст†Татарскихъ Хановъ, которые, взимая дань съ народа, поставляли въ нихъ Князей и ихъ перемЂняли по своему произволенію, что продолжалось по 1462 годъ, въ который Князь Московскій Иванъ Васильевичь, Третій сего имени, пользуясь слабостію Татаръ, изнемогшихъ междоусобными войнами и раздЂлами, отказалъ Хану Ахмату отъ ежегодной дани съ народа и отъ своего повиновенія; а внукъ сего Князя, Иванъ Васильевичь Четвертый, названный Грозный, совокупивъ многія Княжества Рускія во едино, въ 1547 году переименовалъ себя изъ Князя Царемъ и Самодержцемъ Московскимъ, и съ того времяни навсегда уже Царство Московское и его владЂтели симъ названіемъ титуловались, съ переименованіемъ наконецъ Царства Московскаго на Россійское, которое, для различія отъ Чермной и БЂлой Руси, называлось Великою Россіею; тЂ же обЂ Руси вмЂстЂ названы тогда Малою Россіею.”

    I’ll just translate the end, about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia, which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia.”

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being "true Rus" and Russians being Muscovites can first be definitively found in this document, even though the term Ukrainian was not used and Little Russian was used instead.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Seraphim, @Gerard-Mandela

    СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ

    Thanks AP for this outstanding quote that I have not been aware of.

  32. What is Russian, Ruthenia, Rus, Small Russian, Great Russian, White Russian New Russian and whatever else Ru – which overlaps to various extend but is not synonymous – very much depends on time, circumstances and POV i.e. who is saying / writing it.

    Just to exemplify:

    Not so long ago Austrian was seen as German as for example Westphalian but would one say so today?

    Even better – for some Prussians were quintessential Germans but there was a time when other Germans were viewing the Prussian as nothing else but superficially germanised Poles of the Piefke sort who were thus imposters, LARP-ing usurpers imposing themselves over ‘real’ Germans and Germany.

    An analogy with Ugrofinnic and Tataro-Mongols wannabe Rus is hard to escape even thou as research shows the genetic core of a large part of Russia’s European population stretching well past Moscow overlaps with that of most Belarusians and many Ukrainians. I believe our host posted some time in the past a map showing just that.

  33. @Simpleguest
    @AP


    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly “security.” They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.
     
    I am disappointed at the level of immaturity exhibited here.

    Long time ago when Soviet Union still existed, we all thought that Russians (as we used to call everyone living east of Czechoslovakia) are mature people capable of, first, building an empire and than rebuilding it as a nuclear superpower capable of leading the world on par with USA.
    Shame.

    Imagine if Germans start bickering about the Thirty Year's War of the 17th century.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

    Different Slav ethnic groups in general are most adept at infighting and betraying each other. I have no idea why this is the case, but historically speaking it is undeniable that their German neighbors are much more aware of their general ethnic interests than Slavs have ever been. Starting in the VIIIth century CE the Wends allied to their Germanic neighbors against other Wendish tribes. To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other. The only way the Slavs can work together is under strong centralizing Imperial rule. This was achieved in Russia because of the example set by the Golden Horde. Of note, by the XIX century the Holstein Gottorp Romanovs were mainly German and so was a large part of the Russian nobility and bureaucrats. Also a great deal of Russian aristocracy had Turkic roots.

    • Agree: AltanBakshi
    • Thanks: Simpleguest
    • Troll: Yevardian
    • Replies: @Zimriel
    @Ano4

    The German states were no stranger to infighting. They first truly united way back in that mediaeval year AD 1871. 70-80 years before that their aristocrats tripped over their own male appendages, first failing to invade Revolutionary France (a chaos well ripe for plucking) and subsequently losing to Napoleon. During the Cold War, BRD premier Konrad Adenauer made little secret that he was pleased to leave the "Asiatics" across the Elbe to the Rus / Ruthenes / Moskovites whatever labels are being thrown about here.

    German divisions are real and they are spectacular.

    Replies: @Ano4

    , @Curmudgeon
    @Ano4

    Depending on the source, Wends are either the Germanic tribes bordering Charlemagne's Empire, or Varangians. Varangians were the Norse, or more specifically East Norse - Swedes. There are claims that Novgorod was essentially Norse.
    https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-ancient-traditions/kievan-rus-0013926
    I differ from the above link as it is not clear that the Norse referenced in the link were "Vikings". Old Norse viking(u)r were the raiders, essentially pirates. They were primarily the West Norse - Denmark and Norway. The East Norse were primarily traders, but fully capable of being raiders.

    Replies: @Ano4

  34. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    That sounds kind of crazy. Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?
     
    I don't know, you tell me. After all you are the one insisting on using Ukraine (an exonym) to describe Rus lands. Why would you do that?

    😉

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    The term “Ukraine” isn’t a foreign exonym used to describe the Ukrainian lands, but a local one first encountered within the Hypatian chronicle in the 12th century. It wasn’t until the 1840’s that the exonym “Ukraine” however, started to gain greater usage by the locals in Central Ukrainian territories, by intellectuals and literary men who favored this newer (older) term in order to help differentiate their nation from that of the “Rosijani” or “Moskali” to the north.

    Since you asked, please try to answer my original question:

    Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?

    And to make things clearer for you, I’m referring to Rosija and Rosijany, not Ukrainians and Ukraine. 🙂

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.

    The native name for these regions was White Rus, Black Rus and Red Rus respectively for modern day Belarus, Ukraine and Trans-Carpathian Ruthenia and Halychina. I am also certain that you know that. When White and Black Rus got united under the Muscovite Tzar they become known as Little Russia. Red Rus was unfortunately under Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian domination for many more centuries. During that domination it was mainly called Ruthenia in Latin.

    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire. For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.

    The Russian Empire used Rossia to emphasize that its origins can be traced back to the time of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine called Rus people Ros and described them in their chronicles as such. When Peter the Great imposed Russia in the European (and therefore World) affairs he wanted to ensure that neither of the other European powers would challenge the historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire and so he used the Byzantine transcription of the Rus ethnonym.

    Does that answer your (trolling) question?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

  35. @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. XYZ

    I have a faint memory that I have seen somewhere Nikolai II recognizing Ukrainians in some letter written by him during his last years..

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Well there you have it, proof positive that Ukraine and Russia, Ukrainians and Russians are indeed two separate countries and nationalities. 🙂

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    I know that your American mind cant perceive any nuances, only gross generalizations(thanks Calvinism and Hollywood) but Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes. The ethnogenesis of the Russian nation is just under a tempory setback. I believe that in the end truth and love will win between brothers, not strife and hatred as you and your deranged ilk desires.

    Its good to have you and AP here as Devils advocates!

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

  36. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Yes your words are not false,
     
    Thank you for at least being honest.

    but your heart is
     
    You do not have access to this.

    Surely this Volhynian Chronicle is an exception among the books written by the Rus and still the Lithuania before the Union of Lublin and before the Counter-reformation was totally different country for its Orthodox subjects
     
    Correct. But you also forget that the PLC after 1630 was totally different from PLC of the Counterreformation a couple of decades earlier. As even your biased Russian source admits:

    http://orthochristian.com/116252.html

    "Respected by all due to his family connections with several European royal houses, he [Peter Mogila] was able to negotiate with the Polish Sejm for the easing of restrictions against the Orthodox. Mogila also opened an institute of higher learning in Kiev that reached a very high level of educational quality, and then he proceeded to open schools throughout the area that would become Ukraine. In order to more greatly encompass all Orthodox thought, his schools taught in Latin, Greek, and Slavonic, and received students from all levels of society. Even the Uniate bishops had to admit with great consternation that their own educational institutions were paltry in comparison with those of Peter Mogila."

    Orthodoxy flourished in Ukraine until Khmelnytsky's destructive war during which he invited in the Tatar allies who with his troops plundered Orthodox monasteries.

    Kiev Mohyla Academy was perhaps the intellectual center of the Orthodox world at the time, prior to the uprising (and later also).


    What then are the Tatars and Buryats, Yakuts and the Armenians, have they lost or will they lose their culture as part of the Russia?
     
    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.

    That even with huge support by Soviet authorities Ukrainians switched their language to Russian.
     
    When Soviets supported Ukrainian culture in the 1920s it flourished, then they repressed it, it did not. Starving to death 3-4 million Ukrainian-speaking rural people and utterly destroying the rural heartland and its culture did not help.

    Clearly your beliefs arise from fear and not from desire to have economic and political security for all of the Rus.
     
    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly "security." They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ, @AltanBakshi, @Simpleguest, @Mr. Hack

    Khmelnitsky’s usage of Tatar auxiliary troops wasn’t anything new and was a practice used before and after his reign as Hetman. It wasn’t really that much different than when Rus princess in Southern Rus used nomadic tribes like the Pechenegs in their warring squabbles too. In Khmelnitsky’s case, they weren’t very reliable and a scourge as you point out, but in later years, as in Vyhovky’s time they were quite useful as in the rout of the more massive Muscovite troops at Konotop. Tatar alliances, fortunately or not, were an important part of the political and military world within Ukraine at that time.

    • Agree: Denis
  37. @AP
    @Seraphim

    And then there was "History of the Rus or Little Russia", written sometime between 1795 and 1810. It was widely circulated among the nobility of what is now Ukraine. It's secret author may have been Catherine II's chancellor, Alexander Bezborodko.

    Text here:

    http://izbornyk.org.ua/istrus/istrus02.htm

    “Восточныхъ Славянъ называли Скиθами или Скиттами по кочевой жизни и по частому переселенію съ мЂста на мЂсто; Полуденныхъ Сарматами по острымъ ящуринымъ глазамъ съ прижмуркою; и Русами или Русняками по волосамъ; СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ; а въ срединЂ отъ тЂхъ живущихъ по родоначальникамъ ихъ, потомкамъ Афетовымъ, называли: по Князю Русу, Роксоланами и Россами, а по Князю Мосоху, кочевавшему при рЂкЂ Моск†и давшему ей сіе названіе, Москвитами и Мосхами: отъ чего впослЂдствіи и Царство ихъ получило названіе Московскаго и наконецъ Россійскаго.”

    Rough translation : Eastern Slavs were called Scyffians or Scythians with a nomadic life and frequent moves, Sarmatians with sharp squinting eyes, and Rus or Rusnaks by their hair, Variags along the sea were named for their predation and ambushes…and in the middle living the descendants of Afetov, who were called Prince of Rus Poksoliany or Rossy, and by the Prince Mosokh, nomads along the Moskva River also known as Moskvyty and Moskh, from whom was descended a Tsardom that obtained the name Muscovy and eventually Russian.

    Later:

    “Bладимирское на КлязьмЂ и наконецъ Московское по городу МосквЂ. Но и тЂ Княжества, славилися первенствомъ свіоимъ по 1238 годъ; а съ сего года нашествіе войною Мунгальскихъ Татаръ, подъ начальствомъ Хана ихъ Батыя, внука Чингис-Ханова, всЂ Княжества удЂльныя и великія разрушило почти до основанія; города ихъ и селенія разорены и многіе сожжены; Князья и воинства избиты, а оставшіесь разсЂялись по отдаленнымъ СЂвернымъ провинціямъ, и съ сего времени большая часть Рускихъ Княжествъ подпали Татарскому игу. И хотя Княжества опять возстановлены, но пребывали они съ Князьями своими въ подданст†Татарскихъ Хановъ, которые, взимая дань съ народа, поставляли въ нихъ Князей и ихъ перемЂняли по своему произволенію, что продолжалось по 1462 годъ, въ который Князь Московскій Иванъ Васильевичь, Третій сего имени, пользуясь слабостію Татаръ, изнемогшихъ междоусобными войнами и раздЂлами, отказалъ Хану Ахмату отъ ежегодной дани съ народа и отъ своего повиновенія; а внукъ сего Князя, Иванъ Васильевичь Четвертый, названный Грозный, совокупивъ многія Княжества Рускія во едино, въ 1547 году переименовалъ себя изъ Князя Царемъ и Самодержцемъ Московскимъ, и съ того времяни навсегда уже Царство Московское и его владЂтели симъ названіемъ титуловались, съ переименованіемъ наконецъ Царства Московскаго на Россійское, которое, для различія отъ Чермной и БЂлой Руси, называлось Великою Россіею; тЂ же обЂ Руси вмЂстЂ названы тогда Малою Россіею.”

    I’ll just translate the end, about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia, which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia.”

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being "true Rus" and Russians being Muscovites can first be definitively found in this document, even though the term Ukrainian was not used and Little Russian was used instead.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Seraphim, @Gerard-Mandela

    Apparently not everyone took the История русов или Малой России as Gospel truth.
    It is from your link (Google translated):
    “Despite the wide popularity of the work in the 19th and early 20th centuries, even Ukrainian historians, in particular Nikolai Kostomarov, noted gross exaggerations in it, and often distortion of facts (for example, about the behavior of the Swedish occupation forces in Ukraine at the beginning of the 18th century). Many historians have recognized the History of the Rus as an unreliable source [5] [6]. So, the historian GF Karpov in 1870 called the “History of the Rus” a pamphlet, and warned against trusting the facts stated in it.
    Nikolay Kostomarov, who had been studying the history of Ukraine all his life, only in his declining years came to the clear conclusion that there is “a lot of infidelity in the History of the Rus, and therefore, at that time, having corresponded many times and passing from hand to hand according to different lists, produced harmful scientifically influence, because it spread false views on the past of Little Russia ”[8]. He also noted: “I was significantly damaged by the trust shown by such a murky source as“ History of the Rus ”” [9].
    On the other hand, there is the opinion of Polish historians, with whom the Polish historian Tadeusz Korzhon agreed in principle, that “History of the Rus” is not a true chronicle, but “an evil political libel, calculated on the complete ignorance of the Russian public and literature.”

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Seraphim

    There's really no need to try and attack the veracity of all of the information to be found within the "Istoria Rusov" that is interlaced with facts and fictionalized elements too:


    An important document of Ukrainian political thought from the end of the 18th or beginning of the 19th century, of unknown authorship. It vividly depicts the development of Ukraine, its people, and statehood from the remote past to 1769, focusing mostly on the periods of the Cossacks, Bohdan Khmelnytsky, and the Hetman state. The historical outlook embodied in the work is that of traditional Cossack historiography. The underlying principle of Istoriia Rusov is that each nation has a natural, moral, and historical right to an independent political development; its main theme is the struggle of the Ukrainian nation against foreign (Russian or Polish) domination. The author made ample use of contemporary historical sources and supplemented them with various legends, personal recollections, and 18th-century archival materials. It was not the writer's intention, however, to present an objective history of Ukraine; rather, he presented history as he believed it should have been.
     
    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CI%5CS%5CIstoriiaRusovIT.htm

    Taken for what it was intended to be, a political panegyric, it is an important document that eschews the feelings and opinions of members of the then contemporary progeny of the Hetmanate starshyna of Ukraine.

  38. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    The term "Ukraine" isn't a foreign exonym used to describe the Ukrainian lands, but a local one first encountered within the Hypatian chronicle in the 12th century. It wasn't until the 1840's that the exonym "Ukraine" however, started to gain greater usage by the locals in Central Ukrainian territories, by intellectuals and literary men who favored this newer (older) term in order to help differentiate their nation from that of the "Rosijani" or "Moskali" to the north.

    Since you asked, please try to answer my original question:


    Why would any proud nation-builders appropriate a foreign translation of their time honored original name?
     
    And to make things clearer for you, I'm referring to Rosija and Rosijany, not Ukrainians and Ukraine. :-)

    Replies: @Ano4

    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.

    The native name for these regions was White Rus, Black Rus and Red Rus respectively for modern day Belarus, Ukraine and Trans-Carpathian Ruthenia and Halychina. I am also certain that you know that. When White and Black Rus got united under the Muscovite Tzar they become known as Little Russia. Red Rus was unfortunately under Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian domination for many more centuries. During that domination it was mainly called Ruthenia in Latin.

    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire. For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.

    The Russian Empire used Rossia to emphasize that its origins can be traced back to the time of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine called Rus people Ros and described them in their chronicles as such. When Peter the Great imposed Russia in the European (and therefore World) affairs he wanted to ensure that neither of the other European powers would challenge the historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire and so he used the Byzantine transcription of the Rus ethnonym.

    Does that answer your (trolling) question?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Your answer to my "trolling" question is a good one, however, it still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the "historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire" to begin with? It seems a convenient ploy that this new political configuration in the north would find the bulk of its legitimacy in lands mostly in the South, lands today known as Ukraine. It looks as if proof of legitimacy of some kind was needed where perhaps none really existed?

    As for the exonym "Ukraine" having some sort of nefarious Polish origins, well this is just ridiculous. As I've already pointed out, the first mention of "Ukraine" can be found in the local Hypatian chronicle referring to South Rus lands, no Polish intrigue anywhere in sight.

    As for the usage and meaning of the word "Ukraine" in all three Slavic languages it means "borderland", for indeed Ukraine was a borderland area neighboring on and expanding into the mostly wild and uninhabited steppe area "dyke pole." In fact by the 17th century, starting with the hetmanate of Yuri Khmelnitsky and later including those of hetmans Petro Doroshenko and Ivan Briukhovetsky, the exonym "Ukraine" was commonly used in official correspondence with the Czar and Russian court. As one expert in the field has put it:


    The term “Ukraine,” meaning the Hetmanate, had been used with increasing frequency in Cossack correspondence with Muscovy since the times of Bohdan Khmelnytsky..the new Ukrainian project was very real, enhanced by the existence of a separate polity, administrative structure, and army.
     
    The Origin of Slavic Nations - Serhii Plokhy

    There are real and convincing reasons why the french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine - was he a Ukrainian nationalist too, Ano4? :-)

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Ano4

    , @AP
    @Ano4


    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.
     
    It translates roughly as something like "March" or "Mark" (i.e., Denmark) but its usage precedes the Poles:

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

    The oldest recorded mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In connection with the death of the Volodymyr Hlibovych, the ruler of Principality of Pereyaslavl which was Kyïv's southern shield against the Wild Fields, the Hypatian Codex says "oukraina groaned for him", ѡ нем же оукраина много постона (o nem že oukraina mnogo postona).[5] In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus' without a specific geographic fixation: Halych-Volhynia, Pskov, Ryazan etc.[6]:183[7]


    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
     
    Correct. I have mixed feelings about this deliberate change of terminology but the fact is that it is used widely and nothing can be done. Might as well ask Romanians to resume calling themselves Vlachs or whatever. I met some Russian nationalists in Moscow who complained bitterly to me that the useage of Russians rather than Rus and that the term "Russians," like "Ukrainian" was a term created by Poles and Jews to divide the Rus people. Well, what will he do, it is the widely used term nowadays.

    For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.
     
    Nothing good came of Hungarian rule but prior to Khmelnytsky's treason being part of the PLC could not be characterized as "domination" by a "foreign power" because the ones in control (and indeed steering PLC's eastern policies) were local princes who wielded much more power than they would under Muscovite domination.

    And of course Hapsburg rule was good for the Rus people.

    You might be interested in this article about Khmelytsky's nemesis, whom modern Ukrainian nationalists despise because they twist history:

    https://day.kyiv.ua/en/article/culture/jeremi-wisniowiecki-hero-or-antihero

    The character of a person’s actions is largely determined by his or her self-identification, which sets up the paradigm for this person’s conduct. Who did Wisniowiecki think he was? His princely descent was the foremost part of his self-image. In the eyes of society at the time it was something sacral, God-given. The title of prince put him on an equal footing with the szlachta (nobility) but only formally, because it actually gave him real advantages in obtaining government positions and opened up opportunities for participation in the political life of the Rzech Pospolita. Finally, princely descent gave a person the right to ascent to the throne. The Vyshnevetskys had blood relations among Polish kings, Lithuanian dukes, and Muscovite tsars.

    Wisniowiecki’s active role in defending the rights of Rus’ princes in 1638 spoke of his high regard for his descent. At the age of 26 he headed the party of kniazhata starozhytni, which brought together a number of respected older Ukrainian aristocrats. Their goal was to keep the titles they received before the Union of Lublin. This campaign, which was spearheaded by the prince, can be interpreted as a manifestation of Rus’ regionalism, which was, however, quite legal. Generally, Wisniowiecki was a legist, i.e., a representative of the school that highly esteemed the law. It should be noted that for a while he lived and studied in Western Europe with its relatively high level of respect for the law.

    Another aspect of Wisniowiecki’s self-identification was the fact that he was a law-abiding citizen of his state, the Rzech Pospolita. The prince was included in the system of power and seemed unable to imagine being outside it. Even when he was mistreated by the highest ranking officials, he did not resort to a rebellion or unlawful actions.

    An important factor for Wi ni­owiec­ki’s self-identification was his religious affiliation. He was raised in a family with strong Orthodox traditions. His parents were ardent Orthodox believers and protected the Orthodox Church in various ways. Wisniowiecki was christened in the Orthodox Church and remained there until the age of 20. However, in 1632, after he returned from Western Europe, he converted to Catholicism. Despite a widespread notion that at the time Ukrainian Orthodox nobility adopted the Catholic religion en masse, such conversions were not common. Therefore, Wisniowiecki’s step caused repercussions: for example, he received a condemning letter from Isaiah Kosynsky.

    Why did Wisniowiecki venture to do this, realizing that many in his milieu would react negatively? A number of researchers link his conversion to the fact that his teachers were Lviv-based Jesuits and he studied in Italian universities. After he had exposure to Western European Catholic culture, it grew on him. Such considerations might have played a part, but we should not think that these were the only factors contributing to his conversion.

    Wisniowiecki could not fail to understand that Catholicism opened far better opportunities for making a political career and joining the state elite. In my opinion, this pragmatic motive proved to be decisive.

    [a charitable and no less realistic interpretation than the author's, is that Wisniowecki viewed Catholicism as more advanced and Orthodoxy as backward, and as a "state-builder" he chose to reform his lands and people by bringing them to Catholicism. Peter I of Russia visited the Netherlands and had his own struggle with Orthodoxy after returning, but it came later and his modernization project did not involve conversion to Catholicism but massive changes in Russia's Church and often brutal cultural transformation - AP].

    Naturally, a religious conversion did not do credit to Wisniowiecki. In the circum­stances of an acute denominational confrontation in Ukraine this move was perceived as apostasy and betrayal of the ancestral traditions, which were treasured by society at the time. Young and ambitious Wisniowiecki had just returned from ab­ro­ad and wanted to make a career in politics; it is quite possible that he did not perceive the gravity of his step. Eventually, his conversion did not yield much in terms of political advancement. However, without this he would not have been so popular among the Polish szlachta and his son would not ha­ve ascended the Polish throne. In princip­le, this can be seen as the prince’s sagacity.

    We should not accuse Wisniowiecki of religious intolerance, which is often a distinctive feature of neophytes. True, he funded Catholic cathedrals in Ukrainian lands, but, on the other hand, it is a clear exaggeration to attribute to him the forceful imposition of Catholicism. At the same time, the prince helped Orthodox shrines: there are testimonies that during the Khmelnytsky-led war the Cossacks looted some Orthodox monasteries, while Wisniowiecki defended them. Isn’t this paradoxical: an adherent of Catholicism defended Orthodox monks from the Cossacks, who claimed to be protectors of Orthodoxy? Also telling is Wisniowiecki’s 1648 move when the throne was vacant and he supported George I R k czi, a Protestant. In other words, when socially important things were at stake, religious affiliation was not a factor for the prince. In principle, this kind of “denominational pragmatism” was common among the magnates in the Rzech Pospolita at the time.

    It was precisely pragmatism and sober calculations that helped Wisniowiecki gain control over lands in Left-Bank Ukraine and become extremely wealthy. His success in this sphere is almost unreal. It should be noted that the Vyshnevetskys were not rich, so some representatives of this dynasty sought a military career, as was the case with his great grandfather, Dmytro Vyshnevetsky (Baida).

    Paradoxical as it may seem, with his administrative and economic activities the prince created a foundation for the creation of the modern Ukrainian nation. The territories that were settled and populated in the time of his rule became the launching pad for Ukraine’s cultural formation. Con­temporary standard Ukrainian developed from the Poltava–Kyiv dialects.

    Hryhorii Skovoroda, Ivan Kotlia­rev­sky, Hryhorii Kvitka-Osnovianenko, Yev­hen Hrebinka, Taras Shevchenko, and nu­merous prominent figures in Ukrainian culture came from Wisniowiecki’s Left-Bank estates (known as Vyshnevechchyna) and the neighboring territories. It may sound somewhat far-fetched, but we would not have the Ukrainian nation in its modern cultural form without Wisniowiecki who was called “an enemy of the Ukrainian people.”

    Gaining control over Left-Bank Ukraine would have been possible without fighting the Tatars, who constantly plundered Ukrainian lands and took people prisoners. In the 1640s Wisniowiecki made quite a few raids against them and managed to secure the safety of these territories. The fact that Wisniowiecki provided protection for the lands and granted privileges to the newcomers was an important factor that facilitated his efforts to bring this territory under control.

    Those who accuse Wisniowiecki of having an anti-Ukrainian stance rely in their assessment on the fact that he was against Khmelnytsky’s actions when he managed to organize the Zaporozhian Cossacks for a rebellion. Today Khmelnytsky is an unquestionable Ukrainian national hero and a symbol of Ukrianianness. On the other hand, in Ukrainian folklore this figure is described in somewhat restrained manner and some activists of the Ukrainian national revival, Shevchenko for one, were very critical of Khmelnytsky. I will not dwell now about how the myth about Khmelnytsky took shape, but will just mention that it appeared later, in the 19th century. Any myth does not always correspond to historic events and often replaces true facts with the desired ones. Subjectively, Khmelnytsky was not and, in fact, at the time, could not possibly be a national leader. He was guided by his own interests and sometimes his own ambitions. At the same time, he became a tool of a tough geopolitical game on the territory of Eastern Europe that was played by the imperial states—the Rzecz Pospolita, Turkey, Russia, and even Sweden.

    That is why there is no point in interpreting Wisniowiecki or Khmelnytsky through the lens of national vision. As a loyal citizen of the Rzech Pospolita, Wisniowiecki saw in Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks rebels, law-breakers, and traitors of the state. Khmelnytsky had brought along the Tatars, something other Cossack leaders did not dare do.

    Both Wisniowiecki and Khmelnytsky knew that since 1646 King W adys aw had been nurturing a plan to destroy the Crimean Khanate, and both of them had been involved in the realization of this plan. Now with Khmelnytsky’s help the khanate dealt a blow to the Rzech Pospolita. What could Wisniowiecki’s reaction be under the circumstances?

    Furthermore, Khmelnytsky’s rebellion sowed the seeds of anarchy and disorganization in social life and posed a direct threat to the prince’s estates in Left-Bank Uk­raine. The city of Lubny, Vyshnevech­chy­na’s seat of sorts, was razed to the ground. The same fate befell other prosperous settlements of craftsmen and merchants. This rebellion brought the Tatar hordes to Uk­rainian lands, and they engaged in merciless looting. In fact, the Cossack army was largely comprised of the Tatars, and without their help the Cossacks would have been unable to succeed in their fight against the Rzech Pospolita. In contrast to this, the Vyshnevetsky princes were famed anti-Tatar crusaders. In this context Wi ­niowiecki’s struggle against Khmelnytsky appears to be quite logical.

    The intricacies of this struggle have been described in detail and are well-known. Here I would like to say that in this struggle Wisniowiecki was not without his faults; he often resorted to cruel terror, deservedly earning his nickname—“the terror of the Cossacks.” His characteristic pragmatism seems to have often betrayed him in this struggle, giving place to emotions.

    Replies: @Dreadilk

  39. @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    Well there you have it, proof positive that Ukraine and Russia, Ukrainians and Russians are indeed two separate countries and nationalities. :-)

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    I know that your American mind cant perceive any nuances, only gross generalizations(thanks Calvinism and Hollywood) but Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes. The ethnogenesis of the Russian nation is just under a tempory setback. I believe that in the end truth and love will win between brothers, not strife and hatred as you and your deranged ilk desires.

    Its good to have you and AP here as Devils advocates!

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    You certainly must have AP and myself mixed-up with somebody perhaps of your own background and breeding? Mongolians were commonly referred to as "devils" in Ukraine and Russia for their immense and barbaric carnage inflicted upon the Rus lands and other peoples too.

    https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/kGfyDa8sDDTFrHJbgVXblgV1flQ=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale():strip_icc()/pic58131.jpg

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    , @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes.
     
    No, you exaggerate because Greeks etc., all spoke more or less the same language. Its more akin not to Swedes two tribes but Dutch vs. Germans, or Swedes vs. Norwegians (even more so, as Ukrainian is more distant from Russian than Swedish is from Norwegian).

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

  40. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.

    The native name for these regions was White Rus, Black Rus and Red Rus respectively for modern day Belarus, Ukraine and Trans-Carpathian Ruthenia and Halychina. I am also certain that you know that. When White and Black Rus got united under the Muscovite Tzar they become known as Little Russia. Red Rus was unfortunately under Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian domination for many more centuries. During that domination it was mainly called Ruthenia in Latin.

    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire. For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.

    The Russian Empire used Rossia to emphasize that its origins can be traced back to the time of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine called Rus people Ros and described them in their chronicles as such. When Peter the Great imposed Russia in the European (and therefore World) affairs he wanted to ensure that neither of the other European powers would challenge the historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire and so he used the Byzantine transcription of the Rus ethnonym.

    Does that answer your (trolling) question?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    Your answer to my “trolling” question is a good one, however, it still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the “historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire” to begin with? It seems a convenient ploy that this new political configuration in the north would find the bulk of its legitimacy in lands mostly in the South, lands today known as Ukraine. It looks as if proof of legitimacy of some kind was needed where perhaps none really existed?

    As for the exonym “Ukraine” having some sort of nefarious Polish origins, well this is just ridiculous. As I’ve already pointed out, the first mention of “Ukraine” can be found in the local Hypatian chronicle referring to South Rus lands, no Polish intrigue anywhere in sight.

    As for the usage and meaning of the word “Ukraine” in all three Slavic languages it means “borderland”, for indeed Ukraine was a borderland area neighboring on and expanding into the mostly wild and uninhabited steppe area “dyke pole.” In fact by the 17th century, starting with the hetmanate of Yuri Khmelnitsky and later including those of hetmans Petro Doroshenko and Ivan Briukhovetsky, the exonym “Ukraine” was commonly used in official correspondence with the Czar and Russian court. As one expert in the field has put it:

    The term “Ukraine,” meaning the Hetmanate, had been used with increasing frequency in Cossack correspondence with Muscovy since the times of Bohdan Khmelnytsky..the new Ukrainian project was very real, enhanced by the existence of a separate polity, administrative structure, and army.

    The Origin of Slavic Nations – Serhii Plokhy

    There are real and convincing reasons why the french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine – was he a Ukrainian nationalist too, Ano4? 🙂

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    Kingdom of Castile taking the Latin name of their Peninsula, or English and Scots using Britain? Your historical illiteracy really doesnt know any bounds.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    , @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the “historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire” to begin with
     
    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer, he changed Russian society and culture in very extreme ways. Starting with Peter the Great, westernizing tendencies prevailed in the Russian nobility and deeply affected the mentality of the Russian Empire's elites. And it could be argued that these westernizing elites were directly responsible for the Revolution, Bolsheviks being also Westernizers and Communism being a Western political doctrine.

    Changing their countries' traditions to bring them closer to Western standards and rewriting their historical record to please / impress the West is what Westernizers do. BTW this is what Ukrainian nationalists do since day one: negating or downplaying their Rusyn or Malorossian origins, affirming that Moskali and Khokhly are two different and incompatible nations and blathering about Ukrayna Ce Evropa (as if Moscow and St Petersburg are located somewhere in Asia).

    🙂


    french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine
     
    Beauplan entitled his map as Description d'Ukranie (sic) qui sont plusieurs provinces du Royaume de Pologne contenues depuis les confins de la Moscovie, jusqu'aux limites de la Transilvanie.

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beauplan_opys_1660.jpg

    1) Beauplan used the Polish name for these "provinces" which Rus names I have clearly mentioned in my previous comment.

    2) Beauplan actually used Ukranie instead of Ukraina / Ukraine.

    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn't accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.

    🙂

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @anonymous coward

  41. @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    I know that your American mind cant perceive any nuances, only gross generalizations(thanks Calvinism and Hollywood) but Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes. The ethnogenesis of the Russian nation is just under a tempory setback. I believe that in the end truth and love will win between brothers, not strife and hatred as you and your deranged ilk desires.

    Its good to have you and AP here as Devils advocates!

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    You certainly must have AP and myself mixed-up with somebody perhaps of your own background and breeding? Mongolians were commonly referred to as “devils” in Ukraine and Russia for their immense and barbaric carnage inflicted upon the Rus lands and other peoples too.

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    Really, are you not getting the context? Because you and AP represent the opposition towards the unification of the Rus or you are against the RF, without you this comment section would be more like a echo chamber. It was a compliment and you somehow dont get it? Rest of here who have some connection Russia, support Putin, or are Russian nationalists, or antiwestern or Sovoks. Yes there are others here, but they are not from the peoples of ex-Soviet Union.

  42. @Seraphim
    "Rossia" was the term used also in Latin documents. Ex. The 'Bendery Constitution' of the 'Zaporozhian Host' and of 'Rossiaca gens' of Pylyp Orlyk:

    "Pacta et constitutiones legum libertatumque exercitus Zaporoviensis":

    Exercitu Zaporoviensi genteque Rossiaca protectione Imperii Moscovitici dedisse et libere se subdidisse...
    erigendis ecclesiis exercendisque in artibus liberalibus filiis Rossiacis dilatetur...
    Propter vero majorem authoritatem primariae in Parva Rossia sedis Metropolitanae Kiiovensis faciliorique in Spiritualibus regimine...
    Parva Rossia, patria nostra...
    Metropolis Urbs Rossiae, Kiiovia...

    The 'Constitution' differentiates between the Cossacks, who are the descendants of the Khazars, and the 'Rossiaca gens', Russians.
    "Ita et gentem strenuam antiquamque Cosaticam, antea nominatam Cossaricam, prius exaltaverat immoritura gloria, amplo dominio et factis heroicis...
    Anyhow, the country is emphatically called 'Parva Rossia' by the locals. 'Ruthenia' was a scholarly Latinizing term 'Rusia sive Ruthenia' used by foreigners.

    Raška (in Latin Rascia) was the medieval region from which the Serbian realm grew. Raška is in the Kotor region. Stefan Nemanja, the "founder" of Serbia, started as župan of Raška. Soon after Raška (Rascia) became an exonym for Serbia in western sources (Papacy, German, Italian, French etc.) often in conjunction with Serbia (Servia et Rascia).

    Replies: @AP, @Zimriel

    Huh, “Servia et Rascia”. Endonym-and-exonym. Just like the legal Norman “Null & Void”.

  43. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Your answer to my "trolling" question is a good one, however, it still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the "historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire" to begin with? It seems a convenient ploy that this new political configuration in the north would find the bulk of its legitimacy in lands mostly in the South, lands today known as Ukraine. It looks as if proof of legitimacy of some kind was needed where perhaps none really existed?

    As for the exonym "Ukraine" having some sort of nefarious Polish origins, well this is just ridiculous. As I've already pointed out, the first mention of "Ukraine" can be found in the local Hypatian chronicle referring to South Rus lands, no Polish intrigue anywhere in sight.

    As for the usage and meaning of the word "Ukraine" in all three Slavic languages it means "borderland", for indeed Ukraine was a borderland area neighboring on and expanding into the mostly wild and uninhabited steppe area "dyke pole." In fact by the 17th century, starting with the hetmanate of Yuri Khmelnitsky and later including those of hetmans Petro Doroshenko and Ivan Briukhovetsky, the exonym "Ukraine" was commonly used in official correspondence with the Czar and Russian court. As one expert in the field has put it:


    The term “Ukraine,” meaning the Hetmanate, had been used with increasing frequency in Cossack correspondence with Muscovy since the times of Bohdan Khmelnytsky..the new Ukrainian project was very real, enhanced by the existence of a separate polity, administrative structure, and army.
     
    The Origin of Slavic Nations - Serhii Plokhy

    There are real and convincing reasons why the french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine - was he a Ukrainian nationalist too, Ano4? :-)

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Ano4

    Kingdom of Castile taking the Latin name of their Peninsula, or English and Scots using Britain? Your historical illiteracy really doesnt know any bounds.

    • Troll: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    Save your nonsense for somebody else - I'm not interested. :-(

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

  44. @Ano4
    @Simpleguest

    Different Slav ethnic groups in general are most adept at infighting and betraying each other. I have no idea why this is the case, but historically speaking it is undeniable that their German neighbors are much more aware of their general ethnic interests than Slavs have ever been. Starting in the VIIIth century CE the Wends allied to their Germanic neighbors against other Wendish tribes. To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other. The only way the Slavs can work together is under strong centralizing Imperial rule. This was achieved in Russia because of the example set by the Golden Horde. Of note, by the XIX century the Holstein Gottorp Romanovs were mainly German and so was a large part of the Russian nobility and bureaucrats. Also a great deal of Russian aristocracy had Turkic roots.

    Replies: @Zimriel, @Curmudgeon

    The German states were no stranger to infighting. They first truly united way back in that mediaeval year AD 1871. 70-80 years before that their aristocrats tripped over their own male appendages, first failing to invade Revolutionary France (a chaos well ripe for plucking) and subsequently losing to Napoleon. During the Cold War, BRD premier Konrad Adenauer made little secret that he was pleased to leave the “Asiatics” across the Elbe to the Rus / Ruthenes / Moskovites whatever labels are being thrown about here.

    German divisions are real and they are spectacular.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Zimriel


    German divisions are real and they are spectacular.

     

    Perhaps, but I need to repeat myself:

    To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other.

    During the Cold War, BRD premier Konrad Adenauer made little secret that he was pleased to leave the “Asiatics” across the Elbe to the Rus / Ruthenes / Moskovites whatever labels are being thrown about here.
     
    Well, maybe he just understood that some 30% of the DDR male population was indeed just germanized Wends (without mentioning the Sorbs).

    😁
  45. @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    Kingdom of Castile taking the Latin name of their Peninsula, or English and Scots using Britain? Your historical illiteracy really doesnt know any bounds.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Save your nonsense for somebody else – I’m not interested. 🙁

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    Then you are free to not reply my posts or you can just ignore me, still you are often replying....

  46. @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    You certainly must have AP and myself mixed-up with somebody perhaps of your own background and breeding? Mongolians were commonly referred to as "devils" in Ukraine and Russia for their immense and barbaric carnage inflicted upon the Rus lands and other peoples too.

    https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/kGfyDa8sDDTFrHJbgVXblgV1flQ=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale():strip_icc()/pic58131.jpg

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    Really, are you not getting the context? Because you and AP represent the opposition towards the unification of the Rus or you are against the RF, without you this comment section would be more like a echo chamber. It was a compliment and you somehow dont get it? Rest of here who have some connection Russia, support Putin, or are Russian nationalists, or antiwestern or Sovoks. Yes there are others here, but they are not from the peoples of ex-Soviet Union.

  47. @Mr. XYZ
    @AP

    Do you think that making Ukrainian a second official language of all of Russia (even in the days of the Russian Empire) would have been far superior, AP?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @AP

    It would have been more humane and would have had a much better chance of preserving the political unity of the Rus people. In that case Russia would have been like China, with Ukraine being Cantonese and Great Russia being Mandarin.

    There was a strong Little Russian movement in Ukraine in the mid 19th century. Its adherents were local patriots who believed that Little Russians rather than Muscovites were the principal heirs of Rus (see the essay I posted the link to above), standardized a literary Little Russian language and planned to introduce mass education in it; but they were also loyal to the Tsar and to the idea of a single Rus state. They were also anti-Polish and anti-Catholic, opposed to the local Polish nobles and Jews. Ironically, due to familiarity with Polish nationalists, this local Russian nationalism was perhaps more developed at the time than in Russia itself.

    The Russian authorities considered two approaches to them. The local government officials such as Governor-General Dondukov-Korsakov were friendly towards Little Russians, seeing them as loyal patriots, but officials in Moscow such as interior minister Pyotr Valuyev were spooked by the Polish uprising and decided that any deviation from Great Russianism was dangerous and should be destroyed. The anti-Little Russian approach prevailed and Little Russianism was shut down and persecuted. The result was the opposite of what was hoped for. A single Great Russian identity was neither achieved nor consolidated. Instead, Little Russians became bitter anti-Russian Ukrainians. Their project was achieved on a mass scale when they went into exile in Galicia (previously Galicia had been pro-Russian too) but even within the Russian Empire there was primarily resentment towards Great Russians and as I had written earlier there was no pro-Russian loyalty in Ukraine when it was needed, during the Revolution. Ukrainian nationalists easily won the elections in the Russian election of 1917 on Ukrainian lands. The all-Rus identity was historically rather brief to begin with and did not have a very stable foundation, but it may have been viable on Little Russian/Great Russian terms. Great Russian chauvinists successfully destroyed it.

    Putin’s adventures in Crimea and Donbas continue the effective Russian tradition of Ukrainian nation-building. Good arguments can be made that this may be worth it, but it is still so.

  48. @Mr. Hack
    @AltanBakshi

    Save your nonsense for somebody else - I'm not interested. :-(

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    Then you are free to not reply my posts or you can just ignore me, still you are often replying….

  49. @Simpleguest
    @AP


    They arise from knowledge of history. Deepening serfdom, destruction of local autonomy and institutions, starving to death millions of people were hardly “security.” They represent consolidation of power for part of Rus, Moscow, but not all of Rus.
     
    I am disappointed at the level of immaturity exhibited here.

    Long time ago when Soviet Union still existed, we all thought that Russians (as we used to call everyone living east of Czechoslovakia) are mature people capable of, first, building an empire and than rebuilding it as a nuclear superpower capable of leading the world on par with USA.
    Shame.

    Imagine if Germans start bickering about the Thirty Year's War of the 17th century.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century. And in the 21st century, nowadays, over 50% of Russians support the man who did this, and Russian nationalists such as out Altanbakshi still proclaim that if only they could get their hands on the people of Galicia they would send them to Central Asia.

    So no thanks with the unity. Or with Soviet nostalgia which may be good for distant simpletons but not for people who have to live with that type of rule.

    • Replies: @Simpleguest
    @AP


    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century.
     
    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don't show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

    Finally, for a very brief moment in history, in the post Cuban crisis period, Soviet Union was accepted and treated as equal by the West and the US.

    In general, this was a period of unbridled optimism and faith in the bright future of humanity based on unlimited technological and scientific development. Soviet Union was accepted as equal participant and significant contributor to this future.

    To better illustrate the mood of the era, I will mention Kubrick's famous "2001: A space Odyssey" and a scene from it. Without describing the scene too much, it involves an encounter and a brief dialogue with several Soviet, as they were all speaking Russian, presumably scientists, waiting for their regular trip to a permanent human moon base.

    Where are you now? Bickering who has and who does not have the right to the Rus brand.
    Shame indeed.

    Replies: @AP

  50. @AltanBakshi
    @Mr. Hack

    I know that your American mind cant perceive any nuances, only gross generalizations(thanks Calvinism and Hollywood) but Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes. The ethnogenesis of the Russian nation is just under a tempory setback. I believe that in the end truth and love will win between brothers, not strife and hatred as you and your deranged ilk desires.

    Its good to have you and AP here as Devils advocates!

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes.

    No, you exaggerate because Greeks etc., all spoke more or less the same language. Its more akin not to Swedes two tribes but Dutch vs. Germans, or Swedes vs. Norwegians (even more so, as Ukrainian is more distant from Russian than Swedish is from Norwegian).

    • Replies: @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist.... Although I am very sympathetic towards Russians and the Slavs, except Croats and those who harbor strongly anti-Russian forms of Ukrainian or Polish nationalism.... Probably most non-uniate Galicians are salvageable... Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.


    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.

    French too spoke many different varieties of Gallo-Romance, which were not mutually intelligible, like Arpitan and Langues d'oil some even spoke Dutch Flemish, German and Breton. But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation. In the end tribalism just leads to the death of ones tribe, for few petty nations have as strong coherence, in the longer run, as Jews have. There are two choices for small nations, to unite with ones kin and achieve a civilizational level as a culture or slowly die from insignificance. And I say this as a man who strongly cares of the well being of many small nations. Yes some small nations can survive, but for that you need to be a product of very particular history, like the Tibetans, and have your own faith.

    Replies: @AP, @Agathoklis

  51. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Malorossy/Ukrainians and Velikorossy are two branches of one Russian nation as Greeks originally were three tribes or Swedes two tribes or Germans multitude of tribes.
     
    No, you exaggerate because Greeks etc., all spoke more or less the same language. Its more akin not to Swedes two tribes but Dutch vs. Germans, or Swedes vs. Norwegians (even more so, as Ukrainian is more distant from Russian than Swedish is from Norwegian).

    Replies: @AltanBakshi

    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist…. Although I am very sympathetic towards Russians and the Slavs, except Croats and those who harbor strongly anti-Russian forms of Ukrainian or Polish nationalism…. Probably most non-uniate Galicians are salvageable… Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.

    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.

    French too spoke many different varieties of Gallo-Romance, which were not mutually intelligible, like Arpitan and Langues d’oil some even spoke Dutch Flemish, German and Breton. But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation. In the end tribalism just leads to the death of ones tribe, for few petty nations have as strong coherence, in the longer run, as Jews have. There are two choices for small nations, to unite with ones kin and achieve a civilizational level as a culture or slowly die from insignificance. And I say this as a man who strongly cares of the well being of many small nations. Yes some small nations can survive, but for that you need to be a product of very particular history, like the Tibetans, and have your own faith.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist
     
    I am I suppose a pan-Slavist in the real term, not as it was commonly used in the 19th century when it was a a language trick that really stood for Great Russian nationalism. I want good fortune for all the Slavic peoples, and in particular the Rus peoples. The Muscovites had done a good job for themselves but unfortunately often at the expense of other Rus peoples. I do not hate them for it, and indeed love their culture and hate those who have destroyed them but given what they have done to their brothers in Novgorod and Ukraine it is better for them to stay on their own lands and to focus their efforts on civilizing the East where they have done much good, rather than ruining their western brothers.

    Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.
     
    They were conquered no less with Ukrainian blood, and Ukrainians helped Russians conquer and settle the East. But ultimately it is the choice of the locals. Outside Donbas locals preferred staying in the Ukrainian state. 2014 when Ukraine had no real army was a good test.

    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.
     
    I stand corrected on this point, I guess.

    But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation.
     
    You do not view Muscovite attempted destruction of non-Muscovite Rus cultures (which ironically led to the fragmentation of the Russian Empire, see my other post) or bitter opposition to expansion of incorporation of Moscow into PLC which would have produced a true pan-Slavic homeland, as narrow tribalism?
    , @Agathoklis
    @AltanBakshi

    "You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek."

    Incorrect. Ancient sources, and modern scholars, generally all suggest that Doric, Aeolian and Ionian were mutually intelligible. Unintelligibility only occurred when a speaker of one of these dialects came from a more remote Greek city-state or kingdom and they had difficulty understanding them due to their accents and peculiar pronunciations. Not sure what Tsakonian, Karamanlidika and Pontic Greek comments have to do with the above comment.

  52. @Seraphim
    @AP

    Apparently not everyone took the История русов или Малой России as Gospel truth.
    It is from your link (Google translated):
    "Despite the wide popularity of the work in the 19th and early 20th centuries, even Ukrainian historians, in particular Nikolai Kostomarov, noted gross exaggerations in it, and often distortion of facts (for example, about the behavior of the Swedish occupation forces in Ukraine at the beginning of the 18th century). Many historians have recognized the History of the Rus as an unreliable source [5] [6]. So, the historian GF Karpov in 1870 called the "History of the Rus" a pamphlet, and warned against trusting the facts stated in it.
    Nikolay Kostomarov, who had been studying the history of Ukraine all his life, only in his declining years came to the clear conclusion that there is “a lot of infidelity in the History of the Rus, and therefore, at that time, having corresponded many times and passing from hand to hand according to different lists, produced harmful scientifically influence, because it spread false views on the past of Little Russia ”[8]. He also noted: “I was significantly damaged by the trust shown by such a murky source as“ History of the Rus ”” [9].
    On the other hand, there is the opinion of Polish historians, with whom the Polish historian Tadeusz Korzhon agreed in principle, that "History of the Rus" is not a true chronicle, but "an evil political libel, calculated on the complete ignorance of the Russian public and literature."

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    There’s really no need to try and attack the veracity of all of the information to be found within the “Istoria Rusov” that is interlaced with facts and fictionalized elements too:

    An important document of Ukrainian political thought from the end of the 18th or beginning of the 19th century, of unknown authorship. It vividly depicts the development of Ukraine, its people, and statehood from the remote past to 1769, focusing mostly on the periods of the Cossacks, Bohdan Khmelnytsky, and the Hetman state. The historical outlook embodied in the work is that of traditional Cossack historiography. The underlying principle of Istoriia Rusov is that each nation has a natural, moral, and historical right to an independent political development; its main theme is the struggle of the Ukrainian nation against foreign (Russian or Polish) domination. The author made ample use of contemporary historical sources and supplemented them with various legends, personal recollections, and 18th-century archival materials. It was not the writer’s intention, however, to present an objective history of Ukraine; rather, he presented history as he believed it should have been.

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CI%5CS%5CIstoriiaRusovIT.htm

    Taken for what it was intended to be, a political panegyric, it is an important document that eschews the feelings and opinions of members of the then contemporary progeny of the Hetmanate starshyna of Ukraine.

  53. @AltanBakshi
    @AP


    Russia has shown neither interest nor history of trying to erase these cultures. Unlike in the case of Little Russian/Ukrainian.
     
    So Kalmyks, Chechens and people of Kuban should choose the same road as Ukrainian nation and strive to be independent at any cost. Poor Kalmyks suffered much more because of Soviet rule than the Ukrainians.

    For some reason your view of Soviet Union lacks nuance.

    Replies: @AP

    So Kalmyks, Chechens and people of Kuban should choose the same road as Ukrainian nation and strive to be independent at any cost. Poor Kalmyks suffered much more because of Soviet rule than the Ukrainians.

    Kalmyks and Kuban Cossacks did fine under Moscow historically; only under Stalin did they have problems. Also their geographic situation makes things a bit more difficult. Chechens would be better off on their own (and Russia would be better off without them).

  54. I recall around the time coverage of all the “Maidan” stuff was at its peak, there was quite a bit of talk in the “altenative” media that the whole revolution itself was a plot orchestrated and lead by Jews with the intention of basically claiming the Ukraine for themselves because they see it as the true Khazarian homeland of Ashkenazi Jews.

    One of the most commonly speculated reasons is that elite Jews want to set up the Ukraine as a potential alternative to Israel should something happen there that would make continued Jewish presence there unviable, and the large proportion of Jewish politicians in the Ukrainian parliament as well as the fact Zelensky the Ukrainian president is Jewish is often cited as proof of this.

    I think it all sounds a bit far-fetched, but it’s undeniable that Jewish involvement in the Ukraine is absolutely huge, probably the most of any country in Europe.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    @Europe Europa

    No, it is not farfetched. It is the elephant in the room, that people pretend to not see because of the smoke-screen of the 'Bandero-Ukro-Nazis'.

    Replies: @anonymous coward

    , @Old Jew
    @Europe Europa

    Romanian nationalists said the same about Romania:
    Jews want to populate it, when Israel collapses.

  55. AP says:
    @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.

    The native name for these regions was White Rus, Black Rus and Red Rus respectively for modern day Belarus, Ukraine and Trans-Carpathian Ruthenia and Halychina. I am also certain that you know that. When White and Black Rus got united under the Muscovite Tzar they become known as Little Russia. Red Rus was unfortunately under Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian domination for many more centuries. During that domination it was mainly called Ruthenia in Latin.

    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire. For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.

    The Russian Empire used Rossia to emphasize that its origins can be traced back to the time of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine called Rus people Ros and described them in their chronicles as such. When Peter the Great imposed Russia in the European (and therefore World) affairs he wanted to ensure that neither of the other European powers would challenge the historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire and so he used the Byzantine transcription of the Rus ethnonym.

    Does that answer your (trolling) question?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.

    It translates roughly as something like “March” or “Mark” (i.e., Denmark) but its usage precedes the Poles:

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

    The oldest recorded mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In connection with the death of the Volodymyr Hlibovych, the ruler of Principality of Pereyaslavl which was Kyïv’s southern shield against the Wild Fields, the Hypatian Codex says “oukraina groaned for him”, ѡ нем же оукраина много постона (o nem že oukraina mnogo postona).[5] In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus’ without a specific geographic fixation: Halych-Volhynia, Pskov, Ryazan etc.[6]:183[7]

    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire.

    Correct. I have mixed feelings about this deliberate change of terminology but the fact is that it is used widely and nothing can be done. Might as well ask Romanians to resume calling themselves Vlachs or whatever. I met some Russian nationalists in Moscow who complained bitterly to me that the useage of Russians rather than Rus and that the term “Russians,” like “Ukrainian” was a term created by Poles and Jews to divide the Rus people. Well, what will he do, it is the widely used term nowadays.

    For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.

    Nothing good came of Hungarian rule but prior to Khmelnytsky’s treason being part of the PLC could not be characterized as “domination” by a “foreign power” because the ones in control (and indeed steering PLC’s eastern policies) were local princes who wielded much more power than they would under Muscovite domination.

    And of course Hapsburg rule was good for the Rus people.

    You might be interested in this article about Khmelytsky’s nemesis, whom modern Ukrainian nationalists despise because they twist history:

    https://day.kyiv.ua/en/article/culture/jeremi-wisniowiecki-hero-or-antihero

    [MORE]

    The character of a person’s actions is largely determined by his or her self-identification, which sets up the paradigm for this person’s conduct. Who did Wisniowiecki think he was? His princely descent was the foremost part of his self-image. In the eyes of society at the time it was something sacral, God-given. The title of prince put him on an equal footing with the szlachta (nobility) but only formally, because it actually gave him real advantages in obtaining government positions and opened up opportunities for participation in the political life of the Rzech Pospolita. Finally, princely descent gave a person the right to ascent to the throne. The Vyshnevetskys had blood relations among Polish kings, Lithuanian dukes, and Muscovite tsars.

    Wisniowiecki’s active role in defending the rights of Rus’ princes in 1638 spoke of his high regard for his descent. At the age of 26 he headed the party of kniazhata starozhytni, which brought together a number of respected older Ukrainian aristocrats. Their goal was to keep the titles they received before the Union of Lublin. This campaign, which was spearheaded by the prince, can be interpreted as a manifestation of Rus’ regionalism, which was, however, quite legal. Generally, Wisniowiecki was a legist, i.e., a representative of the school that highly esteemed the law. It should be noted that for a while he lived and studied in Western Europe with its relatively high level of respect for the law.

    Another aspect of Wisniowiecki’s self-identification was the fact that he was a law-abiding citizen of his state, the Rzech Pospolita. The prince was included in the system of power and seemed unable to imagine being outside it. Even when he was mistreated by the highest ranking officials, he did not resort to a rebellion or unlawful actions.

    An important factor for Wi ni­owiec­ki’s self-identification was his religious affiliation. He was raised in a family with strong Orthodox traditions. His parents were ardent Orthodox believers and protected the Orthodox Church in various ways. Wisniowiecki was christened in the Orthodox Church and remained there until the age of 20. However, in 1632, after he returned from Western Europe, he converted to Catholicism. Despite a widespread notion that at the time Ukrainian Orthodox nobility adopted the Catholic religion en masse, such conversions were not common. Therefore, Wisniowiecki’s step caused repercussions: for example, he received a condemning letter from Isaiah Kosynsky.

    Why did Wisniowiecki venture to do this, realizing that many in his milieu would react negatively? A number of researchers link his conversion to the fact that his teachers were Lviv-based Jesuits and he studied in Italian universities. After he had exposure to Western European Catholic culture, it grew on him. Such considerations might have played a part, but we should not think that these were the only factors contributing to his conversion.

    Wisniowiecki could not fail to understand that Catholicism opened far better opportunities for making a political career and joining the state elite. In my opinion, this pragmatic motive proved to be decisive.

    [a charitable and no less realistic interpretation than the author’s, is that Wisniowecki viewed Catholicism as more advanced and Orthodoxy as backward, and as a “state-builder” he chose to reform his lands and people by bringing them to Catholicism. Peter I of Russia visited the Netherlands and had his own struggle with Orthodoxy after returning, but it came later and his modernization project did not involve conversion to Catholicism but massive changes in Russia’s Church and often brutal cultural transformation – AP].

    Naturally, a religious conversion did not do credit to Wisniowiecki. In the circum­stances of an acute denominational confrontation in Ukraine this move was perceived as apostasy and betrayal of the ancestral traditions, which were treasured by society at the time. Young and ambitious Wisniowiecki had just returned from ab­ro­ad and wanted to make a career in politics; it is quite possible that he did not perceive the gravity of his step. Eventually, his conversion did not yield much in terms of political advancement. However, without this he would not have been so popular among the Polish szlachta and his son would not ha­ve ascended the Polish throne. In princip­le, this can be seen as the prince’s sagacity.

    We should not accuse Wisniowiecki of religious intolerance, which is often a distinctive feature of neophytes. True, he funded Catholic cathedrals in Ukrainian lands, but, on the other hand, it is a clear exaggeration to attribute to him the forceful imposition of Catholicism. At the same time, the prince helped Orthodox shrines: there are testimonies that during the Khmelnytsky-led war the Cossacks looted some Orthodox monasteries, while Wisniowiecki defended them. Isn’t this paradoxical: an adherent of Catholicism defended Orthodox monks from the Cossacks, who claimed to be protectors of Orthodoxy? Also telling is Wisniowiecki’s 1648 move when the throne was vacant and he supported George I R k czi, a Protestant. In other words, when socially important things were at stake, religious affiliation was not a factor for the prince. In principle, this kind of “denominational pragmatism” was common among the magnates in the Rzech Pospolita at the time.

    It was precisely pragmatism and sober calculations that helped Wisniowiecki gain control over lands in Left-Bank Ukraine and become extremely wealthy. His success in this sphere is almost unreal. It should be noted that the Vyshnevetskys were not rich, so some representatives of this dynasty sought a military career, as was the case with his great grandfather, Dmytro Vyshnevetsky (Baida).

    Paradoxical as it may seem, with his administrative and economic activities the prince created a foundation for the creation of the modern Ukrainian nation. The territories that were settled and populated in the time of his rule became the launching pad for Ukraine’s cultural formation. Con­temporary standard Ukrainian developed from the Poltava–Kyiv dialects.

    Hryhorii Skovoroda, Ivan Kotlia­rev­sky, Hryhorii Kvitka-Osnovianenko, Yev­hen Hrebinka, Taras Shevchenko, and nu­merous prominent figures in Ukrainian culture came from Wisniowiecki’s Left-Bank estates (known as Vyshnevechchyna) and the neighboring territories. It may sound somewhat far-fetched, but we would not have the Ukrainian nation in its modern cultural form without Wisniowiecki who was called “an enemy of the Ukrainian people.”

    Gaining control over Left-Bank Ukraine would have been possible without fighting the Tatars, who constantly plundered Ukrainian lands and took people prisoners. In the 1640s Wisniowiecki made quite a few raids against them and managed to secure the safety of these territories. The fact that Wisniowiecki provided protection for the lands and granted privileges to the newcomers was an important factor that facilitated his efforts to bring this territory under control.

    Those who accuse Wisniowiecki of having an anti-Ukrainian stance rely in their assessment on the fact that he was against Khmelnytsky’s actions when he managed to organize the Zaporozhian Cossacks for a rebellion. Today Khmelnytsky is an unquestionable Ukrainian national hero and a symbol of Ukrianianness. On the other hand, in Ukrainian folklore this figure is described in somewhat restrained manner and some activists of the Ukrainian national revival, Shevchenko for one, were very critical of Khmelnytsky. I will not dwell now about how the myth about Khmelnytsky took shape, but will just mention that it appeared later, in the 19th century. Any myth does not always correspond to historic events and often replaces true facts with the desired ones. Subjectively, Khmelnytsky was not and, in fact, at the time, could not possibly be a national leader. He was guided by his own interests and sometimes his own ambitions. At the same time, he became a tool of a tough geopolitical game on the territory of Eastern Europe that was played by the imperial states—the Rzecz Pospolita, Turkey, Russia, and even Sweden.

    That is why there is no point in interpreting Wisniowiecki or Khmelnytsky through the lens of national vision. As a loyal citizen of the Rzech Pospolita, Wisniowiecki saw in Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks rebels, law-breakers, and traitors of the state. Khmelnytsky had brought along the Tatars, something other Cossack leaders did not dare do.

    Both Wisniowiecki and Khmelnytsky knew that since 1646 King W adys aw had been nurturing a plan to destroy the Crimean Khanate, and both of them had been involved in the realization of this plan. Now with Khmelnytsky’s help the khanate dealt a blow to the Rzech Pospolita. What could Wisniowiecki’s reaction be under the circumstances?

    Furthermore, Khmelnytsky’s rebellion sowed the seeds of anarchy and disorganization in social life and posed a direct threat to the prince’s estates in Left-Bank Uk­raine. The city of Lubny, Vyshnevech­chy­na’s seat of sorts, was razed to the ground. The same fate befell other prosperous settlements of craftsmen and merchants. This rebellion brought the Tatar hordes to Uk­rainian lands, and they engaged in merciless looting. In fact, the Cossack army was largely comprised of the Tatars, and without their help the Cossacks would have been unable to succeed in their fight against the Rzech Pospolita. In contrast to this, the Vyshnevetsky princes were famed anti-Tatar crusaders. In this context Wi ­niowiecki’s struggle against Khmelnytsky appears to be quite logical.

    The intricacies of this struggle have been described in detail and are well-known. Here I would like to say that in this struggle Wisniowiecki was not without his faults; he often resorted to cruel terror, deservedly earning his nickname—“the terror of the Cossacks.” His characteristic pragmatism seems to have often betrayed him in this struggle, giving place to emotions.

    • Replies: @Dreadilk
    @AP

    I like the sound of Vlachs.

    As far as to what Ukranians call them selves it's not a problem. For however long they still remain outside of Russia's control.

    Edit: What is it with English and confusing how things are called? There is no confusion in Russian between "Римляни" and "Румыны". Same fucking problem with Georgia, China and Russia.

  56. @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist.... Although I am very sympathetic towards Russians and the Slavs, except Croats and those who harbor strongly anti-Russian forms of Ukrainian or Polish nationalism.... Probably most non-uniate Galicians are salvageable... Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.


    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.

    French too spoke many different varieties of Gallo-Romance, which were not mutually intelligible, like Arpitan and Langues d'oil some even spoke Dutch Flemish, German and Breton. But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation. In the end tribalism just leads to the death of ones tribe, for few petty nations have as strong coherence, in the longer run, as Jews have. There are two choices for small nations, to unite with ones kin and achieve a civilizational level as a culture or slowly die from insignificance. And I say this as a man who strongly cares of the well being of many small nations. Yes some small nations can survive, but for that you need to be a product of very particular history, like the Tibetans, and have your own faith.

    Replies: @AP, @Agathoklis

    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist

    I am I suppose a pan-Slavist in the real term, not as it was commonly used in the 19th century when it was a a language trick that really stood for Great Russian nationalism. I want good fortune for all the Slavic peoples, and in particular the Rus peoples. The Muscovites had done a good job for themselves but unfortunately often at the expense of other Rus peoples. I do not hate them for it, and indeed love their culture and hate those who have destroyed them but given what they have done to their brothers in Novgorod and Ukraine it is better for them to stay on their own lands and to focus their efforts on civilizing the East where they have done much good, rather than ruining their western brothers.

    Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.

    They were conquered no less with Ukrainian blood, and Ukrainians helped Russians conquer and settle the East. But ultimately it is the choice of the locals. Outside Donbas locals preferred staying in the Ukrainian state. 2014 when Ukraine had no real army was a good test.

    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.

    I stand corrected on this point, I guess.

    But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation.

    You do not view Muscovite attempted destruction of non-Muscovite Rus cultures (which ironically led to the fragmentation of the Russian Empire, see my other post) or bitter opposition to expansion of incorporation of Moscow into PLC which would have produced a true pan-Slavic homeland, as narrow tribalism?

  57. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Your answer to my "trolling" question is a good one, however, it still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the "historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire" to begin with? It seems a convenient ploy that this new political configuration in the north would find the bulk of its legitimacy in lands mostly in the South, lands today known as Ukraine. It looks as if proof of legitimacy of some kind was needed where perhaps none really existed?

    As for the exonym "Ukraine" having some sort of nefarious Polish origins, well this is just ridiculous. As I've already pointed out, the first mention of "Ukraine" can be found in the local Hypatian chronicle referring to South Rus lands, no Polish intrigue anywhere in sight.

    As for the usage and meaning of the word "Ukraine" in all three Slavic languages it means "borderland", for indeed Ukraine was a borderland area neighboring on and expanding into the mostly wild and uninhabited steppe area "dyke pole." In fact by the 17th century, starting with the hetmanate of Yuri Khmelnitsky and later including those of hetmans Petro Doroshenko and Ivan Briukhovetsky, the exonym "Ukraine" was commonly used in official correspondence with the Czar and Russian court. As one expert in the field has put it:


    The term “Ukraine,” meaning the Hetmanate, had been used with increasing frequency in Cossack correspondence with Muscovy since the times of Bohdan Khmelnytsky..the new Ukrainian project was very real, enhanced by the existence of a separate polity, administrative structure, and army.
     
    The Origin of Slavic Nations - Serhii Plokhy

    There are real and convincing reasons why the french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine - was he a Ukrainian nationalist too, Ano4? :-)

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Ano4

    still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the “historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire” to begin with

    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer, he changed Russian society and culture in very extreme ways. Starting with Peter the Great, westernizing tendencies prevailed in the Russian nobility and deeply affected the mentality of the Russian Empire’s elites. And it could be argued that these westernizing elites were directly responsible for the Revolution, Bolsheviks being also Westernizers and Communism being a Western political doctrine.

    Changing their countries’ traditions to bring them closer to Western standards and rewriting their historical record to please / impress the West is what Westernizers do. BTW this is what Ukrainian nationalists do since day one: negating or downplaying their Rusyn or Malorossian origins, affirming that Moskali and Khokhly are two different and incompatible nations and blathering about Ukrayna Ce Evropa (as if Moscow and St Petersburg are located somewhere in Asia).

    🙂

    french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine

    Beauplan entitled his map as Description d’Ukranie (sic) qui sont plusieurs provinces du Royaume de Pologne contenues depuis les confins de la Moscovie, jusqu’aux limites de la Transilvanie.

    1) Beauplan used the Polish name for these “provinces” which Rus names I have clearly mentioned in my previous comment.

    2) Beauplan actually used Ukranie instead of Ukraina / Ukraine.

    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn’t accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.

    🙂

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4


    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn’t accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.
     
    I'm sorry, but you're not making it easy to connect the dots that you're throwing out there. No matter how Beauplan spelled Ukraine in his native French tongue, translated from Polish (he was a for a while a hired Polish soldier), this in no way proves that the term "Ukraine" was ever a Polish concoction or of its origin for its Eastern provinces.

    Like I've already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle, and the term was also already in use during the 17th century, often used between Ukrainian Hetmans and the Russian court. Equally important as the maps that Beaplain provided were his memoirs about his long stay within Ukraine (1630 - 1647) where he wrote a very colorful and descriptive account of the Ukrainian people (upper & lower classes), distinguishing them thoroughly from the Polish ethnos. He treats the Ukrainian people uniquely and pays a lot of attention to details that make up his descriptions. I had the good fortune to read it while in college many years ago, getting special permission to read a copy translated into English within the Special Collections section at the U of MN. It's much easier to get a hold of today, and if you're really all that interested, I'd suggest you get a copy and see why its considered such an important historical document.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

    , @anonymous coward
    @Ano4


    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer
     
    No. The system he tried to implement was absolutely extreme and had no parallel anywhere in the Western world.

    Really he was a proto-Bolshevik, his path most closely matches the Great Leaps Forward, Cambodia, Five Year Plans and the rest.

    Replies: @Ano4

  58. The true crime here is that Paradox Interactive released Crusader Kings 3 before Victoria 3. I suspect they just don’t want to wade into the controversy of the Scramble for Africa in the current climate, considering you can make a Ghanian Holy Roman Emperor in CK3’s simulation quite easily.

    • LOL: Kent Nationalist, mal
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    @Supply and Demand

    I share your sentiments although it is probably because they were able to sell 10 odd bits of major DLC for CK II and one for Vickie.

    , @Daniel Chieh
    @Supply and Demand

    Crusader King is much more entertaining dickery for me. Where else do you desperately plot to murder your grandchildren(liberal enthusiasm in 2020 aside).

  59. @AP
    @AltanBakshi


    Enough of your lies
     
    Name a single false statement in my comment, or retract your claim. So far you have excused mass murder of Rus people but have not been dishonest. Did you know that 1625 came after 1440?

    From your source (a Russian one, not bad for theological information but take with a big grain of salt with respect to Russian-Ukrainian issues):

    "The Unia council likewise anathematized the Orthodox council and triumphantly signed the act of Unia, which had been already ratified by the Polish king. They pronounced a thunderous rebuke against all the Orthodox—saying that their bishops were in disobedience and had betrayed their Church, that the Greek exarchs were spies for the Turkish sultan"

    LOL. Hmm...sound familiar?

    Replies: @AltanBakshi, @Denis

    Name a single false statement in my comment

    I’ve got one, in your comment you claimed that the Russians/Rus/Muscovites in the past “often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians”.

    Is there any evidence whatsoever for the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians? I find this doubtful, given the relatively great ethnic distance between Lithuanians and Rus.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis

    Your second paragraph does not match the first (what I wrote).

    , @AP
    @Denis

    I didn't claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.

    To quote Russian historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    "During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy."

    So in the mid 15th to end of the 16th centuries the Eastern Slavs of both Poland/Lithuania/PLC and Muscovy referred to themselves as Rus people but viewed each other as foreigners and not-Rus people. The Rus of Ukraine and Belarus saw Muscovites on the other side of the border, the Rus of Moscow saw Lithuanians or Cherkasses on the other side of the border. Like Romanians, Romansch, and Romans they were different peoples that had retained a similar name from a long-gone defunct state.

    Replies: @Denis

  60. @Zimriel
    @Ano4

    The German states were no stranger to infighting. They first truly united way back in that mediaeval year AD 1871. 70-80 years before that their aristocrats tripped over their own male appendages, first failing to invade Revolutionary France (a chaos well ripe for plucking) and subsequently losing to Napoleon. During the Cold War, BRD premier Konrad Adenauer made little secret that he was pleased to leave the "Asiatics" across the Elbe to the Rus / Ruthenes / Moskovites whatever labels are being thrown about here.

    German divisions are real and they are spectacular.

    Replies: @Ano4

    German divisions are real and they are spectacular.

    Perhaps, but I need to repeat myself:

    To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other.

    During the Cold War, BRD premier Konrad Adenauer made little secret that he was pleased to leave the “Asiatics” across the Elbe to the Rus / Ruthenes / Moskovites whatever labels are being thrown about here.

    Well, maybe he just understood that some 30% of the DDR male population was indeed just germanized Wends (without mentioning the Sorbs).

    😁

  61. @Denis
    @AP


    Name a single false statement in my comment
     
    I've got one, in your comment you claimed that the Russians/Rus/Muscovites in the past "often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians".

    Is there any evidence whatsoever for the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians? I find this doubtful, given the relatively great ethnic distance between Lithuanians and Rus.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    Your second paragraph does not match the first (what I wrote).

  62. @AP
    @Simpleguest

    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century. And in the 21st century, nowadays, over 50% of Russians support the man who did this, and Russian nationalists such as out Altanbakshi still proclaim that if only they could get their hands on the people of Galicia they would send them to Central Asia.

    So no thanks with the unity. Or with Soviet nostalgia which may be good for distant simpletons but not for people who have to live with that type of rule.

    Replies: @Simpleguest

    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century.

    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don’t show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

    Finally, for a very brief moment in history, in the post Cuban crisis period, Soviet Union was accepted and treated as equal by the West and the US.

    In general, this was a period of unbridled optimism and faith in the bright future of humanity based on unlimited technological and scientific development. Soviet Union was accepted as equal participant and significant contributor to this future.

    To better illustrate the mood of the era, I will mention Kubrick’s famous “2001: A space Odyssey” and a scene from it. Without describing the scene too much, it involves an encounter and a brief dialogue with several Soviet, as they were all speaking Russian, presumably scientists, waiting for their regular trip to a permanent human moon base.

    Where are you now? Bickering who has and who does not have the right to the Rus brand.
    Shame indeed.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @AP
    @Simpleguest


    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don’t show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.
     
    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples. Perhaps simpletons can't grasp that difference. All Soviets were Russians.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
     
    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Simpleguest

  63. @Supply and Demand
    The true crime here is that Paradox Interactive released Crusader Kings 3 before Victoria 3. I suspect they just don't want to wade into the controversy of the Scramble for Africa in the current climate, considering you can make a Ghanian Holy Roman Emperor in CK3's simulation quite easily.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Daniel Chieh

    I share your sentiments although it is probably because they were able to sell 10 odd bits of major DLC for CK II and one for Vickie.

    • Agree: Supply and Demand
  64. @Simpleguest
    @AP


    Killings of millions of Rus people in Ukraine by Moscow occurred in the 1930s, not 17th century.
     
    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don't show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

    Finally, for a very brief moment in history, in the post Cuban crisis period, Soviet Union was accepted and treated as equal by the West and the US.

    In general, this was a period of unbridled optimism and faith in the bright future of humanity based on unlimited technological and scientific development. Soviet Union was accepted as equal participant and significant contributor to this future.

    To better illustrate the mood of the era, I will mention Kubrick's famous "2001: A space Odyssey" and a scene from it. Without describing the scene too much, it involves an encounter and a brief dialogue with several Soviet, as they were all speaking Russian, presumably scientists, waiting for their regular trip to a permanent human moon base.

    Where are you now? Bickering who has and who does not have the right to the Rus brand.
    Shame indeed.

    Replies: @AP

    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don’t show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.

    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples. Perhaps simpletons can’t grasp that difference. All Soviets were Russians.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    All Soviets were Russians.
     
    You know this is untrue.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.
     
    Also untrue.

    I know that you don't like Soviets, but here you get carried away.

    🙂

    Replies: @AP

    , @Simpleguest
    @AP


    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples.
     
    But, that's exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs, they consider themselves one people (and don't bicker about medieval wars). They are being very mature about that, unlike Slavs. You see, I am referring to Slavs, not Soviets.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?
     
    Ah, the standard "relatives and friends" argument. By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems. Myself visiting it or not is irrelevant because I did not express any opinion about life in Soviet Union.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.
     
    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.

    You didn't say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

  65. @Denis
    @AP


    Name a single false statement in my comment
     
    I've got one, in your comment you claimed that the Russians/Rus/Muscovites in the past "often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians".

    Is there any evidence whatsoever for the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians? I find this doubtful, given the relatively great ethnic distance between Lithuanians and Rus.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    I didn’t claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.

    To quote Russian historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    So in the mid 15th to end of the 16th centuries the Eastern Slavs of both Poland/Lithuania/PLC and Muscovy referred to themselves as Rus people but viewed each other as foreigners and not-Rus people. The Rus of Ukraine and Belarus saw Muscovites on the other side of the border, the Rus of Moscow saw Lithuanians or Cherkasses on the other side of the border. Like Romanians, Romansch, and Romans they were different peoples that had retained a similar name from a long-gone defunct state.

    • Replies: @Denis
    @AP


    I didn’t claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.
     
    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned. It would be a great misconception to identify Ukrainians as Lithuanians as opposed to Russians, since Lithuanians are substantially more distinct from them than their fellow Rus. I can see that you have now modified your claim to say that they were also viewed as Cossacks/Cherkasses when not viewed as Lithuanians (apparently called Litva by your source).

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective in the passage that you quote, so I am disinclined to refer to him. Following the link doesn't seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians. Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either "Litva" or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.

    Replies: @AP

  66. @AP
    @Simpleguest


    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don’t show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.
     
    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples. Perhaps simpletons can't grasp that difference. All Soviets were Russians.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
     
    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Simpleguest

    All Soviets were Russians.

    You know this is untrue.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.

    Also untrue.

    I know that you don’t like Soviets, but here you get carried away.

    🙂

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    “All Soviets were Russians.”

    You know this is untrue.
     
    Of course. I was referring to what Western simpletons often thought (the previous sentence).

    “The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.”

    Also untrue.
     
    It’s a simplification but actually correct in essence.

    Replies: @Ano4

  67. @Ano4
    @AP


    All Soviets were Russians.
     
    You know this is untrue.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.
     
    Also untrue.

    I know that you don't like Soviets, but here you get carried away.

    🙂

    Replies: @AP

    “All Soviets were Russians.”

    You know this is untrue.

    Of course. I was referring to what Western simpletons often thought (the previous sentence).

    “The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.”

    Also untrue.

    It’s a simplification but actually correct in essence.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    It’s a simplification but actually correct in essence
     
    A lot of people who agitated for Soviet downfall were politically motivated. Many of them Nationalists of different ethnicities. There were also religious people who felt oppressed by the Soviet militant atheism. There were the pacifist types who were afraid of the possible nuclear conflict. There were even the ultra-leftist types who saw Nomenklatura as a sold-out cryptocapitalist (these Anarcho-Bolsheviks were probably right in retrospect). All these people were somewhat idealistic.

    Other anti-Soviet people were motivated by a desire to increase their living standards and having the freedom to travel the world and consume as much as they can pay for without any regard to the wellbeing of other Soviet citizens. Those were the materialistic types.

    Those who sabotaged the Soviet Regime in the general population were a mix of both types. In the Nomenklatura and the Siloviki the main type was the ultra-cynical materialistic type of person. Although even these types need some ideological justification.

    As the Gospel has it: " A man does not live by bread only, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God."

    Jeans and coca cola were not enough, even if you added some chewing gum and Adidas sneakers to them. You need the ideological fuse to light the bomb of latent anti-Sovietism of the 80ies.
  68. @AP
    @Simpleguest


    Germans suffered total devastation during WW2 and yet they don’t show any signs of splitting ways. On the contrary, they even managed to re-unite with the part which is mostly blamed for German woes of the 19th and 20th century.

    That is the difference between mature and immature people.
     
    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples. Perhaps simpletons can't grasp that difference. All Soviets were Russians.

    As far as Soviet rule is concerned, I believe that you have never experienced real everyday life in it, so I think you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
     
    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Simpleguest

    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples.

    But, that’s exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs, they consider themselves one people (and don’t bicker about medieval wars). They are being very mature about that, unlike Slavs. You see, I am referring to Slavs, not Soviets.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    Ah, the standard “relatives and friends” argument. By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems. Myself visiting it or not is irrelevant because I did not express any opinion about life in Soviet Union.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.

    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.

    You didn’t say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Simpleguest


    The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union
     
    Baltic States and Georgia were even more pro-independence. And Russia voting to acquire sovereignty inside USSR was also a very important factor. But yes, Ukrainian Nomenklatura did everything to prevent the renegotiation of the Union and the CIS from becoming anything really functional.

    The funniest part was that Soviet constitution did not formally prevent any republic from leaving the Union, I have no idea what its authors were thinking about...

    Replies: @Simpleguest

    , @AP
    @Simpleguest


    But, that’s exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs,
     
    Have you ever visited Germany or Eastern Slavic lands? Your statement is very silly.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    Ah, the standard “relatives and friends” argument
     

    I also witnessed the squalor first hand but thankfully didn’t have to live in it. But I lived there about 10 years later, in the aftermath.

    You haven’t answered my my question. And you?


    By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems
     
    The 90s transition, the work of Soviet elites and a a reflection of Soviet morality, was terrible and botched (as was nearly everything Soviets did) and many older people never recovered. But this reminds me of the joke someone posted here once about a grandfather telling his grandson that life was better under Stalin. “Why?” His grandson asked. “Because I could get it up then.”

    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.
     
    Which is not the same as dismantling the Soviet system.

    You didn’t say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it
     
    Soviet Union was respected, in the way that the Ottoman Empire was once respected, for its raw power but not because it wasn’t primitive, poor and disgusting. Although the ignorant among the Leftist degenerates did fetishise it for its communism, there was that at least.
  69. @AP
    @Ano4


    “All Soviets were Russians.”

    You know this is untrue.
     
    Of course. I was referring to what Western simpletons often thought (the previous sentence).

    “The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola.”

    Also untrue.
     
    It’s a simplification but actually correct in essence.

    Replies: @Ano4

    It’s a simplification but actually correct in essence

    A lot of people who agitated for Soviet downfall were politically motivated. Many of them Nationalists of different ethnicities. There were also religious people who felt oppressed by the Soviet militant atheism. There were the pacifist types who were afraid of the possible nuclear conflict. There were even the ultra-leftist types who saw Nomenklatura as a sold-out cryptocapitalist (these Anarcho-Bolsheviks were probably right in retrospect). All these people were somewhat idealistic.

    Other anti-Soviet people were motivated by a desire to increase their living standards and having the freedom to travel the world and consume as much as they can pay for without any regard to the wellbeing of other Soviet citizens. Those were the materialistic types.

    Those who sabotaged the Soviet Regime in the general population were a mix of both types. In the Nomenklatura and the Siloviki the main type was the ultra-cynical materialistic type of person. Although even these types need some ideological justification.

    As the Gospel has it: ” A man does not live by bread only, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.”

    Jeans and coca cola were not enough, even if you added some chewing gum and Adidas sneakers to them. You need the ideological fuse to light the bomb of latent anti-Sovietism of the 80ies.

  70. @Simpleguest
    @AP


    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples.
     
    But, that's exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs, they consider themselves one people (and don't bicker about medieval wars). They are being very mature about that, unlike Slavs. You see, I am referring to Slavs, not Soviets.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?
     
    Ah, the standard "relatives and friends" argument. By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems. Myself visiting it or not is irrelevant because I did not express any opinion about life in Soviet Union.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.
     
    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.

    You didn't say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

    The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union

    Baltic States and Georgia were even more pro-independence. And Russia voting to acquire sovereignty inside USSR was also a very important factor. But yes, Ukrainian Nomenklatura did everything to prevent the renegotiation of the Union and the CIS from becoming anything really functional.

    The funniest part was that Soviet constitution did not formally prevent any republic from leaving the Union, I have no idea what its authors were thinking about…

    • Replies: @Simpleguest
    @Ano4


    Baltic States and Georgia were even more pro-independence. And Russia voting to acquire sovereignty inside USSR was also a very important factor.
     
    Yes, you are right. Saying that the rest voted against dissolution is a generalization for the sake of keeping the comments as short as possible.
    I was referring, rather, to the 70% or so of votes to keep the Union where the referendum was allowed to take place.
    Speaking of Russian elites of the time, I maintain that they were the ones that inflicted the final blow to the Union. I am not being judgmental, I am just stating that as a fact.

    Had they have chosen a different path and decided to keep the Union than I believe some kind of Union was probably going to be still around. The support among the people was there in all republics more or less (minus the Baltics) although use of force, to an unpredictable degree, was going to be inevitable.

    Facing the realities of the time, I don't know what would have been the correct thing to do. Putin at one occasion said the same thing.
  71. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the “historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire” to begin with
     
    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer, he changed Russian society and culture in very extreme ways. Starting with Peter the Great, westernizing tendencies prevailed in the Russian nobility and deeply affected the mentality of the Russian Empire's elites. And it could be argued that these westernizing elites were directly responsible for the Revolution, Bolsheviks being also Westernizers and Communism being a Western political doctrine.

    Changing their countries' traditions to bring them closer to Western standards and rewriting their historical record to please / impress the West is what Westernizers do. BTW this is what Ukrainian nationalists do since day one: negating or downplaying their Rusyn or Malorossian origins, affirming that Moskali and Khokhly are two different and incompatible nations and blathering about Ukrayna Ce Evropa (as if Moscow and St Petersburg are located somewhere in Asia).

    🙂


    french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine
     
    Beauplan entitled his map as Description d'Ukranie (sic) qui sont plusieurs provinces du Royaume de Pologne contenues depuis les confins de la Moscovie, jusqu'aux limites de la Transilvanie.

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beauplan_opys_1660.jpg

    1) Beauplan used the Polish name for these "provinces" which Rus names I have clearly mentioned in my previous comment.

    2) Beauplan actually used Ukranie instead of Ukraina / Ukraine.

    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn't accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.

    🙂

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @anonymous coward

    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn’t accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.

    I’m sorry, but you’re not making it easy to connect the dots that you’re throwing out there. No matter how Beauplan spelled Ukraine in his native French tongue, translated from Polish (he was a for a while a hired Polish soldier), this in no way proves that the term “Ukraine” was ever a Polish concoction or of its origin for its Eastern provinces.

    Like I’ve already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle, and the term was also already in use during the 17th century, often used between Ukrainian Hetmans and the Russian court. Equally important as the maps that Beaplain provided were his memoirs about his long stay within Ukraine (1630 – 1647) where he wrote a very colorful and descriptive account of the Ukrainian people (upper & lower classes), distinguishing them thoroughly from the Polish ethnos. He treats the Ukrainian people uniquely and pays a lot of attention to details that make up his descriptions. I had the good fortune to read it while in college many years ago, getting special permission to read a copy translated into English within the Special Collections section at the U of MN. It’s much easier to get a hold of today, and if you’re really all that interested, I’d suggest you get a copy and see why its considered such an important historical document.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Mr. Hack

    The "Description of Ukraine" came out in several editions and even different languages. Here's an early one that shows clearly that Beauplan included the Ukrainian spelling of Ukraine "Ukraina" and not the Polish one. Somehow, I think that I've already made my case, even before finding this conclusive piece of evidence. :-)

    https://www.wdl.org/en/item/79/view/1/1/

    , @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    Like I’ve already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle
     
    The fact that the Chronicle used the word Окраина (again it simply means border-land) doesn't mean that its author recognized the existence of a nation or country named Ukraine.

    Again and for the third time, we both know how Rus lands were named until Polish-Lithuanian conquest. And we both know that even after this conquest these lands were still named Рѹ́сьскаѧ землѧ. Just because today's Ukrainian nationalists decided so doesn't mean their ancestors were not Rusyns.

    Shall we leave it at this?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  72. @Simpleguest
    @AP


    Rather, it is the difference between one people and different peoples.
     
    But, that's exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs, they consider themselves one people (and don't bicker about medieval wars). They are being very mature about that, unlike Slavs. You see, I am referring to Slavs, not Soviets.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?
     
    Ah, the standard "relatives and friends" argument. By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems. Myself visiting it or not is irrelevant because I did not express any opinion about life in Soviet Union.

    The people of that state sold it out for jeans and coca cola. That tells you how much it really mattered to those unfortunate enough to have lived in it.
     
    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.

    You didn't say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AP

    But, that’s exactly what I am talking about. Bravo. Despite their differences, which are greater then what you have between Eastern Slavs,

    Have you ever visited Germany or Eastern Slavic lands? Your statement is very silly.

    My grandparents, wife, cousins, uncles and aunts, and friends have. But I was only in the USSR once, as a visitor. What about you?

    Ah, the standard “relatives and friends” argument

    I also witnessed the squalor first hand but thankfully didn’t have to live in it. But I lived there about 10 years later, in the aftermath.

    You haven’t answered my my question. And you?

    By a large margin people, who are old enough to have actually lived in Soviet Union, consider it a better environment then the current systems

    The 90s transition, the work of Soviet elites and a a reflection of Soviet morality, was terrible and botched (as was nearly everything Soviets did) and many older people never recovered. But this reminds me of the joke someone posted here once about a grandfather telling his grandson that life was better under Stalin. “Why?” His grandson asked. “Because I could get it up then.”

    If you ask me, only Ukrainians sold it when being told that if independent, Ukraine would reach French standards of living (was it in 5 years?). The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union.

    Which is not the same as dismantling the Soviet system.

    You didn’t say anything about the rest of my comment, so I assume you agree with it

    Soviet Union was respected, in the way that the Ottoman Empire was once respected, for its raw power but not because it wasn’t primitive, poor and disgusting. Although the ignorant among the Leftist degenerates did fetishise it for its communism, there was that at least.

  73. @Ano4
    @Simpleguest


    The rest voted against dissolution of Soviet Union
     
    Baltic States and Georgia were even more pro-independence. And Russia voting to acquire sovereignty inside USSR was also a very important factor. But yes, Ukrainian Nomenklatura did everything to prevent the renegotiation of the Union and the CIS from becoming anything really functional.

    The funniest part was that Soviet constitution did not formally prevent any republic from leaving the Union, I have no idea what its authors were thinking about...

    Replies: @Simpleguest

    Baltic States and Georgia were even more pro-independence. And Russia voting to acquire sovereignty inside USSR was also a very important factor.

    Yes, you are right. Saying that the rest voted against dissolution is a generalization for the sake of keeping the comments as short as possible.
    I was referring, rather, to the 70% or so of votes to keep the Union where the referendum was allowed to take place.
    Speaking of Russian elites of the time, I maintain that they were the ones that inflicted the final blow to the Union. I am not being judgmental, I am just stating that as a fact.

    Had they have chosen a different path and decided to keep the Union than I believe some kind of Union was probably going to be still around. The support among the people was there in all republics more or less (minus the Baltics) although use of force, to an unpredictable degree, was going to be inevitable.

    Facing the realities of the time, I don’t know what would have been the correct thing to do. Putin at one occasion said the same thing.

    • Agree: Ano4
  74. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4


    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn’t accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.
     
    I'm sorry, but you're not making it easy to connect the dots that you're throwing out there. No matter how Beauplan spelled Ukraine in his native French tongue, translated from Polish (he was a for a while a hired Polish soldier), this in no way proves that the term "Ukraine" was ever a Polish concoction or of its origin for its Eastern provinces.

    Like I've already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle, and the term was also already in use during the 17th century, often used between Ukrainian Hetmans and the Russian court. Equally important as the maps that Beaplain provided were his memoirs about his long stay within Ukraine (1630 - 1647) where he wrote a very colorful and descriptive account of the Ukrainian people (upper & lower classes), distinguishing them thoroughly from the Polish ethnos. He treats the Ukrainian people uniquely and pays a lot of attention to details that make up his descriptions. I had the good fortune to read it while in college many years ago, getting special permission to read a copy translated into English within the Special Collections section at the U of MN. It's much easier to get a hold of today, and if you're really all that interested, I'd suggest you get a copy and see why its considered such an important historical document.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

    The “Description of Ukraine” came out in several editions and even different languages. Here’s an early one that shows clearly that Beauplan included the Ukrainian spelling of Ukraine “Ukraina” and not the Polish one. Somehow, I think that I’ve already made my case, even before finding this conclusive piece of evidence. 🙂

    https://www.wdl.org/en/item/79/view/1/1/

  75. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4


    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn’t accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.
     
    I'm sorry, but you're not making it easy to connect the dots that you're throwing out there. No matter how Beauplan spelled Ukraine in his native French tongue, translated from Polish (he was a for a while a hired Polish soldier), this in no way proves that the term "Ukraine" was ever a Polish concoction or of its origin for its Eastern provinces.

    Like I've already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle, and the term was also already in use during the 17th century, often used between Ukrainian Hetmans and the Russian court. Equally important as the maps that Beaplain provided were his memoirs about his long stay within Ukraine (1630 - 1647) where he wrote a very colorful and descriptive account of the Ukrainian people (upper & lower classes), distinguishing them thoroughly from the Polish ethnos. He treats the Ukrainian people uniquely and pays a lot of attention to details that make up his descriptions. I had the good fortune to read it while in college many years ago, getting special permission to read a copy translated into English within the Special Collections section at the U of MN. It's much easier to get a hold of today, and if you're really all that interested, I'd suggest you get a copy and see why its considered such an important historical document.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

    Like I’ve already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle

    The fact that the Chronicle used the word Окраина (again it simply means border-land) doesn’t mean that its author recognized the existence of a nation or country named Ukraine.

    Again and for the third time, we both know how Rus lands were named until Polish-Lithuanian conquest. And we both know that even after this conquest these lands were still named Рѹ́сьскаѧ землѧ. Just because today’s Ukrainian nationalists decided so doesn’t mean their ancestors were not Rusyns.

    Shall we leave it at this?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    I think that we're in basic agreement, but then again you continually add new things into our discussion that makes me wonder?

    I'm really not aware of any Ukrainian nationalists that insist that their ancestors were not called Rusyns in an earlier period. Could you point one out to me?

    I think that it's reasonable to conclude that the first mentioning of the word "Окраина"mentioned within the chronicle did not refer to a nation or country per se, but referred to a region of the Southern Rus lands. I think that it would be reasoble for you too to admit that this regional term was gaining some prominence in the 17th century and by the mid 19th was becoming the preferred term used by many intellectuals and writers who were convinced that they were a separate nationality from the Russian one. By the early 20th century the name was in prominent use by many if not most of the people who at one time referred to themselves as "Rusyns", "Little Russians" or just "Cossacks".

    Until you provide some convincing proof, other than plain speculation though, I'll have to remain skeptical of the "Polish" origins of the name "Ukraina" or the ethnonym "Ukrainian".

  76. @AP
    @Denis

    I didn't claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.

    To quote Russian historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    "During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy."

    So in the mid 15th to end of the 16th centuries the Eastern Slavs of both Poland/Lithuania/PLC and Muscovy referred to themselves as Rus people but viewed each other as foreigners and not-Rus people. The Rus of Ukraine and Belarus saw Muscovites on the other side of the border, the Rus of Moscow saw Lithuanians or Cherkasses on the other side of the border. Like Romanians, Romansch, and Romans they were different peoples that had retained a similar name from a long-gone defunct state.

    Replies: @Denis

    I didn’t claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.

    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned. It would be a great misconception to identify Ukrainians as Lithuanians as opposed to Russians, since Lithuanians are substantially more distinct from them than their fellow Rus. I can see that you have now modified your claim to say that they were also viewed as Cossacks/Cherkasses when not viewed as Lithuanians (apparently called Litva by your source).

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective in the passage that you quote, so I am disinclined to refer to him. Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians. Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either “Litva” or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis


    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned
     
    Whether someone is an ethnic Balt or an ethnic Slav is more than a semantic difference. I did not state that they were viewed as non-Slavic Baltic ethnic people, just that they were viewed by Muscovite Rus as non-Rus and called usually Lithuanians (the country they were from) rather than as Rus people with the same ethnicity as Muscovites.

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective
     
    Given his name, Russian fluency, and choice of career (he is a specialist of medieval and early modern history at Yale) I suspect he is an American-born child of White Russian emigres.

    He also studied at MGU, the top university in Russia, but I guess an internet rando from the Balkans knows more than he does lol.

    Again: "“During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”


    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context
     
    Bushkovitch, "Rise of national consciousness in Early Modern Russia"

    for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians.
     
    Why bold to view them as a different people and call them by the name of their country rather than as fellows of the same nation? Idea of them being one nation despite different languages and histories is rather bolder.

    Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either “Litva” or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.
     
    "Not even Slavic" was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.

    Replies: @AP, @Denis

  77. @Denis
    @AP


    I didn’t claim they were viewed as identical to ethnic Lithuanians. They were simply seen as foreign and given names other than Rus people.
     
    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned. It would be a great misconception to identify Ukrainians as Lithuanians as opposed to Russians, since Lithuanians are substantially more distinct from them than their fellow Rus. I can see that you have now modified your claim to say that they were also viewed as Cossacks/Cherkasses when not viewed as Lithuanians (apparently called Litva by your source).

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective in the passage that you quote, so I am disinclined to refer to him. Following the link doesn't seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians. Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either "Litva" or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.

    Replies: @AP

    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned

    Whether someone is an ethnic Balt or an ethnic Slav is more than a semantic difference. I did not state that they were viewed as non-Slavic Baltic ethnic people, just that they were viewed by Muscovite Rus as non-Rus and called usually Lithuanians (the country they were from) rather than as Rus people with the same ethnicity as Muscovites.

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective

    Given his name, Russian fluency, and choice of career (he is a specialist of medieval and early modern history at Yale) I suspect he is an American-born child of White Russian emigres.

    He also studied at MGU, the top university in Russia, but I guess an internet rando from the Balkans knows more than he does lol.

    Again: ““During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context

    Bushkovitch, “Rise of national consciousness in Early Modern Russia”

    for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians.

    Why bold to view them as a different people and call them by the name of their country rather than as fellows of the same nation? Idea of them being one nation despite different languages and histories is rather bolder.

    Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either “Litva” or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.

    “Not even Slavic” was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AP


    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context
     
    Here's the first pages of the article:



    https://i.imgur.com/UiXmXaf.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/TyVxO1B.jpg
    , @Denis
    @AP


    “Not even Slavic” was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.
     
    You haven't corrected me, you are just half-heartedly walking back your claim that Ukrainians were seen as Lithuanians. Altan Bakshi was a little off, you aren't really a liar, you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.

    Replies: @AP

  78. @AltanBakshi
    @AP

    I am more of an Eurasianist than a Russian nationalist.... Although I am very sympathetic towards Russians and the Slavs, except Croats and those who harbor strongly anti-Russian forms of Ukrainian or Polish nationalism.... Probably most non-uniate Galicians are salvageable... Still I would begrudgingly accept independent Ukraine without the Novorossiya and Sloboda Ukraine, for those lands were conquered by the Russian blood.


    You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.

    French too spoke many different varieties of Gallo-Romance, which were not mutually intelligible, like Arpitan and Langues d'oil some even spoke Dutch Flemish, German and Breton. But yes Slavs on this topic are somewhat cursed, tribalism is a sign of petty and ignorant people, its even sillier than Globalism and Multi-culturalism of European elites, for tribalism just means that one is easily divided and conquered, that one culture lacks of greater vision or motivation. In the end tribalism just leads to the death of ones tribe, for few petty nations have as strong coherence, in the longer run, as Jews have. There are two choices for small nations, to unite with ones kin and achieve a civilizational level as a culture or slowly die from insignificance. And I say this as a man who strongly cares of the well being of many small nations. Yes some small nations can survive, but for that you need to be a product of very particular history, like the Tibetans, and have your own faith.

    Replies: @AP, @Agathoklis

    “You are definitely wrong on Greek question, Doric, Aeolians and Ionians spoke languages that were not mutually intelligible. There is still very small minority of people in the Peloponnesus who speak Tsakonian, which is descentant of Doric. Also there were hundreds of thousands Karamanlide Greeks who spoke Turkish one hundred years ago and those Greeks who spoke Pontic Greek, which is quite different from the Modern Greek.”

    Incorrect. Ancient sources, and modern scholars, generally all suggest that Doric, Aeolian and Ionian were mutually intelligible. Unintelligibility only occurred when a speaker of one of these dialects came from a more remote Greek city-state or kingdom and they had difficulty understanding them due to their accents and peculiar pronunciations. Not sure what Tsakonian, Karamanlidika and Pontic Greek comments have to do with the above comment.

    • Thanks: AltanBakshi
  79. @AP
    @Denis


    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned
     
    Whether someone is an ethnic Balt or an ethnic Slav is more than a semantic difference. I did not state that they were viewed as non-Slavic Baltic ethnic people, just that they were viewed by Muscovite Rus as non-Rus and called usually Lithuanians (the country they were from) rather than as Rus people with the same ethnicity as Muscovites.

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective
     
    Given his name, Russian fluency, and choice of career (he is a specialist of medieval and early modern history at Yale) I suspect he is an American-born child of White Russian emigres.

    He also studied at MGU, the top university in Russia, but I guess an internet rando from the Balkans knows more than he does lol.

    Again: "“During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”


    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context
     
    Bushkovitch, "Rise of national consciousness in Early Modern Russia"

    for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians.
     
    Why bold to view them as a different people and call them by the name of their country rather than as fellows of the same nation? Idea of them being one nation despite different languages and histories is rather bolder.

    Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either “Litva” or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.
     
    "Not even Slavic" was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.

    Replies: @AP, @Denis

    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context

    Here’s the first pages of the article:

    [MORE]

  80. @Europe Europa
    I recall around the time coverage of all the "Maidan" stuff was at its peak, there was quite a bit of talk in the "altenative" media that the whole revolution itself was a plot orchestrated and lead by Jews with the intention of basically claiming the Ukraine for themselves because they see it as the true Khazarian homeland of Ashkenazi Jews.

    One of the most commonly speculated reasons is that elite Jews want to set up the Ukraine as a potential alternative to Israel should something happen there that would make continued Jewish presence there unviable, and the large proportion of Jewish politicians in the Ukrainian parliament as well as the fact Zelensky the Ukrainian president is Jewish is often cited as proof of this.

    I think it all sounds a bit far-fetched, but it's undeniable that Jewish involvement in the Ukraine is absolutely huge, probably the most of any country in Europe.

    Replies: @Seraphim, @Old Jew

    No, it is not farfetched. It is the elephant in the room, that people pretend to not see because of the smoke-screen of the ‘Bandero-Ukro-Nazis’.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    @Seraphim

    Nazis and Jews are frequent allies.

    Witness the CIA in the 20th century, for example.

    Using literal Nazi collaborators like "AP's" grandpa to do the dirty work didn't clash in the least with the "Israel first" policy.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  81. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    Like I’ve already pointed out (for the third time now) the term is first used within the Hypatian chronicle
     
    The fact that the Chronicle used the word Окраина (again it simply means border-land) doesn't mean that its author recognized the existence of a nation or country named Ukraine.

    Again and for the third time, we both know how Rus lands were named until Polish-Lithuanian conquest. And we both know that even after this conquest these lands were still named Рѹ́сьскаѧ землѧ. Just because today's Ukrainian nationalists decided so doesn't mean their ancestors were not Rusyns.

    Shall we leave it at this?

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    I think that we’re in basic agreement, but then again you continually add new things into our discussion that makes me wonder?

    I’m really not aware of any Ukrainian nationalists that insist that their ancestors were not called Rusyns in an earlier period. Could you point one out to me?

    I think that it’s reasonable to conclude that the first mentioning of the word “Окраина”mentioned within the chronicle did not refer to a nation or country per se, but referred to a region of the Southern Rus lands. I think that it would be reasoble for you too to admit that this regional term was gaining some prominence in the 17th century and by the mid 19th was becoming the preferred term used by many intellectuals and writers who were convinced that they were a separate nationality from the Russian one. By the early 20th century the name was in prominent use by many if not most of the people who at one time referred to themselves as “Rusyns”, “Little Russians” or just “Cossacks”.

    Until you provide some convincing proof, other than plain speculation though, I’ll have to remain skeptical of the “Polish” origins of the name “Ukraina” or the ethnonym “Ukrainian”.

  82. @AP
    @Belarusian Dude

    Welcome back. You okay?

    Replies: @Belarusian Dude

    Yes, following developments on all sides of the happenings my only further participation in the happenings of this country will be of personal interest and gain. I met one of your countrymen recently out here, nice fellow from Lvov, much like myself he didn’t have any strong ideological convictions and just came here to observe from curiosity after accidentally falling asleep on one of the bus vans to a relative’s village and getting too far. Its always nice to meet a fellow apath.

  83. @AP
    @Denis


    What you said was pretty clear, that they often viewed them as Lithuanians, whether or not identically is a question of semantics with which I am unconcerned
     
    Whether someone is an ethnic Balt or an ethnic Slav is more than a semantic difference. I did not state that they were viewed as non-Slavic Baltic ethnic people, just that they were viewed by Muscovite Rus as non-Rus and called usually Lithuanians (the country they were from) rather than as Rus people with the same ethnicity as Muscovites.

    Your source (who appears to be an American, not sure) demonstrates his biased and erroneous perspective
     
    Given his name, Russian fluency, and choice of career (he is a specialist of medieval and early modern history at Yale) I suspect he is an American-born child of White Russian emigres.

    He also studied at MGU, the top university in Russia, but I guess an internet rando from the Balkans knows more than he does lol.

    Again: "“During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”


    Following the link doesn’t seem to lead to a larger article that might provide more context
     
    Bushkovitch, "Rise of national consciousness in Early Modern Russia"

    for this bold claim that Ukrainians were seen by their fellow Rus, in the early modern period, as Lithuanians.
     
    Why bold to view them as a different people and call them by the name of their country rather than as fellows of the same nation? Idea of them being one nation despite different languages and histories is rather bolder.

    Regardless, the claim he actually makes, that they were seen as either “Litva” or Cossacks is at least somewhat more credible than that they had somehow come to believe that half the lands of the Russian Orthodox Church were not even Slavic.
     
    "Not even Slavic" was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.

    Replies: @AP, @Denis

    “Not even Slavic” was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.

    You haven’t corrected me, you are just half-heartedly walking back your claim that Ukrainians were seen as Lithuanians. Altan Bakshi was a little off, you aren’t really a liar, you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis

    I will now have to correct you a third time.

    My exact words. I will bold words you have failed to read or understand for some reason:

    "The Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians."

    I did not state, that they viewed them as ethnic Lithuanians (non-Slavic Balts) , that they weren't seen as Slavs. This is entirely your silly interpretation. If I believed such a bizarre thing I would have written that they viewed them as non-Slavic Lithuanians or something like that. Believing they weren't even Slavs would have even further showed that they were seen as foreign, as I said they were seen.

    What I wrote comes from specialist on this field, Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”"


    you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.
     
    You haven't done so after two tries. Maybe third time is a charm? Are you trolling, or really that dense?

    Replies: @Denis

  84. @Denis
    @AP


    “Not even Slavic” was your very silly personal interpretation. I have now corrected you twice.
     
    You haven't corrected me, you are just half-heartedly walking back your claim that Ukrainians were seen as Lithuanians. Altan Bakshi was a little off, you aren't really a liar, you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.

    Replies: @AP

    I will now have to correct you a third time.

    My exact words. I will bold words you have failed to read or understand for some reason:

    “The Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians.”

    I did not state, that they viewed them as ethnic Lithuanians (non-Slavic Balts) , that they weren’t seen as Slavs. This is entirely your silly interpretation. If I believed such a bizarre thing I would have written that they viewed them as non-Slavic Lithuanians or something like that. Believing they weren’t even Slavs would have even further showed that they were seen as foreign, as I said they were seen.

    What I wrote comes from specialist on this field, Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.””

    you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.

    You haven’t done so after two tries. Maybe third time is a charm? Are you trolling, or really that dense?

    • Troll: Denis
    • Replies: @Denis
    @AP

    You are becoming rude and arguing over inane semantics, all because I pointed out a silly claim of yours. Maybe you should take a break?

    Replies: @AP

  85. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    still leads one to wonder why any nation would stoop to amending its time honored name, just to pacify those that might question the “historical legitimacy of the Russian Empire” to begin with
     
    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer, he changed Russian society and culture in very extreme ways. Starting with Peter the Great, westernizing tendencies prevailed in the Russian nobility and deeply affected the mentality of the Russian Empire's elites. And it could be argued that these westernizing elites were directly responsible for the Revolution, Bolsheviks being also Westernizers and Communism being a Western political doctrine.

    Changing their countries' traditions to bring them closer to Western standards and rewriting their historical record to please / impress the West is what Westernizers do. BTW this is what Ukrainian nationalists do since day one: negating or downplaying their Rusyn or Malorossian origins, affirming that Moskali and Khokhly are two different and incompatible nations and blathering about Ukrayna Ce Evropa (as if Moscow and St Petersburg are located somewhere in Asia).

    🙂


    french engineer Beauplan accurately labeled his famous maps of Ukraine
     
    Beauplan entitled his map as Description d'Ukranie (sic) qui sont plusieurs provinces du Royaume de Pologne contenues depuis les confins de la Moscovie, jusqu'aux limites de la Transilvanie.

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Beauplan_opys_1660.jpg

    1) Beauplan used the Polish name for these "provinces" which Rus names I have clearly mentioned in my previous comment.

    2) Beauplan actually used Ukranie instead of Ukraina / Ukraine.

    Therefore, perhaps you shouldn't accentuate too much the attention of the readers on his map, least they realize that (A) I was right and Ukraina is of Polish origin and (B) start wondering whether it would be historically justified to call all Ukrainians Ukry.

    🙂

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @anonymous coward

    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer

    No. The system he tried to implement was absolutely extreme and had no parallel anywhere in the Western world.

    Really he was a proto-Bolshevik, his path most closely matches the Great Leaps Forward, Cambodia, Five Year Plans and the rest.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @anonymous coward

    We both agree that he was absolutely an extremist. For me he was an extremist Westernizer. But yes he was also something of a proto-Bolshevik. I am not sure at all whether he did more good than evil to the Russian people, he started building my deeply loved Saint Petersburg though...

    Replies: @AP

  86. @AP
    @Denis

    I will now have to correct you a third time.

    My exact words. I will bold words you have failed to read or understand for some reason:

    "The Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians."

    I did not state, that they viewed them as ethnic Lithuanians (non-Slavic Balts) , that they weren't seen as Slavs. This is entirely your silly interpretation. If I believed such a bizarre thing I would have written that they viewed them as non-Slavic Lithuanians or something like that. Believing they weren't even Slavs would have even further showed that they were seen as foreign, as I said they were seen.

    What I wrote comes from specialist on this field, Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”"


    you just have difficulty admitting when you are mistaken.
     
    You haven't done so after two tries. Maybe third time is a charm? Are you trolling, or really that dense?

    Replies: @Denis

    You are becoming rude and arguing over inane semantics, all because I pointed out a silly claim of yours. Maybe you should take a break?

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis

    You are the one who made the falsely accused me of making a false statement, based on a willful misinterpretation of what I wrote, and I showed it to you. Somehow the "semantics" were not "inane" when they served as the basis of your false accusation, but when you were proven wrong they became "inane."

    I wrote, "the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. So each considered the other to be foreign." A statement based on the conclusion of an eminent specialist of historian who specialized in this stuff.*

    You chose to twist this to mean something I didn't say (your misinterpretation of what I wrote: " the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians"), and then accused me of writing a falsehood, when the false words were yours not mine.

    A nice, open example of your intellectual dishonesty in this particular case.

    And when I point it out, and even go to the trouble to post the original texts (for the benefit of other readers, I suspect you are just trolling), you whine about me being "rude" to you.

    And yes, I will point it out when you do it to me.

    *Once again the quote this is based on:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    And text it comes from:



    https://i.imgur.com/UiXmXaf.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/TyVxO1B.jpg

    Replies: @Denis

  87. @Seraphim
    @Europe Europa

    No, it is not farfetched. It is the elephant in the room, that people pretend to not see because of the smoke-screen of the 'Bandero-Ukro-Nazis'.

    Replies: @anonymous coward

    Nazis and Jews are frequent allies.

    Witness the CIA in the 20th century, for example.

    Using literal Nazi collaborators like “AP’s” grandpa to do the dirty work didn’t clash in the least with the “Israel first” policy.

    • Agree: Seraphim, Robjil
    • Troll: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @anonymous coward

    Can you verify this claim? So far, only our Romanian dupe has found your accusations satisfactory, and his thinking abilities have been warped by years of overindulging in his favorite beverage, tuica.:-( .

    Replies: @Seraphim

  88. Power determines nationality, this whole convo is fake & gay।।

  89. @anonymous coward
    @Ano4


    Tzar Peter was a Westernizer
     
    No. The system he tried to implement was absolutely extreme and had no parallel anywhere in the Western world.

    Really he was a proto-Bolshevik, his path most closely matches the Great Leaps Forward, Cambodia, Five Year Plans and the rest.

    Replies: @Ano4

    We both agree that he was absolutely an extremist. For me he was an extremist Westernizer. But yes he was also something of a proto-Bolshevik. I am not sure at all whether he did more good than evil to the Russian people, he started building my deeply loved Saint Petersburg though…

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4

    At first I was inclined to see Peter I as a proto-Bolshevik but there is a rule that when Anonymous Coward makes a conclusion one must be suspicious of it.

    So Peter shared with Bolsheviks a ruthless "modernization" drive but that was about it. So did the Meiji of Japan - were they also "proto-Bolsheviks"? The essence of Bolshevism was not only modernizing a country but also failing at doing so and leaving it weaker than would have been the case had it not been "modernized" in such a way. Look at the empty husk the actual Bolsheviks left behind.

    Peter I was simply a ruthless modernizer and Westernizer. The 18th to 20th centuries were times of the West. Mighty countries such the "gunpowder empires" (Ottoman, Persian and Mughal) and China who during this time failed to do modernize/Westernize so or did so ineffectively were destroyed, fatally weakened or came under Western influence. Russia under Peter and Japan under Meiji avoided such a fate due to their ruthless modernization and Westernization. I say this as no fan of Peter, who limited Ukraine's autonomy (though a lot of individual Ukrainians, whose culture was more advanced and Western owing to their lands formerly having been part of the PLC, benefited enormously by his Westernization drive).

    In their way, men like those Rus princes of Ukraine who were trying to impose Catholicism on their patrimony were also modernizers/Westernizers like Peter I, trying to advance their lands; 100 before Peter Catholicism played a larger role in such Westernization and modernization whereas in Peter's time it was less necessary.

  90. In 1796, the Polish Magnate Prince Jan Potocki in his Fragments historiques et géographiques sur la Scythie, la Sarmatie et les Slaves is among the first to mention Ukrainians as a distinct branch of the Eastern Slavs.

    Interestingly enough, he writes that Russians are descendants of the Slavs of Novgorod, who are “les Slaves proprement dits” i.e. Slavs proper.

    In 1801 Tadeusz Czazcki in his article entitled О nazwisku Ukrainy і początki kozaków derives the population of modern-day Ukraine from the nomadic Ukrs , but also writes that the name of the country originated in Polish use of pusta kraina since XVth century CE to describe the regions bordering the enemies of the Rzeczpospolita to the East.

    Specifically, he writes that this name for the region bordering the Turkish Empire started being colloquially used starting from the reign of the king Alexander Jagiellon. That this term became more widespread in the reign of king Stefan Batory and that it is nowhere to be found in official documents prior to the reign of the king Zygmunt I Stary.

    Interestingly enough, the map of De Beauplan, the draft of which was probably produced during his service in Polish army, and that you have kindly linked in one of your comments above, states just that in Latin: Camporum desertum vulgo Ukraina.

    And with this I rest my case.

    🙂

    P.S. I am really ain’t no fan of Ukro-Russian Хохлосрачь effortposting.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Ano4

    This was intended as a reply to Mr. Hack retarding the Polish origins of the word Ukraine. The link to our discussion broke somehow.

    For those unfamiliar with the Хохлосрачь concept please see:

    http://lurkmore.to/%D0%A5%D0%BE%D1%85%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%87

    , @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    "pusta krajina" meaning empty land, is really not the same as "Ukraina" that means borderland. Close, perhaps, "but no cigar" Ano4. All that you've shown me anyway, is that by the beginning (well almost) of the 19th century Poles were using the term "Ukraina" (1796, 1801).

    As for Czazki's rendition of how and when the descriptor "Ukraina" was first used in the 15th century, you do have to pay special attention to the fact that the term "Ukrainiens" was used "colloquially" to describe the newly acquired territories and people, meaning that the term was in common use already by the locals before it was used within written documents, be they in Polish, Ruthenian or Russian.

    Then there's always the need to go back to the original document where this descriptor was first used. In the context of the original Rus triangle (Kyiv, Pereieslav Chernihiv) within the Hypotian Codex, it too was used to describe the Kyiv principality's southern flank, facing the "Wild Fields". I'm borrowing here the additional information that AP has provided in his comment #55:


    The oldest recorded mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In connection with the death of the Volodymyr Hlibovych, the ruler of Principality of Pereyaslavl which was Kyïv’s southern shield against the Wild Fields, the Hypatian Codex says “oukraina groaned for him”, ѡ нем же оукраина много постона (o nem že oukraina mnogo postona).[5] In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus’ without a specific geographic fixation: Halych-Volhynia, Pskov, Ryazan etc.[6]:183[7]

     

    So, although you've shown that the terms "Ukraina" and "Ukrainiens" were already in use within Polish documents of the 15th century, I'm more inclined to believe that the terms were already in use by the locals of that time and borrowed by the magnates and bookmen of that era to describe these territories.
  91. @Ano4
    In 1796, the Polish Magnate Prince Jan Potocki in his Fragments historiques et géographiques sur la Scythie, la Sarmatie et les Slaves is among the first to mention Ukrainians as a distinct branch of the Eastern Slavs.

    Interestingly enough, he writes that Russians are descendants of the Slavs of Novgorod, who are "les Slaves proprement dits" i.e. Slavs proper.

    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/zhenziyou/14947834/86920/86920_original.jpg

    In 1801 Tadeusz Czazcki in his article entitled О nazwisku Ukrainy і początki kozaków derives the population of modern-day Ukraine from the nomadic Ukrs , but also writes that the name of the country originated in Polish use of pusta kraina since XVth century CE to describe the regions bordering the enemies of the Rzeczpospolita to the East.

    Specifically, he writes that this name for the region bordering the Turkish Empire started being colloquially used starting from the reign of the king Alexander Jagiellon. That this term became more widespread in the reign of king Stefan Batory and that it is nowhere to be found in official documents prior to the reign of the king Zygmunt I Stary.

    Interestingly enough, the map of De Beauplan, the draft of which was probably produced during his service in Polish army, and that you have kindly linked in one of your comments above, states just that in Latin: Camporum desertum vulgo Ukraina.

    And with this I rest my case.

    🙂

    P.S. I am really ain't no fan of Ukro-Russian Хохлосрачь effortposting.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Mr. Hack

    This was intended as a reply to Mr. Hack retarding the Polish origins of the word Ukraine. The link to our discussion broke somehow.

    For those unfamiliar with the Хохлосрачь concept please see:

    http://lurkmore.to/%D0%A5%D0%BE%D1%85%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%87

    • LOL: AP
  92. @Ano4
    In 1796, the Polish Magnate Prince Jan Potocki in his Fragments historiques et géographiques sur la Scythie, la Sarmatie et les Slaves is among the first to mention Ukrainians as a distinct branch of the Eastern Slavs.

    Interestingly enough, he writes that Russians are descendants of the Slavs of Novgorod, who are "les Slaves proprement dits" i.e. Slavs proper.

    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/zhenziyou/14947834/86920/86920_original.jpg

    In 1801 Tadeusz Czazcki in his article entitled О nazwisku Ukrainy і początki kozaków derives the population of modern-day Ukraine from the nomadic Ukrs , but also writes that the name of the country originated in Polish use of pusta kraina since XVth century CE to describe the regions bordering the enemies of the Rzeczpospolita to the East.

    Specifically, he writes that this name for the region bordering the Turkish Empire started being colloquially used starting from the reign of the king Alexander Jagiellon. That this term became more widespread in the reign of king Stefan Batory and that it is nowhere to be found in official documents prior to the reign of the king Zygmunt I Stary.

    Interestingly enough, the map of De Beauplan, the draft of which was probably produced during his service in Polish army, and that you have kindly linked in one of your comments above, states just that in Latin: Camporum desertum vulgo Ukraina.

    And with this I rest my case.

    🙂

    P.S. I am really ain't no fan of Ukro-Russian Хохлосрачь effortposting.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Mr. Hack

    “pusta krajina” meaning empty land, is really not the same as “Ukraina” that means borderland. Close, perhaps, “but no cigar” Ano4. All that you’ve shown me anyway, is that by the beginning (well almost) of the 19th century Poles were using the term “Ukraina” (1796, 1801).

    As for Czazki’s rendition of how and when the descriptor “Ukraina” was first used in the 15th century, you do have to pay special attention to the fact that the term “Ukrainiens” was used “colloquially” to describe the newly acquired territories and people, meaning that the term was in common use already by the locals before it was used within written documents, be they in Polish, Ruthenian or Russian.

    Then there’s always the need to go back to the original document where this descriptor was first used. In the context of the original Rus triangle (Kyiv, Pereieslav Chernihiv) within the Hypotian Codex, it too was used to describe the Kyiv principality’s southern flank, facing the “Wild Fields”. I’m borrowing here the additional information that AP has provided in his comment #55:

    The oldest recorded mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In connection with the death of the Volodymyr Hlibovych, the ruler of Principality of Pereyaslavl which was Kyïv’s southern shield against the Wild Fields, the Hypatian Codex says “oukraina groaned for him”, ѡ нем же оукраина много постона (o nem že oukraina mnogo postona).[5] In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus’ without a specific geographic fixation: Halych-Volhynia, Pskov, Ryazan etc.[6]:183[7]

    So, although you’ve shown that the terms “Ukraina” and “Ukrainiens” were already in use within Polish documents of the 15th century, I’m more inclined to believe that the terms were already in use by the locals of that time and borrowed by the magnates and bookmen of that era to describe these territories.

  93. @AP
    @Ano4


    Ukraine is directly derived from the word the Poles used to describe the border lands between the Rzeczpospolita and Muscovy on one hand and Rzeczpospolita and Crimean Tatars on the other hand. I am quite certain that you are well aware of the use of this word by the Poles during the Rzeczpospolita colonization of the western Rus lands.
     
    It translates roughly as something like "March" or "Mark" (i.e., Denmark) but its usage precedes the Poles:

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

    The oldest recorded mention of the word ukraina dates back to the year 1187. In connection with the death of the Volodymyr Hlibovych, the ruler of Principality of Pereyaslavl which was Kyïv's southern shield against the Wild Fields, the Hypatian Codex says "oukraina groaned for him", ѡ нем же оукраина много постона (o nem že oukraina mnogo postona).[5] In the following decades and centuries this term was applied to fortified borderlands of different principalities of Rus' without a specific geographic fixation: Halych-Volhynia, Pskov, Ryazan etc.[6]:183[7]


    The only reason why you and other Ukrainian nationalists use Ukraine instead of Rus is to emphasize the difference between the Russian Empire that you resent for various reasons and the parts of Rus lands that have been ruled by the Rzeczpospolita and Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
     
    Correct. I have mixed feelings about this deliberate change of terminology but the fact is that it is used widely and nothing can be done. Might as well ask Romanians to resume calling themselves Vlachs or whatever. I met some Russian nationalists in Moscow who complained bitterly to me that the useage of Russians rather than Rus and that the term "Russians," like "Ukrainian" was a term created by Poles and Jews to divide the Rus people. Well, what will he do, it is the widely used term nowadays.

    For reasons unknown you seem to believe that being ruled by Lithuanians, Poles and Hungarians was a kind of blessing for the Rus people who fell under the domination of these foreign powers.
     
    Nothing good came of Hungarian rule but prior to Khmelnytsky's treason being part of the PLC could not be characterized as "domination" by a "foreign power" because the ones in control (and indeed steering PLC's eastern policies) were local princes who wielded much more power than they would under Muscovite domination.

    And of course Hapsburg rule was good for the Rus people.

    You might be interested in this article about Khmelytsky's nemesis, whom modern Ukrainian nationalists despise because they twist history:

    https://day.kyiv.ua/en/article/culture/jeremi-wisniowiecki-hero-or-antihero

    The character of a person’s actions is largely determined by his or her self-identification, which sets up the paradigm for this person’s conduct. Who did Wisniowiecki think he was? His princely descent was the foremost part of his self-image. In the eyes of society at the time it was something sacral, God-given. The title of prince put him on an equal footing with the szlachta (nobility) but only formally, because it actually gave him real advantages in obtaining government positions and opened up opportunities for participation in the political life of the Rzech Pospolita. Finally, princely descent gave a person the right to ascent to the throne. The Vyshnevetskys had blood relations among Polish kings, Lithuanian dukes, and Muscovite tsars.

    Wisniowiecki’s active role in defending the rights of Rus’ princes in 1638 spoke of his high regard for his descent. At the age of 26 he headed the party of kniazhata starozhytni, which brought together a number of respected older Ukrainian aristocrats. Their goal was to keep the titles they received before the Union of Lublin. This campaign, which was spearheaded by the prince, can be interpreted as a manifestation of Rus’ regionalism, which was, however, quite legal. Generally, Wisniowiecki was a legist, i.e., a representative of the school that highly esteemed the law. It should be noted that for a while he lived and studied in Western Europe with its relatively high level of respect for the law.

    Another aspect of Wisniowiecki’s self-identification was the fact that he was a law-abiding citizen of his state, the Rzech Pospolita. The prince was included in the system of power and seemed unable to imagine being outside it. Even when he was mistreated by the highest ranking officials, he did not resort to a rebellion or unlawful actions.

    An important factor for Wi ni­owiec­ki’s self-identification was his religious affiliation. He was raised in a family with strong Orthodox traditions. His parents were ardent Orthodox believers and protected the Orthodox Church in various ways. Wisniowiecki was christened in the Orthodox Church and remained there until the age of 20. However, in 1632, after he returned from Western Europe, he converted to Catholicism. Despite a widespread notion that at the time Ukrainian Orthodox nobility adopted the Catholic religion en masse, such conversions were not common. Therefore, Wisniowiecki’s step caused repercussions: for example, he received a condemning letter from Isaiah Kosynsky.

    Why did Wisniowiecki venture to do this, realizing that many in his milieu would react negatively? A number of researchers link his conversion to the fact that his teachers were Lviv-based Jesuits and he studied in Italian universities. After he had exposure to Western European Catholic culture, it grew on him. Such considerations might have played a part, but we should not think that these were the only factors contributing to his conversion.

    Wisniowiecki could not fail to understand that Catholicism opened far better opportunities for making a political career and joining the state elite. In my opinion, this pragmatic motive proved to be decisive.

    [a charitable and no less realistic interpretation than the author's, is that Wisniowecki viewed Catholicism as more advanced and Orthodoxy as backward, and as a "state-builder" he chose to reform his lands and people by bringing them to Catholicism. Peter I of Russia visited the Netherlands and had his own struggle with Orthodoxy after returning, but it came later and his modernization project did not involve conversion to Catholicism but massive changes in Russia's Church and often brutal cultural transformation - AP].

    Naturally, a religious conversion did not do credit to Wisniowiecki. In the circum­stances of an acute denominational confrontation in Ukraine this move was perceived as apostasy and betrayal of the ancestral traditions, which were treasured by society at the time. Young and ambitious Wisniowiecki had just returned from ab­ro­ad and wanted to make a career in politics; it is quite possible that he did not perceive the gravity of his step. Eventually, his conversion did not yield much in terms of political advancement. However, without this he would not have been so popular among the Polish szlachta and his son would not ha­ve ascended the Polish throne. In princip­le, this can be seen as the prince’s sagacity.

    We should not accuse Wisniowiecki of religious intolerance, which is often a distinctive feature of neophytes. True, he funded Catholic cathedrals in Ukrainian lands, but, on the other hand, it is a clear exaggeration to attribute to him the forceful imposition of Catholicism. At the same time, the prince helped Orthodox shrines: there are testimonies that during the Khmelnytsky-led war the Cossacks looted some Orthodox monasteries, while Wisniowiecki defended them. Isn’t this paradoxical: an adherent of Catholicism defended Orthodox monks from the Cossacks, who claimed to be protectors of Orthodoxy? Also telling is Wisniowiecki’s 1648 move when the throne was vacant and he supported George I R k czi, a Protestant. In other words, when socially important things were at stake, religious affiliation was not a factor for the prince. In principle, this kind of “denominational pragmatism” was common among the magnates in the Rzech Pospolita at the time.

    It was precisely pragmatism and sober calculations that helped Wisniowiecki gain control over lands in Left-Bank Ukraine and become extremely wealthy. His success in this sphere is almost unreal. It should be noted that the Vyshnevetskys were not rich, so some representatives of this dynasty sought a military career, as was the case with his great grandfather, Dmytro Vyshnevetsky (Baida).

    Paradoxical as it may seem, with his administrative and economic activities the prince created a foundation for the creation of the modern Ukrainian nation. The territories that were settled and populated in the time of his rule became the launching pad for Ukraine’s cultural formation. Con­temporary standard Ukrainian developed from the Poltava–Kyiv dialects.

    Hryhorii Skovoroda, Ivan Kotlia­rev­sky, Hryhorii Kvitka-Osnovianenko, Yev­hen Hrebinka, Taras Shevchenko, and nu­merous prominent figures in Ukrainian culture came from Wisniowiecki’s Left-Bank estates (known as Vyshnevechchyna) and the neighboring territories. It may sound somewhat far-fetched, but we would not have the Ukrainian nation in its modern cultural form without Wisniowiecki who was called “an enemy of the Ukrainian people.”

    Gaining control over Left-Bank Ukraine would have been possible without fighting the Tatars, who constantly plundered Ukrainian lands and took people prisoners. In the 1640s Wisniowiecki made quite a few raids against them and managed to secure the safety of these territories. The fact that Wisniowiecki provided protection for the lands and granted privileges to the newcomers was an important factor that facilitated his efforts to bring this territory under control.

    Those who accuse Wisniowiecki of having an anti-Ukrainian stance rely in their assessment on the fact that he was against Khmelnytsky’s actions when he managed to organize the Zaporozhian Cossacks for a rebellion. Today Khmelnytsky is an unquestionable Ukrainian national hero and a symbol of Ukrianianness. On the other hand, in Ukrainian folklore this figure is described in somewhat restrained manner and some activists of the Ukrainian national revival, Shevchenko for one, were very critical of Khmelnytsky. I will not dwell now about how the myth about Khmelnytsky took shape, but will just mention that it appeared later, in the 19th century. Any myth does not always correspond to historic events and often replaces true facts with the desired ones. Subjectively, Khmelnytsky was not and, in fact, at the time, could not possibly be a national leader. He was guided by his own interests and sometimes his own ambitions. At the same time, he became a tool of a tough geopolitical game on the territory of Eastern Europe that was played by the imperial states—the Rzecz Pospolita, Turkey, Russia, and even Sweden.

    That is why there is no point in interpreting Wisniowiecki or Khmelnytsky through the lens of national vision. As a loyal citizen of the Rzech Pospolita, Wisniowiecki saw in Khmelnytsky and the Cossacks rebels, law-breakers, and traitors of the state. Khmelnytsky had brought along the Tatars, something other Cossack leaders did not dare do.

    Both Wisniowiecki and Khmelnytsky knew that since 1646 King W adys aw had been nurturing a plan to destroy the Crimean Khanate, and both of them had been involved in the realization of this plan. Now with Khmelnytsky’s help the khanate dealt a blow to the Rzech Pospolita. What could Wisniowiecki’s reaction be under the circumstances?

    Furthermore, Khmelnytsky’s rebellion sowed the seeds of anarchy and disorganization in social life and posed a direct threat to the prince’s estates in Left-Bank Uk­raine. The city of Lubny, Vyshnevech­chy­na’s seat of sorts, was razed to the ground. The same fate befell other prosperous settlements of craftsmen and merchants. This rebellion brought the Tatar hordes to Uk­rainian lands, and they engaged in merciless looting. In fact, the Cossack army was largely comprised of the Tatars, and without their help the Cossacks would have been unable to succeed in their fight against the Rzech Pospolita. In contrast to this, the Vyshnevetsky princes were famed anti-Tatar crusaders. In this context Wi ­niowiecki’s struggle against Khmelnytsky appears to be quite logical.

    The intricacies of this struggle have been described in detail and are well-known. Here I would like to say that in this struggle Wisniowiecki was not without his faults; he often resorted to cruel terror, deservedly earning his nickname—“the terror of the Cossacks.” His characteristic pragmatism seems to have often betrayed him in this struggle, giving place to emotions.

    Replies: @Dreadilk

    I like the sound of Vlachs.

    As far as to what Ukranians call them selves it’s not a problem. For however long they still remain outside of Russia’s control.

    Edit: What is it with English and confusing how things are called? There is no confusion in Russian between “Римляни” and “Румыны”. Same fucking problem with Georgia, China and Russia.

    • Agree: AP
  94. @Denis
    @AP

    You are becoming rude and arguing over inane semantics, all because I pointed out a silly claim of yours. Maybe you should take a break?

    Replies: @AP

    You are the one who made the falsely accused me of making a false statement, based on a willful misinterpretation of what I wrote, and I showed it to you. Somehow the “semantics” were not “inane” when they served as the basis of your false accusation, but when you were proven wrong they became “inane.”

    I wrote, “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. So each considered the other to be foreign.” A statement based on the conclusion of an eminent specialist of historian who specialized in this stuff.*

    You chose to twist this to mean something I didn’t say (your misinterpretation of what I wrote: ” the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians”), and then accused me of writing a falsehood, when the false words were yours not mine.

    A nice, open example of your intellectual dishonesty in this particular case.

    And when I point it out, and even go to the trouble to post the original texts (for the benefit of other readers, I suspect you are just trolling), you whine about me being “rude” to you.

    And yes, I will point it out when you do it to me.

    *Once again the quote this is based on:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    And text it comes from:

    [MORE]

    • Troll: Denis
    • Replies: @Denis
    @AP

    All this blather and (unwarranted) hostility, because you are unable to admit an error, however minor. Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong or just empty, could have been improved with some simple qualification, but you are unable to admit this.

    It's very sad that a man of your age has turned out so immature.

    Replies: @AP

  95. @Ano4
    @anonymous coward

    We both agree that he was absolutely an extremist. For me he was an extremist Westernizer. But yes he was also something of a proto-Bolshevik. I am not sure at all whether he did more good than evil to the Russian people, he started building my deeply loved Saint Petersburg though...

    Replies: @AP

    At first I was inclined to see Peter I as a proto-Bolshevik but there is a rule that when Anonymous Coward makes a conclusion one must be suspicious of it.

    So Peter shared with Bolsheviks a ruthless “modernization” drive but that was about it. So did the Meiji of Japan – were they also “proto-Bolsheviks”? The essence of Bolshevism was not only modernizing a country but also failing at doing so and leaving it weaker than would have been the case had it not been “modernized” in such a way. Look at the empty husk the actual Bolsheviks left behind.

    Peter I was simply a ruthless modernizer and Westernizer. The 18th to 20th centuries were times of the West. Mighty countries such the “gunpowder empires” (Ottoman, Persian and Mughal) and China who during this time failed to do modernize/Westernize so or did so ineffectively were destroyed, fatally weakened or came under Western influence. Russia under Peter and Japan under Meiji avoided such a fate due to their ruthless modernization and Westernization. I say this as no fan of Peter, who limited Ukraine’s autonomy (though a lot of individual Ukrainians, whose culture was more advanced and Western owing to their lands formerly having been part of the PLC, benefited enormously by his Westernization drive).

    In their way, men like those Rus princes of Ukraine who were trying to impose Catholicism on their patrimony were also modernizers/Westernizers like Peter I, trying to advance their lands; 100 before Peter Catholicism played a larger role in such Westernization and modernization whereas in Peter’s time it was less necessary.

    • Agree: Ano4
  96. @anonymous coward
    @Seraphim

    Nazis and Jews are frequent allies.

    Witness the CIA in the 20th century, for example.

    Using literal Nazi collaborators like "AP's" grandpa to do the dirty work didn't clash in the least with the "Israel first" policy.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Can you verify this claim? So far, only our Romanian dupe has found your accusations satisfactory, and his thinking abilities have been warped by years of overindulging in his favorite beverage, tuica.:-( .

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    @Mr. Hack

    Actually the 'Romanian dupe' made the 'accusations'.

  97. The plot thickens. Ukrainian foreign minister Kuleba stated that Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia. That’s the equivalent of someone saying that Kentucky brought civilization to the US.

    Russian jokers are having a field day. The best I have seen so far: “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    There was some truth in what he said though. Dostoyevsky wrote that “We all come out from Gogol's 'Overcoat'.” Many teachers left Ukraine for Russia in the 17th century, church reforms meant that something like the first six heads of the Holy Synod were Ukrainians (the first one, Stefan Yavorsky, was writing poetry in Latin and Polish in his spare time). The first three significant "Russian" composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    So Ukraine did play a significant role of bringing civilization to Russia.

    I'm surprised you did not know these things.


    “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.
     
    One of the features of Russian rule was a brain drain (such as Gogol) which was a loss for Ukraine but benefit for Russia.

    Replies: @Dreadilk, @Belarusian Dude, @AnonFromTN

  98. @AnonFromTN
    The plot thickens. Ukrainian foreign minister Kuleba stated that Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia. That’s the equivalent of someone saying that Kentucky brought civilization to the US.

    Russian jokers are having a field day. The best I have seen so far: “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.

    Replies: @AP

    There was some truth in what he said though. Dostoyevsky wrote that “We all come out from Gogol’s ‘Overcoat’.” Many teachers left Ukraine for Russia in the 17th century, church reforms meant that something like the first six heads of the Holy Synod were Ukrainians (the first one, Stefan Yavorsky, was writing poetry in Latin and Polish in his spare time). The first three significant “Russian” composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    So Ukraine did play a significant role of bringing civilization to Russia.

    I’m surprised you did not know these things.

    “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.

    One of the features of Russian rule was a brain drain (such as Gogol) which was a loss for Ukraine but benefit for Russia.

    • Replies: @Dreadilk
    @AP

    In that case Russia is more Ukraine than w.e Galicia is. Somehow though I think you are wrong. Russia proper today is way more culturally and economically productive than Ukraine. So that is legacy of people who founded each region.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Belarusian Dude
    @AP

    I don't think anyone disagreed with the technical truth of this, the issue is that the minister's statement is disingenuous given the inequality of contribution of one of the two nations to the other. Looking at the amount of "enko" last names in Russian gov't and academia alone easily demonstrates the magnitude of Ukrainian contribution to Russian advancement, but pretty much all of Ukraine's universities owe their existence to Russia.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    , @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    I am sorry to point this out, but everything Gogol wrote was in Russian, including the “Overcoat”. So, claiming him as a Ukrainian writer is disingenuous, to put it mildly. Gogol used some Malorussian words and expressions in some of his writing, but many Russian writers used words from local dialects in theirs (say, Leskov, Mamin-Sibiryak), which does not make them parochial. Gogol certainly wasn’t.

    Replies: @AP, @Philip Owen

  99. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    There was some truth in what he said though. Dostoyevsky wrote that “We all come out from Gogol's 'Overcoat'.” Many teachers left Ukraine for Russia in the 17th century, church reforms meant that something like the first six heads of the Holy Synod were Ukrainians (the first one, Stefan Yavorsky, was writing poetry in Latin and Polish in his spare time). The first three significant "Russian" composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    So Ukraine did play a significant role of bringing civilization to Russia.

    I'm surprised you did not know these things.


    “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.
     
    One of the features of Russian rule was a brain drain (such as Gogol) which was a loss for Ukraine but benefit for Russia.

    Replies: @Dreadilk, @Belarusian Dude, @AnonFromTN

    In that case Russia is more Ukraine than w.e Galicia is. Somehow though I think you are wrong. Russia proper today is way more culturally and economically productive than Ukraine. So that is legacy of people who founded each region.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Dreadilk


    Russia proper today is way more culturally and economically productive than Ukraine.
     
    Correct and has been for a long time but this does not contradict what I wrote.
  100. @Dreadilk
    @AP

    In that case Russia is more Ukraine than w.e Galicia is. Somehow though I think you are wrong. Russia proper today is way more culturally and economically productive than Ukraine. So that is legacy of people who founded each region.

    Replies: @AP

    Russia proper today is way more culturally and economically productive than Ukraine.

    Correct and has been for a long time but this does not contradict what I wrote.

  101. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    There was some truth in what he said though. Dostoyevsky wrote that “We all come out from Gogol's 'Overcoat'.” Many teachers left Ukraine for Russia in the 17th century, church reforms meant that something like the first six heads of the Holy Synod were Ukrainians (the first one, Stefan Yavorsky, was writing poetry in Latin and Polish in his spare time). The first three significant "Russian" composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    So Ukraine did play a significant role of bringing civilization to Russia.

    I'm surprised you did not know these things.


    “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.
     
    One of the features of Russian rule was a brain drain (such as Gogol) which was a loss for Ukraine but benefit for Russia.

    Replies: @Dreadilk, @Belarusian Dude, @AnonFromTN

    I don’t think anyone disagreed with the technical truth of this, the issue is that the minister’s statement is disingenuous given the inequality of contribution of one of the two nations to the other. Looking at the amount of “enko” last names in Russian gov’t and academia alone easily demonstrates the magnitude of Ukrainian contribution to Russian advancement, but pretty much all of Ukraine’s universities owe their existence to Russia.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Belarusian Dude

    So what exact "contributions" has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN's litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I'm describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine's own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn't worked up until now, and it doesn't appear that it will going into the future.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @AnonFromTN, @Belarusian Dude

  102. @Belarusian Dude
    @AP

    I don't think anyone disagreed with the technical truth of this, the issue is that the minister's statement is disingenuous given the inequality of contribution of one of the two nations to the other. Looking at the amount of "enko" last names in Russian gov't and academia alone easily demonstrates the magnitude of Ukrainian contribution to Russian advancement, but pretty much all of Ukraine's universities owe their existence to Russia.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    So what exact “contributions” has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN’s litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I’m describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine’s own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn’t worked up until now, and it doesn’t appear that it will going into the future.

    • Disagree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine’s own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn’t worked up until now, and it doesn’t appear that it will going into the future.
     
    Морква на городi,
    У саду бджола.
    Жаба на болотi
    Крила розвела.

    Хоче полетiти,
    Тихо каже "Ква!"
    Але в небо взмити
    Hе дає Москва.

    Знають, знають хитрi
    Клятi москалi
    Те, що у повiтрi
    Жаби - королi.

    Що, розкинув крила,
    Мов зелений птах,
    Цiлий день парила б
    Жаба в небесах.



    Що могла б дiстати
    Hавiть до зiрок,
    Що створив лiтати
    Жаб зелених бог.

    Але щось тримає,
    Тягне до трави.
    Жаба точно знає –
    То рука Москви.

    В ней залiзнi пальцi,
    Як кiльцем взяли.
    Тримають за яйця
    Жабу москалi...

    Кажуть, що не треба.
    Кажуть: "Ти лайно".
    Але смотрить в небо
    Жаба все одно.

    I хоча минають
    Цi тяжки часи,
    Досi заважають
    Жабi руськi пси.

    Годi, кляте стерво,
    Золота Москва
    Жаба ще не вмерла,
    Жаба ще жива!

    Жаба ще порине
    В синю далечiнь,
    Бо немає нинi
    Краще жаб створiнь!

    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/atmamarga/49493909/55598/55598_original.jpg

    😁

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

    , @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    I don’t have time to be comprehensive, so here is just one example of it. In 1940 Ukraine had ~8 million cows. The war was devastating for the agriculture (German military advance, then German occupation, then Red Army advance), but Ukraine was helped a lot by the rest of the USSR, and the number of cows in Ukraine in 1945 was over 6 million. This number grew to ~ 25 million by 1985 and remained virtually constant until 1991 independence. One would think that if Ukraine is more advanced (it lately advertised itself as an “agricultural superpower”), the numbers should have, if anything, improved. FYI, the number of cows in Ukraine after 29 years of independence is … about 3 million. So, independence turned out to be a significantly greater disaster than WWII. The same story can be told about every branch of Ukrainian industry (I recently posted the numbers on car production, which are even more dismal), with numbers I don’t have time to look up.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Gerard-Mandela, @AP

    , @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse.
     
    You repeat a lot of globohomo lies, and this is one of them. I went to school in Lugansk 1965-1975. Ukrainian language and literature were obligatory for all students, and took up at least 6 lessons per week (out of fewer than 30 total). I had a huge advantage: I was the only kid in a class of 40+ who spoke fluent Ukrainian, because I was born in Lvov and spent the first years of my life in the area, communicating with other kids in Ukrainian. That’s why our Ukrainian teacher loved me and even insisted on laudatory note about my achievements in Ukrainian language and literature in the document attesting my graduation from school. But the rest of the class had Ukrainian, which was foreign to them, pushed down their throats.

    Lugansk local TV had two channels, one in Russian, another in Ukrainian, even though hardly anyone watched the Ukrainian channel. In 90%+ Russian-speaking Lugansk most books in the book stores and libraries were in Ukrainian. It was not a problem for me, as I spoke both languages equally well, so I even read Stanislaw Lem in Ukrainian, but most people couldn’t. So much for the roadblocks of the use of Ukrainian.

    If anything, the USSR overdid pushing it, same as the other local languages. One of my cousins lived and worked in Uhta, the capital of Komi autonomous republic. She said that nobody spoke Komi in Uhta, except radio.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    , @Belarusian Dude
    @Mr. Hack

    This is a big cope of the swiniest of the vyshyvatnik swine right. Ukrainians have only themselves to blame for their cultural and linguistic backwardness, Russia and by extension the USSR founded all of their major cities and educational institutions.

  103. @Mr. Hack
    @Belarusian Dude

    So what exact "contributions" has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN's litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I'm describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine's own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn't worked up until now, and it doesn't appear that it will going into the future.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @AnonFromTN, @Belarusian Dude

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine’s own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn’t worked up until now, and it doesn’t appear that it will going into the future.

    Морква на городi,
    У саду бджола.
    Жаба на болотi
    Крила розвела.

    Хоче полетiти,
    Тихо каже “Ква!”
    Але в небо взмити
    Hе дає Москва.

    Знають, знають хитрi
    Клятi москалi
    Те, що у повiтрi
    Жаби – королi.

    Що, розкинув крила,
    Мов зелений птах,
    Цiлий день парила б
    Жаба в небесах.

    [MORE]

    Що могла б дiстати
    Hавiть до зiрок,
    Що створив лiтати
    Жаб зелених бог.

    Але щось тримає,
    Тягне до трави.
    Жаба точно знає –
    То рука Москви.

    В ней залiзнi пальцi,
    Як кiльцем взяли.
    Тримають за яйця
    Жабу москалi…

    Кажуть, що не треба.
    Кажуть: “Ти лайно”.
    Але смотрить в небо
    Жаба все одно.

    I хоча минають
    Цi тяжки часи,
    Досi заважають
    Жабi руськi пси.

    Годi, кляте стерво,
    Золота Москва
    Жаба ще не вмерла,
    Жаба ще жива!

    Жаба ще порине
    В синю далечiнь,
    Бо немає нинi
    Краще жаб створiнь!

    😁

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Since you seem to appreciate poetry, and once admitted that your Grandfather was a proud Ukrainian who esteemed Shevchenko's poetry, now you'll understand why! :-)

    https://youtu.be/7Fdry64pRnI

    Replies: @Ano4

    , @AnonFromTN
    @Ano4

    For those who don’t read Ukrainian. This is a satirical poem mocking Ukie propaganda. It says that toads are born to fly, but pesky Russians do not let Ukrainian toad soar into the sky.

    On a more serious note, a lot of posters here often talk about birthrates. Recently a head of the directorate for protection of children rights of Ukrainian Ministry of Social Policy Ruslan Kolbasa bemoaned a huge drop in Ukrainian birthrates. According to him, compared to USSR times, the birthrate in Ukraine after independence dropped 2.5-fold in the 1990s, hitting the bottom of 1.09 children per woman in 2001. Then it went up and reached a peak in the second year of Yanuk presidency (1.53 children per woman). About 500,000 children were born in Ukraine every year in 2011-2013. This number kept dropping after 2014 coup and is just above 300,000 now.

    Links for those who can read Russian
    https://ukraina.ru/news/20200908/1028834528.html
    https://desktop.aftershock.news/?q=node/902124&page=2
    https://newsone.ua/news/society/v_ukraine_za_poslednie_pyat_let_rezko_sokratilos_kolichestvo_novorozhdennyh.html
    https://glavk.net/news/747933-v_minsotspolitiki_bjjut_trevogu_iz-za_stremiteljnogo_sokrashchenija_rohdaemosti
    https://klymenko-time.com/novosti/v-ukraine-katastroficheski-upala-rozhdaemost/

    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho.

    Replies: @AP

  104. @Mr. Hack
    @Belarusian Dude

    So what exact "contributions" has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN's litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I'm describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine's own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn't worked up until now, and it doesn't appear that it will going into the future.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @AnonFromTN, @Belarusian Dude

    I don’t have time to be comprehensive, so here is just one example of it. In 1940 Ukraine had ~8 million cows. The war was devastating for the agriculture (German military advance, then German occupation, then Red Army advance), but Ukraine was helped a lot by the rest of the USSR, and the number of cows in Ukraine in 1945 was over 6 million. This number grew to ~ 25 million by 1985 and remained virtually constant until 1991 independence. One would think that if Ukraine is more advanced (it lately advertised itself as an “agricultural superpower”), the numbers should have, if anything, improved. FYI, the number of cows in Ukraine after 29 years of independence is … about 3 million. So, independence turned out to be a significantly greater disaster than WWII. The same story can be told about every branch of Ukrainian industry (I recently posted the numbers on car production, which are even more dismal), with numbers I don’t have time to look up.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    Ukraine's economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too. There are plenty of good cheeses in both Russia and Europe for Ukraine to concentrate more on value added technical industries.

    Things were so good in pre-war Ukraine that you're making it sound reminiscent of the way Edouard Herriot described Soviet Ukraine:


    like a garden in full bloom.
     
    Add some honey to your equation (that has always been well cultivated in Ukraine) and you get a picture of Soviet Ukraine, as the proverbial land of "Milk and Honey". No wonder that you're so grumpy since it went away. :-)

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    , @Gerard-Mandela
    @AnonFromTN

    As a comparison between Belarus and Ukraine, one has to conclude that there is no way that Belarus would be such demented retards over the gas transit issue.

    Banderastan has a capacity for 4 - 5 times more gas transit to EU per year then they will be providing in 2021, or 2-3 times what they were providing in 2018. This is nothing short of a tragedy that is literally killing the people - it would be a huge percentage of Ukrop GDP(not significant for Russia or Germany, but a sizeable percentage for Ukraine). Even with all the disagreements there is absolutely no chance that Lukashenko would have allowed this farcical situation to develop if Belarus had the infrastructure to supply the west with 230 billion cubic meters of gas per year....and that's just with Belarus being stable, not a nutjob state with mass poverty desperately needing some cash.

    To make things worse, Ukrop are such a prostitute of the west that Banderastan elite are fine with Germany , US and the rest of the west callously showing zero interest in them ever being able to actually improve their gas transit potential by building sane relations with Russia or modernizing their GTS. The west are fine prolonging this freakshow and making ukrainian slaves be "satisified" with a small fraction of this gas transit and revenue - just to satisfy their sick geopolitical ambitions.

    To finish of the freakshow , Ukrop state are thick enough to have wanted "celebration" over the "nation-building"(LOL) Stockholm Arbitration court decision, over what could have been a very easy negotiation guaranteeing an extra 3 billion Dollars into ukrop budget per year

    Ukraine's oil refining capacity is negligible, Belarus's of course considerable. If you had said in 1991 that would be negligible oil refining for Ukraine in 25 years time then literally 100% of people would think you were a maniac.

    , @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Russia's beef production has also declined significantly.

    But you are cherry-picking. Since 1990 Ukraine has had a huge increase in the production of poultry (5x more)

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=broiler-meat&graph=production

    and corn:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=corn&graph=production

    and sunflowerseed oil:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=sunflowerseed-oil&graph=production

    modest increase in cheese production, soybean, stable wheat production (higher in 2020 than any times since 1990) etc. despite a population decline.

    Overall Ukraine's agricultural sector is doing fine. You are just being dishonest about it.

    Replies: @JL

  105. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    I don’t have time to be comprehensive, so here is just one example of it. In 1940 Ukraine had ~8 million cows. The war was devastating for the agriculture (German military advance, then German occupation, then Red Army advance), but Ukraine was helped a lot by the rest of the USSR, and the number of cows in Ukraine in 1945 was over 6 million. This number grew to ~ 25 million by 1985 and remained virtually constant until 1991 independence. One would think that if Ukraine is more advanced (it lately advertised itself as an “agricultural superpower”), the numbers should have, if anything, improved. FYI, the number of cows in Ukraine after 29 years of independence is … about 3 million. So, independence turned out to be a significantly greater disaster than WWII. The same story can be told about every branch of Ukrainian industry (I recently posted the numbers on car production, which are even more dismal), with numbers I don’t have time to look up.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Gerard-Mandela, @AP

    Ukraine’s economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too. There are plenty of good cheeses in both Russia and Europe for Ukraine to concentrate more on value added technical industries.

    Things were so good in pre-war Ukraine that you’re making it sound reminiscent of the way Edouard Herriot described Soviet Ukraine:

    like a garden in full bloom.

    Add some honey to your equation (that has always been well cultivated in Ukraine) and you get a picture of Soviet Ukraine, as the proverbial land of “Milk and Honey”. No wonder that you’re so grumpy since it went away. 🙂

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    Ukraine’s economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too.
     
    Interesting. With the production of every tangible thing going down, what do you mean by “manufacturing”? With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?

    Even Wiki admits that “After pro-European revolution Maidan in 2014 Ukraine became poorest country in Europe according to IMF, behind Moldova” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Ukraine).

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

  106. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    There was some truth in what he said though. Dostoyevsky wrote that “We all come out from Gogol's 'Overcoat'.” Many teachers left Ukraine for Russia in the 17th century, church reforms meant that something like the first six heads of the Holy Synod were Ukrainians (the first one, Stefan Yavorsky, was writing poetry in Latin and Polish in his spare time). The first three significant "Russian" composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87

    So Ukraine did play a significant role of bringing civilization to Russia.

    I'm surprised you did not know these things.


    “if Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia, why didn’t they leave at least some in Ukraine”.
     
    One of the features of Russian rule was a brain drain (such as Gogol) which was a loss for Ukraine but benefit for Russia.

    Replies: @Dreadilk, @Belarusian Dude, @AnonFromTN

    I am sorry to point this out, but everything Gogol wrote was in Russian, including the “Overcoat”. So, claiming him as a Ukrainian writer is disingenuous, to put it mildly. Gogol used some Malorussian words and expressions in some of his writing, but many Russian writers used words from local dialects in theirs (say, Leskov, Mamin-Sibiryak), which does not make them parochial. Gogol certainly wasn’t.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Don't try to change the subject, to whether Gogol was a Russian writer or a Ukrainian one (the answer was that he was a Ukrainian writer who wrote in Russian and who contributed to Russian rather than Ukrainian literature, somewhat analogous to the Polish writer in England, Joseph Conrad). It's irrelevant to the point:

    You mocked the Ukrainian foreign minister saying: " Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia."

    Gogol was a Ukrainian who was very important for the development of Russian literature.

    And you ignored the examples of Ukrainian contribution to Russian music I posted.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    , @Philip Owen
    @AnonFromTN

    In Wales, admittedly with two different language groups involved, we evade this problem by describing writers as Welsh or Anglo-Welsh. Could Gogol, a schoolboy favourite of mine in translation, not be described as Russo-Ukrainian? Does that make sense in the local context?

    Some Anglo-Welsh writers write standard English, some use local English dialects influenced by Welsh - Dylan Thomas did this to a mild degree and some mix in short passages of Welsh. Happens on television now too.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  107. @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    Ukraine's economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too. There are plenty of good cheeses in both Russia and Europe for Ukraine to concentrate more on value added technical industries.

    Things were so good in pre-war Ukraine that you're making it sound reminiscent of the way Edouard Herriot described Soviet Ukraine:


    like a garden in full bloom.
     
    Add some honey to your equation (that has always been well cultivated in Ukraine) and you get a picture of Soviet Ukraine, as the proverbial land of "Milk and Honey". No wonder that you're so grumpy since it went away. :-)

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Ukraine’s economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too.

    Interesting. With the production of every tangible thing going down, what do you mean by “manufacturing”? With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?

    Even Wiki admits that “After pro-European revolution Maidan in 2014 Ukraine became poorest country in Europe according to IMF, behind Moldova” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Ukraine).

    • Agree: Jazman
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    The same Wiki piece that you quote also has this to say about Ukraine's improving economy:


    A 2017 World Bank statement projected growth of 2% in 2017, of 3.5% in 2018 and of 4% in 2019 and 2020.[93]
     
    Now of course this was all written before the Coronavirus pandemic, that I'm sure will have negative effects on the whole world economy. I'm sure that closer economic cooperation with Russia, however, would have dampened any such negative repercussions...blah,blah,blah. :-)
    , @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?
     
    Forbes magazine:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/victoriacollins/2019/10/01/the-ukrainian-tech-industry-and-the-launch-of-the-ukraine-it-creative-fund/#11ade6b84031

    The Ukrainian IT industry is growing by around 25,000 - 30,000 specialists per year at the moment, but with only 16,000 graduates from university.

    That’s why in September 2019 the Ukrainian Prime Minister Oleksiy Honcharuk launched the IT Creative Fund to train newly qualified specialists in IT. This initiative helps to support an expanding tech industry, the development of which can be traced back many decades.

    When I looked for a development company for my new web app, I found myself flying over to Odessa and starting a journey of technical exploration. Viacheslav, cofounder from SteelKiwi welcomed me on arrival. My trip was stress-free, the tree-filled boulevards relaxing, the Potemkin steps impressive and the work was productive.

    I have learned that Ukraine’s developers have helped to build Ford’s in-car infotainment systems, Reuters’ award-winning photography app, Nokia’s customer retail experience, and Deutsche Bank’s Risk Management System to name just a few. Talking to experts in the field, I have started to explore this background.

    Technology in Ukraine today

    The early 2000s saw a continued rise in software companies in Ukraine. Ciklum, for example, was founded in 2002 by a Danish native Torben Majgaard in Kyiv. They now have more than 3,500 developers across the globe in 24 offices.

    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  108. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    Ukraine’s economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too.
     
    Interesting. With the production of every tangible thing going down, what do you mean by “manufacturing”? With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?

    Even Wiki admits that “After pro-European revolution Maidan in 2014 Ukraine became poorest country in Europe according to IMF, behind Moldova” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Ukraine).

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    The same Wiki piece that you quote also has this to say about Ukraine’s improving economy:

    A 2017 World Bank statement projected growth of 2% in 2017, of 3.5% in 2018 and of 4% in 2019 and 2020.[93]

    Now of course this was all written before the Coronavirus pandemic, that I’m sure will have negative effects on the whole world economy. I’m sure that closer economic cooperation with Russia, however, would have dampened any such negative repercussions…blah,blah,blah. 🙂

  109. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    Ukraine’s economy is headed more towards the IT sector and manufacturing too.
     
    Interesting. With the production of every tangible thing going down, what do you mean by “manufacturing”? With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?

    Even Wiki admits that “After pro-European revolution Maidan in 2014 Ukraine became poorest country in Europe according to IMF, behind Moldova” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Ukraine).

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AP

    With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?

    Forbes magazine:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/victoriacollins/2019/10/01/the-ukrainian-tech-industry-and-the-launch-of-the-ukraine-it-creative-fund/#11ade6b84031

    The Ukrainian IT industry is growing by around 25,000 – 30,000 specialists per year at the moment, but with only 16,000 graduates from university.

    That’s why in September 2019 the Ukrainian Prime Minister Oleksiy Honcharuk launched the IT Creative Fund to train newly qualified specialists in IT. This initiative helps to support an expanding tech industry, the development of which can be traced back many decades.

    When I looked for a development company for my new web app, I found myself flying over to Odessa and starting a journey of technical exploration. Viacheslav, cofounder from SteelKiwi welcomed me on arrival. My trip was stress-free, the tree-filled boulevards relaxing, the Potemkin steps impressive and the work was productive.

    I have learned that Ukraine’s developers have helped to build Ford’s in-car infotainment systems, Reuters’ award-winning photography app, Nokia’s customer retail experience, and Deutsche Bank’s Risk Management System to name just a few. Talking to experts in the field, I have started to explore this background.

    Technology in Ukraine today

    The early 2000s saw a continued rise in software companies in Ukraine. Ciklum, for example, was founded in 2002 by a Danish native Torben Majgaard in Kyiv. They now have more than 3,500 developers across the globe in 24 offices.

    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.
     
    You forgot to mention that Ukraine GDP was >183 billion in 2013 and <131 billion in 2018 (projected to be about the same in 2020).
    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp

    Replies: @AP

  110. @Mr. Hack
    @Belarusian Dude

    So what exact "contributions" has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN's litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I'm describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine's own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn't worked up until now, and it doesn't appear that it will going into the future.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @AnonFromTN, @Belarusian Dude

    continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse.

    You repeat a lot of globohomo lies, and this is one of them. I went to school in Lugansk 1965-1975. Ukrainian language and literature were obligatory for all students, and took up at least 6 lessons per week (out of fewer than 30 total). I had a huge advantage: I was the only kid in a class of 40+ who spoke fluent Ukrainian, because I was born in Lvov and spent the first years of my life in the area, communicating with other kids in Ukrainian. That’s why our Ukrainian teacher loved me and even insisted on laudatory note about my achievements in Ukrainian language and literature in the document attesting my graduation from school. But the rest of the class had Ukrainian, which was foreign to them, pushed down their throats.

    Lugansk local TV had two channels, one in Russian, another in Ukrainian, even though hardly anyone watched the Ukrainian channel. In 90%+ Russian-speaking Lugansk most books in the book stores and libraries were in Ukrainian. It was not a problem for me, as I spoke both languages equally well, so I even read Stanislaw Lem in Ukrainian, but most people couldn’t. So much for the roadblocks of the use of Ukrainian.

    If anything, the USSR overdid pushing it, same as the other local languages. One of my cousins lived and worked in Uhta, the capital of Komi autonomous republic. She said that nobody spoke Komi in Uhta, except radio.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    So, how is it, according to your anecdotal sketches, that people of Ukrainian descent prefer to use the Russian language, instead of their own native Ukrainian one? Does a Ukrainian wake up one glorious and sunny morning, and in response to his mother's beckoning voice to come to the breakfast table:


    Синку вставай до сніданку, я тобі приготувала смажені яєчка з салечком і свіжим чорним хлібом.
     
    To which his son consiously replies back to his mother:

    Нет, не хочу. Потом встану і буду кушать щий...
     
    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened. Most people, instinctively prefer their own native language, to one that is somehow transmitted to the masses from afar?

    I suspect thaat in your case, although your mother was Ukrainian, your father was either a Russian or a Russified Jew that set the parameters of language usage within your home.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  111. @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    I am sorry to point this out, but everything Gogol wrote was in Russian, including the “Overcoat”. So, claiming him as a Ukrainian writer is disingenuous, to put it mildly. Gogol used some Malorussian words and expressions in some of his writing, but many Russian writers used words from local dialects in theirs (say, Leskov, Mamin-Sibiryak), which does not make them parochial. Gogol certainly wasn’t.

    Replies: @AP, @Philip Owen

    Don’t try to change the subject, to whether Gogol was a Russian writer or a Ukrainian one (the answer was that he was a Ukrainian writer who wrote in Russian and who contributed to Russian rather than Ukrainian literature, somewhat analogous to the Polish writer in England, Joseph Conrad). It’s irrelevant to the point:

    You mocked the Ukrainian foreign minister saying: ” Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia.”

    Gogol was a Ukrainian who was very important for the development of Russian literature.

    And you ignored the examples of Ukrainian contribution to Russian music I posted.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    The first three significant “Russian” composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:
     
    I would let the others familiar with music compare the people you mentioned with Tchaikovsky, Glinka, and Mussorgsky. I’ll stop at three not because there weren’t others, but because you came up with three names.

    Replies: @AP

  112. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    With huge abundance of Russian software on the world market, and nothing even close from Ukraine, what do you mean by “IT”?
     
    Forbes magazine:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/victoriacollins/2019/10/01/the-ukrainian-tech-industry-and-the-launch-of-the-ukraine-it-creative-fund/#11ade6b84031

    The Ukrainian IT industry is growing by around 25,000 - 30,000 specialists per year at the moment, but with only 16,000 graduates from university.

    That’s why in September 2019 the Ukrainian Prime Minister Oleksiy Honcharuk launched the IT Creative Fund to train newly qualified specialists in IT. This initiative helps to support an expanding tech industry, the development of which can be traced back many decades.

    When I looked for a development company for my new web app, I found myself flying over to Odessa and starting a journey of technical exploration. Viacheslav, cofounder from SteelKiwi welcomed me on arrival. My trip was stress-free, the tree-filled boulevards relaxing, the Potemkin steps impressive and the work was productive.

    I have learned that Ukraine’s developers have helped to build Ford’s in-car infotainment systems, Reuters’ award-winning photography app, Nokia’s customer retail experience, and Deutsche Bank’s Risk Management System to name just a few. Talking to experts in the field, I have started to explore this background.

    Technology in Ukraine today

    The early 2000s saw a continued rise in software companies in Ukraine. Ciklum, for example, was founded in 2002 by a Danish native Torben Majgaard in Kyiv. They now have more than 3,500 developers across the globe in 24 offices.

    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.

    You forgot to mention that Ukraine GDP was >183 billion in 2013 and <131 billion in 2018 (projected to be about the same in 2020).
    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Since Ukraine's GDP didn't shrink 50 times, IT industry has grown significantly.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

  113. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Don't try to change the subject, to whether Gogol was a Russian writer or a Ukrainian one (the answer was that he was a Ukrainian writer who wrote in Russian and who contributed to Russian rather than Ukrainian literature, somewhat analogous to the Polish writer in England, Joseph Conrad). It's irrelevant to the point:

    You mocked the Ukrainian foreign minister saying: " Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia."

    Gogol was a Ukrainian who was very important for the development of Russian literature.

    And you ignored the examples of Ukrainian contribution to Russian music I posted.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    The first three significant “Russian” composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:

    I would let the others familiar with music compare the people you mentioned with Tchaikovsky, Glinka, and Mussorgsky. I’ll stop at three not because there weren’t others, but because you came up with three names.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You are changing the subject again. The discussion wasn't who produced better of more globally famous composers. It was your mocking the Ukrainian foreign minister for claiming "” Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia.”

    These three composers were Russia's first significant ones and important for the development of Russia's classical music tradition.

    So as we have seen, the Ukrainian Gogol was important for Russia's literary tradition and these three Ukrainian composers were for Russia's musical tradition.

    So yes, to an extent at least, Ukraine helped to bring civilization to Russia.

  114. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse.
     
    You repeat a lot of globohomo lies, and this is one of them. I went to school in Lugansk 1965-1975. Ukrainian language and literature were obligatory for all students, and took up at least 6 lessons per week (out of fewer than 30 total). I had a huge advantage: I was the only kid in a class of 40+ who spoke fluent Ukrainian, because I was born in Lvov and spent the first years of my life in the area, communicating with other kids in Ukrainian. That’s why our Ukrainian teacher loved me and even insisted on laudatory note about my achievements in Ukrainian language and literature in the document attesting my graduation from school. But the rest of the class had Ukrainian, which was foreign to them, pushed down their throats.

    Lugansk local TV had two channels, one in Russian, another in Ukrainian, even though hardly anyone watched the Ukrainian channel. In 90%+ Russian-speaking Lugansk most books in the book stores and libraries were in Ukrainian. It was not a problem for me, as I spoke both languages equally well, so I even read Stanislaw Lem in Ukrainian, but most people couldn’t. So much for the roadblocks of the use of Ukrainian.

    If anything, the USSR overdid pushing it, same as the other local languages. One of my cousins lived and worked in Uhta, the capital of Komi autonomous republic. She said that nobody spoke Komi in Uhta, except radio.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    So, how is it, according to your anecdotal sketches, that people of Ukrainian descent prefer to use the Russian language, instead of their own native Ukrainian one? Does a Ukrainian wake up one glorious and sunny morning, and in response to his mother’s beckoning voice to come to the breakfast table:

    Синку вставай до сніданку, я тобі приготувала смажені яєчка з салечком і свіжим чорним хлібом.

    To which his son consiously replies back to his mother:

    Нет, не хочу. Потом встану і буду кушать щий…

    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened. Most people, instinctively prefer their own native language, to one that is somehow transmitted to the masses from afar?

    I suspect thaat in your case, although your mother was Ukrainian, your father was either a Russian or a Russified Jew that set the parameters of language usage within your home.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened.
     
    This level of ignorance could have been excused in someone who learned history in today’s Ukrainian school. Yet you claim better education.

    Less developed languages often lose the competition to the more developed ones. To name the best known to English speakers examples I can mention Irish, Scottish, and Welsh languages. The key here is development. If Ukrainian authorities since 1991 cared about Ukraine, rather than about stuffing their pockets, they would have put some effort into developing Ukrainian, compiling decent dictionaries (like Webster in English or Dal in Russian), selecting foreign words for adoption and Ukrainizing them. In fact, some of this work was done in the USSR, but it stopped after independence. Instead, all Ukrainian elites did after 1991 was use cavemen-level nationalism as a fig leaf for their thievery. Ukrainian is not hopeless even now, it has a chance to become a rich and developed language, but with today’s Ukie leadership it is likely to blow this chance and join hundreds of languages that are already extinct. A pity, if you ask me.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Mr. Hack

  115. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    The IT industry has grown from 0.06% of GDP to 3.3%, more than 50 times, between 2013 and 2018.
     
    You forgot to mention that Ukraine GDP was >183 billion in 2013 and <131 billion in 2018 (projected to be about the same in 2020).
    https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp

    Replies: @AP

    Since Ukraine’s GDP didn’t shrink 50 times, IT industry has grown significantly.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    @AP

    This is also correct. That said, I'm not sure it's worth writing home about. As has been discussed here a few times, the combination of high human capital + bad institutions => stunning growth in the IT industry, because a video game studio doesn't require much in the way of capital investment. It is very good for the programmers who get to enjoy near-Western wages in a much cheaper (and less diverse, if they tilt that way) locale, not that relevant to the country as a whole, the companies in question are hardly Google, they skimp on taxes, are frequently registered in places like Cyprus anyway (this is true of GSC, the legendary creators of STALKER - incidentally, they relocated to Cyprus months after the Maidan). In fairness, as per above, this is not a specifically Ukrainian problem, e.g. World of Tanks is more of a Cypriot company than a Belorussian one.

    Replies: @AP

  116. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    I don’t have time to be comprehensive, so here is just one example of it. In 1940 Ukraine had ~8 million cows. The war was devastating for the agriculture (German military advance, then German occupation, then Red Army advance), but Ukraine was helped a lot by the rest of the USSR, and the number of cows in Ukraine in 1945 was over 6 million. This number grew to ~ 25 million by 1985 and remained virtually constant until 1991 independence. One would think that if Ukraine is more advanced (it lately advertised itself as an “agricultural superpower”), the numbers should have, if anything, improved. FYI, the number of cows in Ukraine after 29 years of independence is … about 3 million. So, independence turned out to be a significantly greater disaster than WWII. The same story can be told about every branch of Ukrainian industry (I recently posted the numbers on car production, which are even more dismal), with numbers I don’t have time to look up.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Gerard-Mandela, @AP

    As a comparison between Belarus and Ukraine, one has to conclude that there is no way that Belarus would be such demented retards over the gas transit issue.

    Banderastan has a capacity for 4 – 5 times more gas transit to EU per year then they will be providing in 2021, or 2-3 times what they were providing in 2018. This is nothing short of a tragedy that is literally killing the people – it would be a huge percentage of Ukrop GDP(not significant for Russia or Germany, but a sizeable percentage for Ukraine). Even with all the disagreements there is absolutely no chance that Lukashenko would have allowed this farcical situation to develop if Belarus had the infrastructure to supply the west with 230 billion cubic meters of gas per year….and that’s just with Belarus being stable, not a nutjob state with mass poverty desperately needing some cash.

    To make things worse, Ukrop are such a prostitute of the west that Banderastan elite are fine with Germany , US and the rest of the west callously showing zero interest in them ever being able to actually improve their gas transit potential by building sane relations with Russia or modernizing their GTS. The west are fine prolonging this freakshow and making ukrainian slaves be “satisified” with a small fraction of this gas transit and revenue – just to satisfy their sick geopolitical ambitions.

    To finish of the freakshow , Ukrop state are thick enough to have wanted “celebration” over the “nation-building”(LOL) Stockholm Arbitration court decision, over what could have been a very easy negotiation guaranteeing an extra 3 billion Dollars into ukrop budget per year

    Ukraine’s oil refining capacity is negligible, Belarus’s of course considerable. If you had said in 1991 that would be negligible oil refining for Ukraine in 25 years time then literally 100% of people would think you were a maniac.

  117. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    The first three significant “Russian” composers, Artemy Vedel, Dmytro Bortniansky and Maxim Berezovsky came from Ukraine:
     
    I would let the others familiar with music compare the people you mentioned with Tchaikovsky, Glinka, and Mussorgsky. I’ll stop at three not because there weren’t others, but because you came up with three names.

    Replies: @AP

    You are changing the subject again. The discussion wasn’t who produced better of more globally famous composers. It was your mocking the Ukrainian foreign minister for claiming “” Ukrainians brought civilization to Russia.”

    These three composers were Russia’s first significant ones and important for the development of Russia’s classical music tradition.

    So as we have seen, the Ukrainian Gogol was important for Russia’s literary tradition and these three Ukrainian composers were for Russia’s musical tradition.

    So yes, to an extent at least, Ukraine helped to bring civilization to Russia.

  118. Most country names seem to be an exonym (name bestowed on outsiders). Very often they were insulting from the start, like nicknames. I remember when every boy had a nickname and he didn’t get to chose his own.

    The British name for Russia was Muscovy. Ukraine, Poland.

  119. @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    So, how is it, according to your anecdotal sketches, that people of Ukrainian descent prefer to use the Russian language, instead of their own native Ukrainian one? Does a Ukrainian wake up one glorious and sunny morning, and in response to his mother's beckoning voice to come to the breakfast table:


    Синку вставай до сніданку, я тобі приготувала смажені яєчка з салечком і свіжим чорним хлібом.
     
    To which his son consiously replies back to his mother:

    Нет, не хочу. Потом встану і буду кушать щий...
     
    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened. Most people, instinctively prefer their own native language, to one that is somehow transmitted to the masses from afar?

    I suspect thaat in your case, although your mother was Ukrainian, your father was either a Russian or a Russified Jew that set the parameters of language usage within your home.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened.

    This level of ignorance could have been excused in someone who learned history in today’s Ukrainian school. Yet you claim better education.

    Less developed languages often lose the competition to the more developed ones. To name the best known to English speakers examples I can mention Irish, Scottish, and Welsh languages. The key here is development. If Ukrainian authorities since 1991 cared about Ukraine, rather than about stuffing their pockets, they would have put some effort into developing Ukrainian, compiling decent dictionaries (like Webster in English or Dal in Russian), selecting foreign words for adoption and Ukrainizing them. In fact, some of this work was done in the USSR, but it stopped after independence. Instead, all Ukrainian elites did after 1991 was use cavemen-level nationalism as a fig leaf for their thievery. Ukrainian is not hopeless even now, it has a chance to become a rich and developed language, but with today’s Ukie leadership it is likely to blow this chance and join hundreds of languages that are already extinct. A pity, if you ask me.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    @AnonFromTN

    You may be right about development. In Wales many advance the argument that the Welsh language was saved by industrialization. In 1880 just before large scale English immigration reached the levels of a deluge, Wales was a Welsh speaking industrial society with a diverse industrialized base and two million speakers. It had industrialized before most of England so it had a modern vocabulary and publishing at a comparable per capita rate to England. Coal pulled in the English (well over a million) and pushed out other industry.

    After the 1926 crash in the coal price the economy did not recover and the depth of the language has been shrinking. New concepts are simply Cymricisations of English words, although of course that happens everywhere. When I first went to Russia in 1994, I was astonished at how many, modern, international, usually English, words were in everyday use. If anything, Russia was borrowing more English words than Welsh, perhaps because speakers were less conscious of the identity issues, even pleased to Anglicize (sometimes Germanicize) their speech. I had expected Communism to have kept out foreign influence on daily life.

    , @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    Ukrainian literature is making nice and steady steps forward already, gaining a lot of respect in Europe, especially writers like Yuri Andrukhovych, Serhiy Zhadan and Oksana Zabushko are a few well respected names today. But you're right, the government could do a lot more to help improve the environment and support up and coming new writers.

    Well, my answer to the question that I posed to you, that you didn't care to answer in a straightforward manner, would of course be that throughout both the imperial period and mostly throughout the soviet one, Ukrainian was played down as much as possible and Russian was extolled. Such are often the vagaries when one country is forcefully absorbed into the imperial designs of another. People don't just stop using their own language for another one, without the direct or indirect assistance of another domineering culture. This imbalance has a lot to do with Ukraine's current stance to separate itself from Russia, a chance hopefully of being to able reestablish and finally finish its final phase of nation building.

    What language did you grow up speaking in your home in Donbas? I grew up in the US, always speaking to my family members in Ukrainian at home. By the time I hit my teen years, however, my Ukrainian was severely wanting, as the effects of American assimilation had taken its full course. It's rather strange to admit, that it wasn't until I took Russian in college that I began to understand some of the hitherto strange rules of Ukrainian grammar, that I hadn't been able to understand fully as a child. So you see, not all things associated with the Russian language are deleterious. :-)

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  120. @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    I am sorry to point this out, but everything Gogol wrote was in Russian, including the “Overcoat”. So, claiming him as a Ukrainian writer is disingenuous, to put it mildly. Gogol used some Malorussian words and expressions in some of his writing, but many Russian writers used words from local dialects in theirs (say, Leskov, Mamin-Sibiryak), which does not make them parochial. Gogol certainly wasn’t.

    Replies: @AP, @Philip Owen

    In Wales, admittedly with two different language groups involved, we evade this problem by describing writers as Welsh or Anglo-Welsh. Could Gogol, a schoolboy favourite of mine in translation, not be described as Russo-Ukrainian? Does that make sense in the local context?

    Some Anglo-Welsh writers write standard English, some use local English dialects influenced by Welsh – Dylan Thomas did this to a mild degree and some mix in short passages of Welsh. Happens on television now too.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Philip Owen

    English culture is imperial and therefore inclusive, same as Russian culture. Ukie nationalism is tribal and narrow-minded, and therefore exclusive, rather than inclusive. That’s a death sentence for any culture.

    Gogol wrote in Russian because village Ukrainian was OK for adding flavor, but woefully inadequate for his self-expression. Hence, he enriched Russian literature, just like Chinghiz Aitmatov (a Kyrgyz), or Fazil Iskander (an Abkhazian). It does not matter what you call them, what matters is which language is adequate for what they have to say. It also matters how big an audience you can address in a particular language.

  121. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened.
     
    This level of ignorance could have been excused in someone who learned history in today’s Ukrainian school. Yet you claim better education.

    Less developed languages often lose the competition to the more developed ones. To name the best known to English speakers examples I can mention Irish, Scottish, and Welsh languages. The key here is development. If Ukrainian authorities since 1991 cared about Ukraine, rather than about stuffing their pockets, they would have put some effort into developing Ukrainian, compiling decent dictionaries (like Webster in English or Dal in Russian), selecting foreign words for adoption and Ukrainizing them. In fact, some of this work was done in the USSR, but it stopped after independence. Instead, all Ukrainian elites did after 1991 was use cavemen-level nationalism as a fig leaf for their thievery. Ukrainian is not hopeless even now, it has a chance to become a rich and developed language, but with today’s Ukie leadership it is likely to blow this chance and join hundreds of languages that are already extinct. A pity, if you ask me.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Mr. Hack

    You may be right about development. In Wales many advance the argument that the Welsh language was saved by industrialization. In 1880 just before large scale English immigration reached the levels of a deluge, Wales was a Welsh speaking industrial society with a diverse industrialized base and two million speakers. It had industrialized before most of England so it had a modern vocabulary and publishing at a comparable per capita rate to England. Coal pulled in the English (well over a million) and pushed out other industry.

    After the 1926 crash in the coal price the economy did not recover and the depth of the language has been shrinking. New concepts are simply Cymricisations of English words, although of course that happens everywhere. When I first went to Russia in 1994, I was astonished at how many, modern, international, usually English, words were in everyday use. If anything, Russia was borrowing more English words than Welsh, perhaps because speakers were less conscious of the identity issues, even pleased to Anglicize (sometimes Germanicize) their speech. I had expected Communism to have kept out foreign influence on daily life.

  122. @Philip Owen
    @AnonFromTN

    In Wales, admittedly with two different language groups involved, we evade this problem by describing writers as Welsh or Anglo-Welsh. Could Gogol, a schoolboy favourite of mine in translation, not be described as Russo-Ukrainian? Does that make sense in the local context?

    Some Anglo-Welsh writers write standard English, some use local English dialects influenced by Welsh - Dylan Thomas did this to a mild degree and some mix in short passages of Welsh. Happens on television now too.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    English culture is imperial and therefore inclusive, same as Russian culture. Ukie nationalism is tribal and narrow-minded, and therefore exclusive, rather than inclusive. That’s a death sentence for any culture.

    Gogol wrote in Russian because village Ukrainian was OK for adding flavor, but woefully inadequate for his self-expression. Hence, he enriched Russian literature, just like Chinghiz Aitmatov (a Kyrgyz), or Fazil Iskander (an Abkhazian). It does not matter what you call them, what matters is which language is adequate for what they have to say. It also matters how big an audience you can address in a particular language.

  123. @Mr. Hack
    @Belarusian Dude

    So what exact "contributions" has Russia brought to Ukraine?

    1) continual roadblocks to the development of its own native Ukrainian language and its usage in public discourse. Recent attempts to try and block the development of its own Ukrainian Orthodox church are just another example of this constant friction.
    2) relegating any specific Ukrainian achievements to a second class status.
    3) creating subservient lackeys of the Imperial Russian culture amongst members of the Ukrainian ethnic group. See AnonFromTN's litany of comments here at this blog for a full flavor of what I'm describing.

    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine's own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn't worked up until now, and it doesn't appear that it will going into the future.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @AnonFromTN, @Belarusian Dude

    This is a big cope of the swiniest of the vyshyvatnik swine right. Ukrainians have only themselves to blame for their cultural and linguistic backwardness, Russia and by extension the USSR founded all of their major cities and educational institutions.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Troll: Zimriel
  124. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    How does this change in language communication occur, organically? It must be the first time in history that this has happened.
     
    This level of ignorance could have been excused in someone who learned history in today’s Ukrainian school. Yet you claim better education.

    Less developed languages often lose the competition to the more developed ones. To name the best known to English speakers examples I can mention Irish, Scottish, and Welsh languages. The key here is development. If Ukrainian authorities since 1991 cared about Ukraine, rather than about stuffing their pockets, they would have put some effort into developing Ukrainian, compiling decent dictionaries (like Webster in English or Dal in Russian), selecting foreign words for adoption and Ukrainizing them. In fact, some of this work was done in the USSR, but it stopped after independence. Instead, all Ukrainian elites did after 1991 was use cavemen-level nationalism as a fig leaf for their thievery. Ukrainian is not hopeless even now, it has a chance to become a rich and developed language, but with today’s Ukie leadership it is likely to blow this chance and join hundreds of languages that are already extinct. A pity, if you ask me.

    Replies: @Philip Owen, @Mr. Hack

    Ukrainian literature is making nice and steady steps forward already, gaining a lot of respect in Europe, especially writers like Yuri Andrukhovych, Serhiy Zhadan and Oksana Zabushko are a few well respected names today. But you’re right, the government could do a lot more to help improve the environment and support up and coming new writers.

    Well, my answer to the question that I posed to you, that you didn’t care to answer in a straightforward manner, would of course be that throughout both the imperial period and mostly throughout the soviet one, Ukrainian was played down as much as possible and Russian was extolled. Such are often the vagaries when one country is forcefully absorbed into the imperial designs of another. People don’t just stop using their own language for another one, without the direct or indirect assistance of another domineering culture. This imbalance has a lot to do with Ukraine’s current stance to separate itself from Russia, a chance hopefully of being to able reestablish and finally finish its final phase of nation building.

    What language did you grow up speaking in your home in Donbas? I grew up in the US, always speaking to my family members in Ukrainian at home. By the time I hit my teen years, however, my Ukrainian was severely wanting, as the effects of American assimilation had taken its full course. It’s rather strange to admit, that it wasn’t until I took Russian in college that I began to understand some of the hitherto strange rules of Ukrainian grammar, that I hadn’t been able to understand fully as a child. So you see, not all things associated with the Russian language are deleterious. 🙂

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    What language did you grow up speaking in your home in Donbas?
     
    I spoke Ukrainian to the kids I played with when I lived near Lvov. I spoke Ukrainian to my grandparents when I visited them, sometimes for many weeks, when I helped them plant potatoes and then harvest them. I spoke Russian to my parents. I had no chance to speak Ukrainian in Lugansk, except in school during Ukrainian language and literature lessons. My spoken Ukrainian got rusty in the US, as I have no opportunity to use it, except reading Ukrainian literature.

    BTW, language includes literature, but is not limited to it. So, in addition to supporting writers and poets, the government that cares about the country must fund creating and updating dictionaries (which must cover words, idioms, etc.) and support efforts to develop the language, which includes borrowing words. Look at Webster or Dal: at least a third of the words in any developed language are borrowed. Sometimes you get surprised: e.g., Greek words “oguri” and “fonari”, or Italian word “pomodori” do not need a translation for a Russian-speaker. Same as the meaning of German word “farben” is clear to a Ukrainian speaker.
  125. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    I don’t have time to be comprehensive, so here is just one example of it. In 1940 Ukraine had ~8 million cows. The war was devastating for the agriculture (German military advance, then German occupation, then Red Army advance), but Ukraine was helped a lot by the rest of the USSR, and the number of cows in Ukraine in 1945 was over 6 million. This number grew to ~ 25 million by 1985 and remained virtually constant until 1991 independence. One would think that if Ukraine is more advanced (it lately advertised itself as an “agricultural superpower”), the numbers should have, if anything, improved. FYI, the number of cows in Ukraine after 29 years of independence is … about 3 million. So, independence turned out to be a significantly greater disaster than WWII. The same story can be told about every branch of Ukrainian industry (I recently posted the numbers on car production, which are even more dismal), with numbers I don’t have time to look up.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Gerard-Mandela, @AP

    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.

    But you are cherry-picking. Since 1990 Ukraine has had a huge increase in the production of poultry (5x more)

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=broiler-meat&graph=production

    and corn:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=corn&graph=production

    and sunflowerseed oil:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=sunflowerseed-oil&graph=production

    modest increase in cheese production, soybean, stable wheat production (higher in 2020 than any times since 1990) etc. despite a population decline.

    Overall Ukraine’s agricultural sector is doing fine. You are just being dishonest about it.

    • Replies: @JL
    @AP


    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.
     
    What's your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind? The Soviet Union never even really had a beef industry, but instead a large and well developed dairy industry. Most of the beef consumed was used up dairy cattle, hence no steak quality meat, but stuff you'd grind up and put in piroshki and pelmeni. Modern Russia's beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years, in part due to the protectionist agricultural counter sanctions.

    Replies: @AP

  126. @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN

    Ukrainian literature is making nice and steady steps forward already, gaining a lot of respect in Europe, especially writers like Yuri Andrukhovych, Serhiy Zhadan and Oksana Zabushko are a few well respected names today. But you're right, the government could do a lot more to help improve the environment and support up and coming new writers.

    Well, my answer to the question that I posed to you, that you didn't care to answer in a straightforward manner, would of course be that throughout both the imperial period and mostly throughout the soviet one, Ukrainian was played down as much as possible and Russian was extolled. Such are often the vagaries when one country is forcefully absorbed into the imperial designs of another. People don't just stop using their own language for another one, without the direct or indirect assistance of another domineering culture. This imbalance has a lot to do with Ukraine's current stance to separate itself from Russia, a chance hopefully of being to able reestablish and finally finish its final phase of nation building.

    What language did you grow up speaking in your home in Donbas? I grew up in the US, always speaking to my family members in Ukrainian at home. By the time I hit my teen years, however, my Ukrainian was severely wanting, as the effects of American assimilation had taken its full course. It's rather strange to admit, that it wasn't until I took Russian in college that I began to understand some of the hitherto strange rules of Ukrainian grammar, that I hadn't been able to understand fully as a child. So you see, not all things associated with the Russian language are deleterious. :-)

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    What language did you grow up speaking in your home in Donbas?

    I spoke Ukrainian to the kids I played with when I lived near Lvov. I spoke Ukrainian to my grandparents when I visited them, sometimes for many weeks, when I helped them plant potatoes and then harvest them. I spoke Russian to my parents. I had no chance to speak Ukrainian in Lugansk, except in school during Ukrainian language and literature lessons. My spoken Ukrainian got rusty in the US, as I have no opportunity to use it, except reading Ukrainian literature.

    BTW, language includes literature, but is not limited to it. So, in addition to supporting writers and poets, the government that cares about the country must fund creating and updating dictionaries (which must cover words, idioms, etc.) and support efforts to develop the language, which includes borrowing words. Look at Webster or Dal: at least a third of the words in any developed language are borrowed. Sometimes you get surprised: e.g., Greek words “oguri” and “fonari”, or Italian word “pomodori” do not need a translation for a Russian-speaker. Same as the meaning of German word “farben” is clear to a Ukrainian speaker.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  127. Ukranian fans of your games here. We are deeply conserned, sad and angry that you called us and our historical lands Russia in CK3 game. Its a big historical mistake. Russia and russian state culture was formed in 18th c.

    What a pathological butthurt behavior! They just do not want to re-write their own history. They also want to re-write the history of Russia in order to calm down their inferiority complex.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @AP
    @Aedib

    Ironically, Ukrainians have a plausible case that Russians have been doing the same for centuries.

  128. @Mr. Hack
    @anonymous coward

    Can you verify this claim? So far, only our Romanian dupe has found your accusations satisfactory, and his thinking abilities have been warped by years of overindulging in his favorite beverage, tuica.:-( .

    Replies: @Seraphim

    Actually the ‘Romanian dupe’ made the ‘accusations’.

  129. @AP
    @Denis

    You are the one who made the falsely accused me of making a false statement, based on a willful misinterpretation of what I wrote, and I showed it to you. Somehow the "semantics" were not "inane" when they served as the basis of your false accusation, but when you were proven wrong they became "inane."

    I wrote, "the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. So each considered the other to be foreign." A statement based on the conclusion of an eminent specialist of historian who specialized in this stuff.*

    You chose to twist this to mean something I didn't say (your misinterpretation of what I wrote: " the claim that Russians/Rus/Muscovites were so misinformed that they thought Ukrainians/Rusyns/Little Russians and Belarussians were actually Lithuanians"), and then accused me of writing a falsehood, when the false words were yours not mine.

    A nice, open example of your intellectual dishonesty in this particular case.

    And when I point it out, and even go to the trouble to post the original texts (for the benefit of other readers, I suspect you are just trolling), you whine about me being "rude" to you.

    And yes, I will point it out when you do it to me.

    *Once again the quote this is based on:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    And text it comes from:



    https://i.imgur.com/UiXmXaf.jpg

    https://i.imgur.com/TyVxO1B.jpg

    Replies: @Denis

    All this blather and (unwarranted) hostility, because you are unable to admit an error, however minor. Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong or just empty, could have been improved with some simple qualification, but you are unable to admit this.

    It’s very sad that a man of your age has turned out so immature.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis

    Pure self-description by you of you. Although your error is not minor, because it demonstrated some ugly intellectual dishonesty by you.


    "Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong "
     
    For the fifth (?) time:

    My original claim:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. "

    Based on:

    "During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    Therefore it was correct.

    Once again you were caught engaging in intellectual dishonesty. I initially give the benefit of the doubt, but this is starting to seem like a pattern, Denis.

    Replies: @Denis

  130. @Supply and Demand
    The true crime here is that Paradox Interactive released Crusader Kings 3 before Victoria 3. I suspect they just don't want to wade into the controversy of the Scramble for Africa in the current climate, considering you can make a Ghanian Holy Roman Emperor in CK3's simulation quite easily.

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Daniel Chieh

    Crusader King is much more entertaining dickery for me. Where else do you desperately plot to murder your grandchildren(liberal enthusiasm in 2020 aside).

    • Agree: mal
  131. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine’s own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn’t worked up until now, and it doesn’t appear that it will going into the future.
     
    Морква на городi,
    У саду бджола.
    Жаба на болотi
    Крила розвела.

    Хоче полетiти,
    Тихо каже "Ква!"
    Але в небо взмити
    Hе дає Москва.

    Знають, знають хитрi
    Клятi москалi
    Те, що у повiтрi
    Жаби - королi.

    Що, розкинув крила,
    Мов зелений птах,
    Цiлий день парила б
    Жаба в небесах.



    Що могла б дiстати
    Hавiть до зiрок,
    Що створив лiтати
    Жаб зелених бог.

    Але щось тримає,
    Тягне до трави.
    Жаба точно знає –
    То рука Москви.

    В ней залiзнi пальцi,
    Як кiльцем взяли.
    Тримають за яйця
    Жабу москалi...

    Кажуть, що не треба.
    Кажуть: "Ти лайно".
    Але смотрить в небо
    Жаба все одно.

    I хоча минають
    Цi тяжки часи,
    Досi заважають
    Жабi руськi пси.

    Годi, кляте стерво,
    Золота Москва
    Жаба ще не вмерла,
    Жаба ще жива!

    Жаба ще порине
    В синю далечiнь,
    Бо немає нинi
    Краще жаб створiнь!

    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/atmamarga/49493909/55598/55598_original.jpg

    😁

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

    Since you seem to appreciate poetry, and once admitted that your Grandfather was a proud Ukrainian who esteemed Shevchenko’s poetry, now you’ll understand why! 🙂

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    My grandfather did not see so much difference between Russians and Ukrainians. I sadly must admit that he was probably wrong. I am glad he died before this difference became apparent for the whole world to see. The difference is not so much of culture or language, not genetics, but psychology and character.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  132. @Denis
    @AP

    All this blather and (unwarranted) hostility, because you are unable to admit an error, however minor. Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong or just empty, could have been improved with some simple qualification, but you are unable to admit this.

    It's very sad that a man of your age has turned out so immature.

    Replies: @AP

    Pure self-description by you of you. Although your error is not minor, because it demonstrated some ugly intellectual dishonesty by you.

    “Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong “

    For the fifth (?) time:

    My original claim:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians.

    Based on:

    “During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    Therefore it was correct.

    Once again you were caught engaging in intellectual dishonesty. I initially give the benefit of the doubt, but this is starting to seem like a pattern, Denis.

    • Troll: Denis
    • Replies: @Denis
    @AP

    I don't understand why you are so rude. Is something upsetting you AP?

    Anyways, if you'll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition ("or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy") to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible. As I said earlier, I still doubt the reliability of the source, but I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.

    Replies: @AP

  133. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Since you seem to appreciate poetry, and once admitted that your Grandfather was a proud Ukrainian who esteemed Shevchenko's poetry, now you'll understand why! :-)

    https://youtu.be/7Fdry64pRnI

    Replies: @Ano4

    My grandfather did not see so much difference between Russians and Ukrainians. I sadly must admit that he was probably wrong. I am glad he died before this difference became apparent for the whole world to see. The difference is not so much of culture or language, not genetics, but psychology and character.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Great ideas are worth pursuing, and Shevchenko's ideas have stood the test of time. Frictions between Ukrainians and Russians have been around for a long time, and Shevchenko's poetry serves to remind us of these historic injustices, that I'm sure your Grandfather was aware of when he read and appreciated Shevchenko's prose. He was probably a Christian deep down and inside, and realized that with the Good Lord's help, these differences could be healed. Fortunately, the God that both Russians and Ukrainians worship implores his followers to love and forgive their enemies and neighbors, so certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let's pray that this is so.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @JL

  134. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Russia's beef production has also declined significantly.

    But you are cherry-picking. Since 1990 Ukraine has had a huge increase in the production of poultry (5x more)

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=broiler-meat&graph=production

    and corn:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=corn&graph=production

    and sunflowerseed oil:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ua&commodity=sunflowerseed-oil&graph=production

    modest increase in cheese production, soybean, stable wheat production (higher in 2020 than any times since 1990) etc. despite a population decline.

    Overall Ukraine's agricultural sector is doing fine. You are just being dishonest about it.

    Replies: @JL

    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.

    What’s your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind? The Soviet Union never even really had a beef industry, but instead a large and well developed dairy industry. Most of the beef consumed was used up dairy cattle, hence no steak quality meat, but stuff you’d grind up and put in piroshki and pelmeni. Modern Russia’s beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years, in part due to the protectionist agricultural counter sanctions.

    • Replies: @AP
    @JL


    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.

    What’s your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind?
     
    Russian beef production:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=beef-and-veal-meat&graph=production

    About 40% of the number in 1990.

    Russian total cattle supply by year:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=cattle&graph=total-supply

    In 2020, about 33% of the number in 1990.

    Modern Russia’s beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years
     
    According to those figures there has been no uptick recently in total cattle production. However, you are probably right, because the total cattle supply dropped significantly more than did the beef supply.

    Ukraine's cattle supply dropped a lot more (in 2020, about 14% of 1990). However its chicken meat supply increased much more than did Russia's; 2.8x increase since 1999 for Russia, but 6.3x increase for Ukraine since 1999. Ukraine didn't have much of a poultry industry until recently but now it produces more chicken meat than it does beef (source is same website as above). It looks like in both Ukraine and Russia, the growth of poultry accounts for almost all of the drop in beef. In Ukraine's case, poultry production was much smaller than Russia's in 1999, but it has come to replace beef much more than has been the case in Russia.

    AnoninTN just presented the data point of the drop in Ukrainian beef or cattle production as evidence of some sort of agricultural collapse in Ukraine. Well, when it comes to Ukraine he has a well-established record of dishonesty.

    Replies: @Philip Owen

  135. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    My grandfather did not see so much difference between Russians and Ukrainians. I sadly must admit that he was probably wrong. I am glad he died before this difference became apparent for the whole world to see. The difference is not so much of culture or language, not genetics, but psychology and character.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Great ideas are worth pursuing, and Shevchenko’s ideas have stood the test of time. Frictions between Ukrainians and Russians have been around for a long time, and Shevchenko’s poetry serves to remind us of these historic injustices, that I’m sure your Grandfather was aware of when he read and appreciated Shevchenko’s prose. He was probably a Christian deep down and inside, and realized that with the Good Lord’s help, these differences could be healed. Fortunately, the God that both Russians and Ukrainians worship implores his followers to love and forgive their enemies and neighbors, so certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let’s pray that this is so.

    • Agree: AP, Ano4, Denis
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Mr. Hack

    BTW, I supposedly go to a nationalistic Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchate, however at least 25% of my fellow parishioners are either Russians or Russian speaking Ukrainians from the old country. We all really get along very well, and have no squabbles amongst ourselves (probably nobody ever talks much about Ukrainian or Russian politics). About once a year, we commemorate the fallen Ukrainian soldiers in Donbas, and nobody seems to mind. Although there is another Russian Orthodox church in the area, I think the fact that our mass is conducted exclusively in the Ukrainian language actually appeals to these Russian speaking members. The Russian church has long been "assimilated" and uses only the English language during mass. Our parish priest, of course, speaks to these parishioners in Russian, he having finished theological school in Russia close to Moscow somewhere. People go to church for spiritual reasons and leave the political stuff at home. Russian and Ukrainian immigrants in America can and do get along just fine.

    , @JL
    @Mr. Hack


    certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let’s pray that this is so.
     
    You're being unusually conciliatory this morning Mr. Hack, did someone slip something into your coffee? With your haranguing of AP for his appreciation of Russia, I always assumed you were just a hardcore hater.

    Russian and Ukrainian immigrants in America can and do get along just fine.
     
    Well, it was certainly the case in Ukraine in 2013, the last time I was there, and now in Russia, that Ukrainians and Russians can and do get along just fine.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  136. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Great ideas are worth pursuing, and Shevchenko's ideas have stood the test of time. Frictions between Ukrainians and Russians have been around for a long time, and Shevchenko's poetry serves to remind us of these historic injustices, that I'm sure your Grandfather was aware of when he read and appreciated Shevchenko's prose. He was probably a Christian deep down and inside, and realized that with the Good Lord's help, these differences could be healed. Fortunately, the God that both Russians and Ukrainians worship implores his followers to love and forgive their enemies and neighbors, so certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let's pray that this is so.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @JL

    BTW, I supposedly go to a nationalistic Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchate, however at least 25% of my fellow parishioners are either Russians or Russian speaking Ukrainians from the old country. We all really get along very well, and have no squabbles amongst ourselves (probably nobody ever talks much about Ukrainian or Russian politics). About once a year, we commemorate the fallen Ukrainian soldiers in Donbas, and nobody seems to mind. Although there is another Russian Orthodox church in the area, I think the fact that our mass is conducted exclusively in the Ukrainian language actually appeals to these Russian speaking members. The Russian church has long been “assimilated” and uses only the English language during mass. Our parish priest, of course, speaks to these parishioners in Russian, he having finished theological school in Russia close to Moscow somewhere. People go to church for spiritual reasons and leave the political stuff at home. Russian and Ukrainian immigrants in America can and do get along just fine.

  137. @JL
    @AP


    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.
     
    What's your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind? The Soviet Union never even really had a beef industry, but instead a large and well developed dairy industry. Most of the beef consumed was used up dairy cattle, hence no steak quality meat, but stuff you'd grind up and put in piroshki and pelmeni. Modern Russia's beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years, in part due to the protectionist agricultural counter sanctions.

    Replies: @AP

    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.

    What’s your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind?

    Russian beef production:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=beef-and-veal-meat&graph=production

    About 40% of the number in 1990.

    Russian total cattle supply by year:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=cattle&graph=total-supply

    In 2020, about 33% of the number in 1990.

    Modern Russia’s beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years

    According to those figures there has been no uptick recently in total cattle production. However, you are probably right, because the total cattle supply dropped significantly more than did the beef supply.

    Ukraine’s cattle supply dropped a lot more (in 2020, about 14% of 1990). However its chicken meat supply increased much more than did Russia’s; 2.8x increase since 1999 for Russia, but 6.3x increase for Ukraine since 1999. Ukraine didn’t have much of a poultry industry until recently but now it produces more chicken meat than it does beef (source is same website as above). It looks like in both Ukraine and Russia, the growth of poultry accounts for almost all of the drop in beef. In Ukraine’s case, poultry production was much smaller than Russia’s in 1999, but it has come to replace beef much more than has been the case in Russia.

    AnoninTN just presented the data point of the drop in Ukrainian beef or cattle production as evidence of some sort of agricultural collapse in Ukraine. Well, when it comes to Ukraine he has a well-established record of dishonesty.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    @AP

    Beef requires a lot of capital investment.

    Chickens, feed the flock for 6 months and you have cash flow.
    Pigs, 18 months, although a breeder can sell on 40 kg piglets for fattening at 6 months.
    Beef, 3 years.

    All the above assume that breeding stock can be bought straight away. Russia lost its livestock during the credit crisis of the Yeltsin era. Ukraine and Belarus not so much. Russia now has breeding stock for chicken and pigs. Not so much for beef. The best was in Kazhakstan anyway. There is new local production for turkeys, goats and rabbits.

    Lamb is being neglected despite tens of millions of muslims in Russia. The quality of the lamb is very bad.

    Tsarist Russia was the world's #1 exporter of beef. The US produced more but exported less. The whole FSU still has vast potential for increased food production. There is not really enough local storage, transport, ports, ships, canals to export what exists whether to the Middle East or China.

    Turning 9 tonnes of fodder into 1 tonne of pig might be a solution but there is almost no means of transporting it (cold chain), especially to China which has just killed huge numbers of pigs due to disease. Huge profits are to be made by investors who can avoid sanctions on the state sector by investing with private businessmen.

  138. @Aedib

    Ukranian fans of your games here. We are deeply conserned, sad and angry that you called us and our historical lands Russia in CK3 game. Its a big historical mistake. Russia and russian state culture was formed in 18th c.
     
    What a pathological butthurt behavior! They just do not want to re-write their own history. They also want to re-write the history of Russia in order to calm down their inferiority complex.

    Replies: @AP

    Ironically, Ukrainians have a plausible case that Russians have been doing the same for centuries.

  139. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Great ideas are worth pursuing, and Shevchenko's ideas have stood the test of time. Frictions between Ukrainians and Russians have been around for a long time, and Shevchenko's poetry serves to remind us of these historic injustices, that I'm sure your Grandfather was aware of when he read and appreciated Shevchenko's prose. He was probably a Christian deep down and inside, and realized that with the Good Lord's help, these differences could be healed. Fortunately, the God that both Russians and Ukrainians worship implores his followers to love and forgive their enemies and neighbors, so certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let's pray that this is so.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @JL

    certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let’s pray that this is so.

    You’re being unusually conciliatory this morning Mr. Hack, did someone slip something into your coffee? With your haranguing of AP for his appreciation of Russia, I always assumed you were just a hardcore hater.

    Russian and Ukrainian immigrants in America can and do get along just fine.

    Well, it was certainly the case in Ukraine in 2013, the last time I was there, and now in Russia, that Ukrainians and Russians can and do get along just fine.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @JL

    I think that "haranguing" is way too strong a word to describe the way I characterize AP's appreciation for Russia. I've questioned or teased him maybe one or twice, similarly to how AK has done, but nothing more. He has family in Russia, Ukraine and even in Poland if I'm not mistaken, and he does appear at times to walk a fine line on a tightrope of competing interests - but he actually is a very fine tightrope walker that we all could learn from. :-)

  140. @JL
    @Mr. Hack


    certainly any rifts between these two brotherly nations can be healed. Let’s pray that this is so.
     
    You're being unusually conciliatory this morning Mr. Hack, did someone slip something into your coffee? With your haranguing of AP for his appreciation of Russia, I always assumed you were just a hardcore hater.

    Russian and Ukrainian immigrants in America can and do get along just fine.
     
    Well, it was certainly the case in Ukraine in 2013, the last time I was there, and now in Russia, that Ukrainians and Russians can and do get along just fine.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    I think that “haranguing” is way too strong a word to describe the way I characterize AP’s appreciation for Russia. I’ve questioned or teased him maybe one or twice, similarly to how AK has done, but nothing more. He has family in Russia, Ukraine and even in Poland if I’m not mistaken, and he does appear at times to walk a fine line on a tightrope of competing interests – but he actually is a very fine tightrope walker that we all could learn from. 🙂

    • Thanks: AP
  141. @AP
    @JL


    Russia’s beef production has also declined significantly.

    What’s your source for this statement, and over what time period do you have in mind?
     
    Russian beef production:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=beef-and-veal-meat&graph=production

    About 40% of the number in 1990.

    Russian total cattle supply by year:

    https://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=ru&commodity=cattle&graph=total-supply

    In 2020, about 33% of the number in 1990.

    Modern Russia’s beef industry was born, really, less than ten years ago and has taken off over the past five years
     
    According to those figures there has been no uptick recently in total cattle production. However, you are probably right, because the total cattle supply dropped significantly more than did the beef supply.

    Ukraine's cattle supply dropped a lot more (in 2020, about 14% of 1990). However its chicken meat supply increased much more than did Russia's; 2.8x increase since 1999 for Russia, but 6.3x increase for Ukraine since 1999. Ukraine didn't have much of a poultry industry until recently but now it produces more chicken meat than it does beef (source is same website as above). It looks like in both Ukraine and Russia, the growth of poultry accounts for almost all of the drop in beef. In Ukraine's case, poultry production was much smaller than Russia's in 1999, but it has come to replace beef much more than has been the case in Russia.

    AnoninTN just presented the data point of the drop in Ukrainian beef or cattle production as evidence of some sort of agricultural collapse in Ukraine. Well, when it comes to Ukraine he has a well-established record of dishonesty.

    Replies: @Philip Owen

    Beef requires a lot of capital investment.

    Chickens, feed the flock for 6 months and you have cash flow.
    Pigs, 18 months, although a breeder can sell on 40 kg piglets for fattening at 6 months.
    Beef, 3 years.

    All the above assume that breeding stock can be bought straight away. Russia lost its livestock during the credit crisis of the Yeltsin era. Ukraine and Belarus not so much. Russia now has breeding stock for chicken and pigs. Not so much for beef. The best was in Kazhakstan anyway. There is new local production for turkeys, goats and rabbits.

    Lamb is being neglected despite tens of millions of muslims in Russia. The quality of the lamb is very bad.

    Tsarist Russia was the world’s #1 exporter of beef. The US produced more but exported less. The whole FSU still has vast potential for increased food production. There is not really enough local storage, transport, ports, ships, canals to export what exists whether to the Middle East or China.

    Turning 9 tonnes of fodder into 1 tonne of pig might be a solution but there is almost no means of transporting it (cold chain), especially to China which has just killed huge numbers of pigs due to disease. Huge profits are to be made by investors who can avoid sanctions on the state sector by investing with private businessmen.

    • Thanks: AP, Blinky Bill
  142. In Latin, Rus’ was also known as “Russia” or “Ruscia”.

    Your post also shows how nonsensical is the modern-day distinction between “russky” and “rossiysky” (as well as the Yeltsinist invention “rossiyane”), when both in fact mean the same thing, one using a Slavic root and the other a Byzantine Greek one.

  143. @Europe Europa
    I recall around the time coverage of all the "Maidan" stuff was at its peak, there was quite a bit of talk in the "altenative" media that the whole revolution itself was a plot orchestrated and lead by Jews with the intention of basically claiming the Ukraine for themselves because they see it as the true Khazarian homeland of Ashkenazi Jews.

    One of the most commonly speculated reasons is that elite Jews want to set up the Ukraine as a potential alternative to Israel should something happen there that would make continued Jewish presence there unviable, and the large proportion of Jewish politicians in the Ukrainian parliament as well as the fact Zelensky the Ukrainian president is Jewish is often cited as proof of this.

    I think it all sounds a bit far-fetched, but it's undeniable that Jewish involvement in the Ukraine is absolutely huge, probably the most of any country in Europe.

    Replies: @Seraphim, @Old Jew

    Romanian nationalists said the same about Romania:
    Jews want to populate it, when Israel collapses.

  144. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack


    Basically, Russia has done everything possible to stultify Ukraine’s own cultural and political aspirations in favor of its own. It hasn’t worked up until now, and it doesn’t appear that it will going into the future.
     
    Морква на городi,
    У саду бджола.
    Жаба на болотi
    Крила розвела.

    Хоче полетiти,
    Тихо каже "Ква!"
    Але в небо взмити
    Hе дає Москва.

    Знають, знають хитрi
    Клятi москалi
    Те, що у повiтрi
    Жаби - королi.

    Що, розкинув крила,
    Мов зелений птах,
    Цiлий день парила б
    Жаба в небесах.



    Що могла б дiстати
    Hавiть до зiрок,
    Що створив лiтати
    Жаб зелених бог.

    Але щось тримає,
    Тягне до трави.
    Жаба точно знає –
    То рука Москви.

    В ней залiзнi пальцi,
    Як кiльцем взяли.
    Тримають за яйця
    Жабу москалi...

    Кажуть, що не треба.
    Кажуть: "Ти лайно".
    Але смотрить в небо
    Жаба все одно.

    I хоча минають
    Цi тяжки часи,
    Досi заважають
    Жабi руськi пси.

    Годi, кляте стерво,
    Золота Москва
    Жаба ще не вмерла,
    Жаба ще жива!

    Жаба ще порине
    В синю далечiнь,
    Бо немає нинi
    Краще жаб створiнь!

    https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/atmamarga/49493909/55598/55598_original.jpg

    😁

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

    For those who don’t read Ukrainian. This is a satirical poem mocking Ukie propaganda. It says that toads are born to fly, but pesky Russians do not let Ukrainian toad soar into the sky.

    On a more serious note, a lot of posters here often talk about birthrates. Recently a head of the directorate for protection of children rights of Ukrainian Ministry of Social Policy Ruslan Kolbasa bemoaned a huge drop in Ukrainian birthrates. According to him, compared to USSR times, the birthrate in Ukraine after independence dropped 2.5-fold in the 1990s, hitting the bottom of 1.09 children per woman in 2001. Then it went up and reached a peak in the second year of Yanuk presidency (1.53 children per woman). About 500,000 children were born in Ukraine every year in 2011-2013. This number kept dropping after 2014 coup and is just above 300,000 now.

    Links for those who can read Russian
    https://ukraina.ru/news/20200908/1028834528.html
    https://desktop.aftershock.news/?q=node/902124&page=2
    https://newsone.ua/news/society/v_ukraine_za_poslednie_pyat_let_rezko_sokratilos_kolichestvo_novorozhdennyh.html
    https://glavk.net/news/747933-v_minsotspolitiki_bjjut_trevogu_iz-za_stremiteljnogo_sokrashchenija_rohdaemosti
    https://klymenko-time.com/novosti/v-ukraine-katastroficheski-upala-rozhdaemost/

    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho
     
    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:

    http://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  145. @AnonFromTN
    @Ano4

    For those who don’t read Ukrainian. This is a satirical poem mocking Ukie propaganda. It says that toads are born to fly, but pesky Russians do not let Ukrainian toad soar into the sky.

    On a more serious note, a lot of posters here often talk about birthrates. Recently a head of the directorate for protection of children rights of Ukrainian Ministry of Social Policy Ruslan Kolbasa bemoaned a huge drop in Ukrainian birthrates. According to him, compared to USSR times, the birthrate in Ukraine after independence dropped 2.5-fold in the 1990s, hitting the bottom of 1.09 children per woman in 2001. Then it went up and reached a peak in the second year of Yanuk presidency (1.53 children per woman). About 500,000 children were born in Ukraine every year in 2011-2013. This number kept dropping after 2014 coup and is just above 300,000 now.

    Links for those who can read Russian
    https://ukraina.ru/news/20200908/1028834528.html
    https://desktop.aftershock.news/?q=node/902124&page=2
    https://newsone.ua/news/society/v_ukraine_za_poslednie_pyat_let_rezko_sokratilos_kolichestvo_novorozhdennyh.html
    https://glavk.net/news/747933-v_minsotspolitiki_bjjut_trevogu_iz-za_stremiteljnogo_sokrashchenija_rohdaemosti
    https://klymenko-time.com/novosti/v-ukraine-katastroficheski-upala-rozhdaemost/

    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho.

    Replies: @AP

    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho

    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:

    http://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:
     
    Yep, Lesotho is only #4 in death rate. Ukraine is still #2. The other three in the top five are Bulgaria, Latvia, and Lithuania, all EU members. Must be the EU achievement. No wonder Ukrainian “leadership” wants to join EU so desperately: then EU would have four out of five highest death rate countries, while now it only has three.

    Funny thing is, the countries the US (#58) proclaims hellish are nowhere near the top: Cuba #51, Venezuela #95, Syria #163, Iran #168.

    Replies: @AP

  146. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    Another Maidan achievement: by death rate, Ukraine is second from the top, with 14.3 deaths per 1,000 population. #1 is Lesotho
     
    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:

    http://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:

    Yep, Lesotho is only #4 in death rate. Ukraine is still #2. The other three in the top five are Bulgaria, Latvia, and Lithuania, all EU members. Must be the EU achievement. No wonder Ukrainian “leadership” wants to join EU so desperately: then EU would have four out of five highest death rate countries, while now it only has three.

    Funny thing is, the countries the US (#58) proclaims hellish are nowhere near the top: Cuba #51, Venezuela #95, Syria #163, Iran #168.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @Gerard-Mandela, @Anatoly Karlin

  147. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    No, Bulgaria is higher than Ukraine:
     
    Yep, Lesotho is only #4 in death rate. Ukraine is still #2. The other three in the top five are Bulgaria, Latvia, and Lithuania, all EU members. Must be the EU achievement. No wonder Ukrainian “leadership” wants to join EU so desperately: then EU would have four out of five highest death rate countries, while now it only has three.

    Funny thing is, the countries the US (#58) proclaims hellish are nowhere near the top: Cuba #51, Venezuela #95, Syria #163, Iran #168.

    Replies: @AP

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP

    It is better. Although the whole of the former Warshaw Pact territory is indeed under the population replacement levels. Ukrainian situation is particularly dire because of post-Maidan economic severing of industrial ties with Russia and civil war. Also the immigration from Ukraine is now much easier than from Russia and young, skilled and gifted run away first, contributing to a lowering numbers of young families and therefore a lower number of children.

    Replies: @AP

    , @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population.
     
    By what kind of logic does that explain Lesotho with life expectancy of ~53 years?

    The fraction of older people would be higher with higher life expectancy. It does not correlate: Lithuania is #78, Latvia #85, Bulgaria #89, Ukraine #118 (BTW, Russia is #112):
    https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/

    In case of Lithuania, I’d say the fact that it’s consistently #1 or #2 in alcohol consumption per capita for many years is more relevant.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP


    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.
     
    LMAO. So "Ukraine is the new Japan". LOL.......I thought I had heard all delinquent BS from this guy as possible - but this is a new low.

    Karlin are you reading? As with everything else, this (troll) has under your patronage, immediately and dishonestly made up a fake argument just for the purposes of lying to prolong ad nauseum his own demented disinformation( seriously WTF?) . Somebody can say or argue that Antarctica is in the Northern Hemisphere, if they truly believe it, or are mistaken, or have made a bad educated guess based on bad translation of latin etymology of the name. What they can't or shouldn't be allowed to do on a blog is insidiously, obviously lie for the purposes of wasting people's time just to occupy his sick fantasies. He has not written that garbage because he genuinely believes it, has reasoned it, subconscious bias or educated guess - he has just created a lie from nowhere.

    No, as obvious to any non-cretin, or anybody who actually does have any knowledge or experience of Ukraine knows..... if there is one problem that Ukraine does NOT have.....then it would be "ageing population". LOL

    Russia has an older life expectancy but even with that, for the years since Maidan it has increased in population for 4 of them (let's say equal numbers of births and deaths) and decreased for 2. The maximum decrease forecast for the next few years is about 100000 people in a year . Ukraine has had 250000 per year more deaths than births for all the years after Maidan! And that is without thinking about the massive loss from migration and Ukrop "statistics" collection reliability.
    So , with 4-6 times more population, Russia has had in the last year a population loss from births/deaths of 30000 people. In terms of proportion ( though just the pure number itself is huge) that's 32 to 48 times less natural population loss than Banderastan. If this year reaches our worst estimates than Russia natural population loss will still be 10-15 times less .


    I suspect
     
    err...hahaha. No, you openly are about to create low-witted disinformation. You don't have any idea , but created BS to deflect from what you must have realised is the probable truth - is the more accurate description

    Moscow is the second highest region of fertility rate in the country you dimwit. Second to Chechnya but higher than the other kavkaz regions.Most of the kavkaz regions birth rates have actually been going significantly down in fertility/birth rates, still above average but descending since ( coincidentally) the time of and after Evromaidan.

    And of course, non-ethnic Russian regions in Siberia and far north have the lowest birth rates you *****. There are of course, ethnic russian regions with low birth rates.....although this "low" birth rate is still far higher than the "best" Ukrop region - making any implication of comparable situation braindead and of course with yourself, deceitful, trash as with the time you spend on here - there is no way you wouldn't have come across the information.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Anatoly Karlin
    @AP

    Correct. That said, it's noteworthy that Russia's LE has overtaken Ukraine since the Maidan, reversing a pattern that has existed since the first records began in the late 19th century.

    Replies: @Gerard-Mandela

  148. @AP
    @Denis

    Pure self-description by you of you. Although your error is not minor, because it demonstrated some ugly intellectual dishonesty by you.


    "Your original claim, which was clearly either silly and wrong "
     
    For the fifth (?) time:

    My original claim:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. "

    Based on:

    "During the sixteenth and early seventeenth century Russian national consciousness was in some respects clearer than in the nineteenth century. Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    Therefore it was correct.

    Once again you were caught engaging in intellectual dishonesty. I initially give the benefit of the doubt, but this is starting to seem like a pattern, Denis.

    Replies: @Denis

    I don’t understand why you are so rude. Is something upsetting you AP?

    Anyways, if you’ll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition (“or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy”) to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible. As I said earlier, I still doubt the reliability of the source, but I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Denis


    I don’t understand why you are so rude
     
    You do not understand many things (or feign not understanding them). You lie about what I wrote and complain of rudeness.

    for the sixth (?) time.

    I wrote this:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. ”

    An objectively true statement.

    Did they often refer to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians? Well, an expert in the field Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch writes that they did:

    "Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    So my statement was correct.

    How did you describe this correct statement?

    "an error, however minor."

    "clearly either silly and wrong or just empty"

    " a silly claim of yours."

    Anyways, if you’ll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition (“or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy”) to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible.
     
    Here is your intellectual dishonesty at work.

    Contrary to your dishonest implication, that fact in no way contradicts my original statement, which was "the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians". Rus to the west were indeed often referred to as Lithuanians. A subset of them, Cossacks, were referred to as Cherkassy. The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren't Cossacks, were called Lithuanians. So my original statement was even milder than reality.

    I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.
     
    And by doing so, you are writing a falsehood.

    You do not seem to be an idiot. So it is likely you are trolling, or arguing in bad faith.

    Disappointing.

    Replies: @AP

  149. Scottish independence seems more and more inevitable as time goes on. Scotland is being treated more and more like a de facto sovereign state by the day, and now largely seems to manage its own foreign relations, especially in terms of coronavirus quarantine rules. Westminster does nothing to challenge this, it seems to just passively accept it as a “fait accompli” almost.

    I know many Russian nationalists and pro-Russia types cheer Scottish independence and instinctively support it, but I don’t think Scottish independence would do their cause any favours. A high profile national disintegration like that of the UK would only embolden Belarusian and Ukrainian nationalists, and possibly other separatists within Russia and elsewhere.

  150. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @Gerard-Mandela, @Anatoly Karlin

    It is better. Although the whole of the former Warshaw Pact territory is indeed under the population replacement levels. Ukrainian situation is particularly dire because of post-Maidan economic severing of industrial ties with Russia and civil war. Also the immigration from Ukraine is now much easier than from Russia and young, skilled and gifted run away first, contributing to a lowering numbers of young families and therefore a lower number of children.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    It is better.
     
    I would't doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:

    https://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders.

    Adjusting for age, Russia's death rate is probably some small fraction of a % lower than Ukraine's. It's a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Gerard-Mandela

  151. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @Gerard-Mandela, @Anatoly Karlin

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population.

    By what kind of logic does that explain Lesotho with life expectancy of ~53 years?

    The fraction of older people would be higher with higher life expectancy. It does not correlate: Lithuania is #78, Latvia #85, Bulgaria #89, Ukraine #118 (BTW, Russia is #112):
    https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/

    In case of Lithuania, I’d say the fact that it’s consistently #1 or #2 in alcohol consumption per capita for many years is more relevant.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population.

    By what kind of logic does that explain Lesotho with life expectancy of ~53 years?
     
    Hmm..do you think that maybe Lesotho is different from Bulgaria, Ukraine, Latvia etc. and the others on the top of the list with the highest death rates?

    The fraction of older people would be higher with higher life expectancy.
     
    Not necessarily. When large numbers of young people living abroad, older people become a higher % of the population, regardless of life expectancy. Obviously other factors are at play also (ETOH abuse, HIV, etc.) but elderly as % of the population is a major one for Eastern Europe.

    So Bulgaria with the world's highest death rate has more elderly as % of the population than does Ukraine:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    In general, the countries with the highest death rates (Lesotho is a glaring exception) are those with a high % of elderly people that are also former commie countries (Japan, Finland, Italy, etc. also have huge % of old people but their death rates are not so high).

    Ukraine has a lower population of elderly than do numerous countries with lower death rates, so other factors also play a role. Russia also has one of the highest death rates in the world (it is in 10th place) but it is also younger than Ukraine. I suspect that if Russia had the same % of elderly people as Ukraine there would be very little difference in death rate.

    BTW, Poland has an older population than that of Ukraine and Russia, and a much lower death rate than either one of those.
  152. @Denis
    @AP

    I don't understand why you are so rude. Is something upsetting you AP?

    Anyways, if you'll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition ("or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy") to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible. As I said earlier, I still doubt the reliability of the source, but I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.

    Replies: @AP

    I don’t understand why you are so rude

    You do not understand many things (or feign not understanding them). You lie about what I wrote and complain of rudeness.

    for the sixth (?) time.

    I wrote this:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. ”

    An objectively true statement.

    Did they often refer to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians? Well, an expert in the field Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch writes that they did:

    “Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    So my statement was correct.

    How did you describe this correct statement?

    “an error, however minor.”

    “clearly either silly and wrong or just empty”

    ” a silly claim of yours.”

    Anyways, if you’ll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition (“or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy”) to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible.

    Here is your intellectual dishonesty at work.

    Contrary to your dishonest implication, that fact in no way contradicts my original statement, which was “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians”. Rus to the west were indeed often referred to as Lithuanians. A subset of them, Cossacks, were referred to as Cherkassy. The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren’t Cossacks, were called Lithuanians. So my original statement was even milder than reality.

    I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.

    And by doing so, you are writing a falsehood.

    You do not seem to be an idiot. So it is likely you are trolling, or arguing in bad faith.

    Disappointing.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AP


    The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren’t Cossacks, were called Lithuanians.
     
    Should have written, "The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren’t Cossacks, were generally called Lithuanians. "
  153. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population.
     
    By what kind of logic does that explain Lesotho with life expectancy of ~53 years?

    The fraction of older people would be higher with higher life expectancy. It does not correlate: Lithuania is #78, Latvia #85, Bulgaria #89, Ukraine #118 (BTW, Russia is #112):
    https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/

    In case of Lithuania, I’d say the fact that it’s consistently #1 or #2 in alcohol consumption per capita for many years is more relevant.

    Replies: @AP

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population.

    By what kind of logic does that explain Lesotho with life expectancy of ~53 years?

    Hmm..do you think that maybe Lesotho is different from Bulgaria, Ukraine, Latvia etc. and the others on the top of the list with the highest death rates?

    The fraction of older people would be higher with higher life expectancy.

    Not necessarily. When large numbers of young people living abroad, older people become a higher % of the population, regardless of life expectancy. Obviously other factors are at play also (ETOH abuse, HIV, etc.) but elderly as % of the population is a major one for Eastern Europe.

    So Bulgaria with the world’s highest death rate has more elderly as % of the population than does Ukraine:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    In general, the countries with the highest death rates (Lesotho is a glaring exception) are those with a high % of elderly people that are also former commie countries (Japan, Finland, Italy, etc. also have huge % of old people but their death rates are not so high).

    Ukraine has a lower population of elderly than do numerous countries with lower death rates, so other factors also play a role. Russia also has one of the highest death rates in the world (it is in 10th place) but it is also younger than Ukraine. I suspect that if Russia had the same % of elderly people as Ukraine there would be very little difference in death rate.

    BTW, Poland has an older population than that of Ukraine and Russia, and a much lower death rate than either one of those.

  154. @Ano4
    @AP

    It is better. Although the whole of the former Warshaw Pact territory is indeed under the population replacement levels. Ukrainian situation is particularly dire because of post-Maidan economic severing of industrial ties with Russia and civil war. Also the immigration from Ukraine is now much easier than from Russia and young, skilled and gifted run away first, contributing to a lowering numbers of young families and therefore a lower number of children.

    Replies: @AP

    It is better.

    I would’t doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:

    https://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders.

    Adjusting for age, Russia’s death rate is probably some small fraction of a % lower than Ukraine’s. It’s a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    a Russian to gloat about
     
    I don't think AnonFromTN is gloating about it. And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.


    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders
     
    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.

    It’s a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about
     
    Again, I don't think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN, @AP

    , @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP

    FFS.LOL. Where do start with this sociopathic garbage ( Karlin are you reading - because why do you allow this nonsense?)


    I would doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:
     

    ....is like saying a 5.2 magnitude earthquake is very similar to 10.7 earthquake.

    I'm refusing to look at your "link" on point of principle , because I know it is sociopathic, instantaneous BS - but because I know its BS, and am relatively well informed on the subject anyway - I can safely know without even looking at your link that:

    1.Russia's death rate is closer to the west/EU average than it is to Ukraine's death rate - effectively ending the argument and killing your (already) BS, disingenuous point

    2.Russia's death rate has rapidly improved in the last decade - Ukraine's has remained a disaster from 1991 to now......with no sign of escape

    3.Russia's death rate is closer to Germany's than it is to Ukraine's ( maybe even better than Germany's)

    4.Most of the countries in the west with lower death rate ( though , again, these rates are much closer to Russia's than Russia's is to Ukrops) also have a much lower birth rate - population loss is of course a calculation of the two of these factors

    5.Russia's death rate compared to Ukrops is at such a much better level ......that it's superior to the level of Japan's life expectancy relative to Russia's life expectancy in the 90's.

    6.The most important thing in all this? Russia has generated a very high and improved birth rate . As you are such a discredited tramp I feel it's safe to make the risky claim, without checking - that Russia has the highest birth rate of any white country on the planet. At worst, I know it is near the top and by a large distance the most improved. It's a sign to Russian society that the political system is working - the complete inverse of the Ukrop disaster.
    Ukrops death rate is a catastrophe, it's birth rate.....even more a catastrophe.

    Literally , you have chosen the worst subject to use for your demented POS fantasies - exacerbating your error further is that you don't speak the language or literally known anything about the land or actually have any interest in the people on this land - which makes you further propagate BS because you are ignorant at starting point.

    You can't get worse than the argumentation you have taken. It's like somebody who hates Usain Bolt paying millions for Kompromat on him......and then use it to try and discredit him for his speed at running. That is the level of stupidity I am encountering here


    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:
     
    1. Difference in percentage is minimal, and completely irrelevant to the point
    2. If I remember correctly, before pension reform started last year, there was 48 million pensioners in Russia out of 147 million people - there is nowhere near that percentage of pensioners in ukrop population, so their working population as % of population is much higher ( not to forgot the cretinism in not accounting for the much higher birth rates in Russia affecting over-65 year %)
    3. Percentage, though irrelevant to the point, is almost certainly a fake from the Ukrop side

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad,
     
    lololololololol!!

    AGAIN...I know without wasting time looking at your insidious filth link that Ukraine's death rate has remained very high before, during and after implementation of the visa-travel regime from the Association agreement.Literally no link to the two things in any way.
    I don't think going to EU affects the stats because they included all Ukrop citizens irrelevant of where they die - just as MH17 victims in 2014 won't go into ukrop death rates stats that year. Anyway they are faking their population statistics you idiot - not including the real population loss makes the death rates look smaller than it is.

    As I have said before., "normal" Ukrop nationalists do not make the same retarded false arguments with Russians on the internet on the same issues that you do- because different to fantasists like you - they don't take pleasure in their peoples mass extinction and have some idea of what is going on in the country . Different to you, despite their idioticness - they do have goals in life higher than somewhere between those of an amoeba and those of a slug. Of course they lie and are full of BS because they are evil and stupid....but at least they do it on issues that are subjective (history and "democracy" and BS on "what Putin is thinking") and would never try to propagate social disasters for them as successes .

    This weirdo behavior of yours is perfectly typical of North American sub-roma banderatards who have done absolutely NOTHING to help the country in 30 years, only curse it with their presence- that's because I don't think there has ever existed such a deranged diaspora in history that has that level of disinterest in their "Mother country's" improvement.

    You're a genuinely sick individual ( Karlin- I am self-regulating and will reduce the, justified, volume of negative commentary at this ******* in any following comments). You obviously use enough time in "research" in your laughable waste of a life to fully know the statistics of the points I made about births and deaths....but despite that you have premeditated done this insidious and deceitful comical garbage "defending" Ukraine's atrocious death statistics ( or any social-economic data in ukropia)

    Replies: @AP

  155. @AP
    @Denis


    I don’t understand why you are so rude
     
    You do not understand many things (or feign not understanding them). You lie about what I wrote and complain of rudeness.

    for the sixth (?) time.

    I wrote this:

    “the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians. ”

    An objectively true statement.

    Did they often refer to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians? Well, an expert in the field Yale historian Paul Bushkovitch writes that they did:

    "Unlike the conservative (and many liberal) Russians of the last century, the men of the sixteenth century did not confuse Russians with Eastern Slavs. The tsar in Moscow ruled over Rus, Rossiia or the Russkaia Zemlya, and his people were the Rus. The Eastern Slavs of Poland-Lithuania were generally called Litva or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy.”

    So my statement was correct.

    How did you describe this correct statement?

    "an error, however minor."

    "clearly either silly and wrong or just empty"

    " a silly claim of yours."

    Anyways, if you’ll kindly look at those words just adjacent to the ones you highlighted, you will see that there is an addition (“or (if Cossacks) Cherkassy”) to your original claim, which would make it significantly more sensible.
     
    Here is your intellectual dishonesty at work.

    Contrary to your dishonest implication, that fact in no way contradicts my original statement, which was "the Rus people of what is now Russia, meanwhile, often referred to the Rus to their west as Lithuanians". Rus to the west were indeed often referred to as Lithuanians. A subset of them, Cossacks, were referred to as Cherkassy. The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren't Cossacks, were called Lithuanians. So my original statement was even milder than reality.

    I must reiterate that based on the passage provided, your initial claim, lacking the addition provided in this passage, is either empty or simply mistaken.
     
    And by doing so, you are writing a falsehood.

    You do not seem to be an idiot. So it is likely you are trolling, or arguing in bad faith.

    Disappointing.

    Replies: @AP

    The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren’t Cossacks, were called Lithuanians.

    Should have written, “The rest of them, the majority of them, those who weren’t Cossacks, were generally called Lithuanians. ”

  156. @AP
    @Ano4


    It is better.
     
    I would't doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:

    https://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders.

    Adjusting for age, Russia's death rate is probably some small fraction of a % lower than Ukraine's. It's a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Gerard-Mandela

    a Russian to gloat about

    I don’t think AnonFromTN is gloating about it. And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders

    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.

    It’s a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about

    Again, I don’t think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Ano4


    Again, I don’t think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.
     
    You are right about this. Personally, I feel pity for normal Ukrainians led into this mess by a bunch of thieves, crooks, and degenerates, which was organized, funded, and directed by the imperial elites (who are thieves, crooks, and degenerates themselves). The only flaw of the Ukrainian populace is gullibility, but they are punished way beyond their guilt. Objectively, Ukraine had everything to be successful. Its downward spiral is only due to the fact that Ukrainians allowed one of the scummiest and greediest elites in the former USSR rule them (I mean ever since 1991, not just after 2014 coup).

    I do hope that there will be at some point enough healthy forces in Ukrainian society to overthrow the ruling compradore scum and revive the country. Hope springs eternal ("Доки жию, сподiваюсь" in Ukrainian).

    , @AP
    @Ano4


    I don’t think AnonFromTN is gloating about it.
     
    It seemed that way and my comment could apply not only to him but to some other Russians who laugh at Ukraine's post-Soviet plight.

    And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.
     
    AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.

    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.
     
    It's around 5% or so. Russian medical system is of higher quality, but Russians drink more. My point was that if you account for Ukraine having an older population than Russia (16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians), the difference in death rate between Russia and Ukraine, already not very large, becomes very small, indeed.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  157. @AP
    @Seraphim

    And then there was "History of the Rus or Little Russia", written sometime between 1795 and 1810. It was widely circulated among the nobility of what is now Ukraine. It's secret author may have been Catherine II's chancellor, Alexander Bezborodko.

    Text here:

    http://izbornyk.org.ua/istrus/istrus02.htm

    “Восточныхъ Славянъ называли Скиθами или Скиттами по кочевой жизни и по частому переселенію съ мЂста на мЂсто; Полуденныхъ Сарматами по острымъ ящуринымъ глазамъ съ прижмуркою; и Русами или Русняками по волосамъ; СЂверныхъ приморскихъ Варягами называли по хищничеству и по засадамъ, ожидающимъ прохожихъ; а въ срединЂ отъ тЂхъ живущихъ по родоначальникамъ ихъ, потомкамъ Афетовымъ, называли: по Князю Русу, Роксоланами и Россами, а по Князю Мосоху, кочевавшему при рЂкЂ Моск†и давшему ей сіе названіе, Москвитами и Мосхами: отъ чего впослЂдствіи и Царство ихъ получило названіе Московскаго и наконецъ Россійскаго.”

    Rough translation : Eastern Slavs were called Scyffians or Scythians with a nomadic life and frequent moves, Sarmatians with sharp squinting eyes, and Rus or Rusnaks by their hair, Variags along the sea were named for their predation and ambushes…and in the middle living the descendants of Afetov, who were called Prince of Rus Poksoliany or Rossy, and by the Prince Mosokh, nomads along the Moskva River also known as Moskvyty and Moskh, from whom was descended a Tsardom that obtained the name Muscovy and eventually Russian.

    Later:

    “Bладимирское на КлязьмЂ и наконецъ Московское по городу МосквЂ. Но и тЂ Княжества, славилися первенствомъ свіоимъ по 1238 годъ; а съ сего года нашествіе войною Мунгальскихъ Татаръ, подъ начальствомъ Хана ихъ Батыя, внука Чингис-Ханова, всЂ Княжества удЂльныя и великія разрушило почти до основанія; города ихъ и селенія разорены и многіе сожжены; Князья и воинства избиты, а оставшіесь разсЂялись по отдаленнымъ СЂвернымъ провинціямъ, и съ сего времени большая часть Рускихъ Княжествъ подпали Татарскому игу. И хотя Княжества опять возстановлены, но пребывали они съ Князьями своими въ подданст†Татарскихъ Хановъ, которые, взимая дань съ народа, поставляли въ нихъ Князей и ихъ перемЂняли по своему произволенію, что продолжалось по 1462 годъ, въ который Князь Московскій Иванъ Васильевичь, Третій сего имени, пользуясь слабостію Татаръ, изнемогшихъ междоусобными войнами и раздЂлами, отказалъ Хану Ахмату отъ ежегодной дани съ народа и отъ своего повиновенія; а внукъ сего Князя, Иванъ Васильевичь Четвертый, названный Грозный, совокупивъ многія Княжества Рускія во едино, въ 1547 году переименовалъ себя изъ Князя Царемъ и Самодержцемъ Московскимъ, и съ того времяни навсегда уже Царство Московское и его владЂтели симъ названіемъ титуловались, съ переименованіемъ наконецъ Царства Московскаго на Россійское, которое, для различія отъ Чермной и БЂлой Руси, называлось Великою Россіею; тЂ же обЂ Руси вмЂстЂ названы тогда Малою Россіею.”

    I’ll just translate the end, about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia, which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia.”

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being "true Rus" and Russians being Muscovites can first be definitively found in this document, even though the term Ukrainian was not used and Little Russian was used instead.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Seraphim, @Gerard-Mandela

    which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia

    “Velikaya” and “Malo” follow a multi-millenium tradition of naming places purely by reference to geography feature, without separating the state and certainly not even hinting at separating the peoples/ethnicity you demented idiot (Karlin – I am self-regulating here, and will only used “idiot” , quite deserved, only once).

    “Greater” and “Little”, “Superior” and “Inferior”, “Prima” and “Secunda” . They have always been used for naming places within a country, particularly during Roman era

    Germania Superior and Germania Inferior, I think there was a Greater Britannia and Inferior Britannia in roman era, Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior, even a Greater Poland, Upper Mesopotamia and Lower Mesopotamia and many others. In none of those place names was there even a hint of separation of people/ethnicity/ or creation of a different state.Most of these other places have a millennium of years more civilisation than Russian world, so the naming evolution in Russian-world perfectly aligns with that fact.

    All the time in your non-life dedicated to disingenuous amateur-level, amateur fake history ( based on your own edits to Wikipedia) could not have teached you this? LOL

    about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia

    WTF? That demented,disingenuous garbage omits the fact that the particular prince or the “they” is Ivan Grozny – one of the most famous and successful people in history and founder of the modern Russian state. His name has far more recognition and importance in Ukraine and to modern Ukraine and Ukrainians ( Just like other Russians as Nevsky, Vladimir the Great and many others) than the random hobos off the street, sadist scum losers of minimal or even zero interest to true Ukrainians, that you promote(based solely on just copying and pasting wikipedia BS and no actual knowledge or inner conviction) . The structure of a Russian state comes from his vision and success of his leadership. His success made it a time when Russia greatly expanded – making further sense to geographically name places within the area of the same people into Great Russia and Little Russia

    Ukrainian nationalist

    LOL…. or as they are usually known as ….bored-out-of their minds liberast Saint Petersburg intellectuals, or late 19th/early 20th century Austrian Intelligence services or sub-human,CIA-smuggled, Banderite diaspora of zero significance

    ideas

    LOL – “ideas” imply some sort of thinking process. These are not ideas

    For the Bandera- diaspora, things are so bad for them – that Steven Segal, Gerard Depardieu and even Roy Jones Junior all classify as superior patriots of Russia, than the bastard Bandera diaspora are of Ukraine. They are that non-patriotic to the land of their (subhuman, sub-roma ancestral crimes)that all the high-profile Banderatards follow the same pattern of: creating problem, get appointed to a big job in ukrop elite , corrupt AND highly incompetent at the same time ….. before all then f**king off immediately back to America after failure. It’s hugely embarrassing that Steven Seagal, Monson and Depardieu are still there and even doing some positive things and work – while as Yarasko, Suprun and the rest of these freaks exited quicker than they arrived.

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites

    Your BS is based on he joke Volynia- Galicia vision.It has no basis because:

    It’s bastard region ,a bastard that exists now with a different religion – making any lineal connection of being “true Rus” amazingly idiotic, traitorous and effectively ending any argument before it has even started

    No connection to black soil of Ukraine – one of the main components of historic national identity,
    zero connection to Cossacks,
    zero connection to black sea,or black sea coastline
    zero connection to crossing the Dnieper,or going near it alot, or even using it for anything practical
    zero connection to any ukrop naval tradition
    zero connection to any ukrop currency

    Except for that it’s “great” LOL

    For all those points mentioned above, Russia is intrinsically connected or immersed in these essential pillars of modern Ukrainian state, to the point that it is the same thing .Galicia–Volhynia and Khokholism in general has absolute zero connection.

    It’s hugely ironic – the most western region of “Ukraine”, not only is the least Eastern, meaning against russia…..it’s the least “western” part of the entire Slavic World. LOL – that’s somethiing that should be impossible, completely illogical…but that is the sad, farcical reality

    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites

    Let’s see now ( God, this is retarded)

    Novgorod is the “Abraham” of Russian world
    Kievan Rus or let’s say Kiev is the ” Moses” of it
    Muscovy but let’s say Moscow, with direct lineal heritage to Novgorod and Kievan Rus is the “Jacob”, Ivan Grozny is probably the King David or Solomon.

    So Russian land is integrally connected to past, present and future of modern Ukrainian state

    Galicia in all this is probably not even the fallen angel ( the Devil), it’s the ( aborted) bastard child

    Modern, subhuman, NATO funded Ukrop “nationalism” is based on the nonsense derived from Galicia–Volhynia – an area now that has been more times invaded, discarded and used than a 2 dollar whore. This complete absence of lineal heritage makes any calling it the “successor” as “true Rus” completely dumb. That’s without going through the retardation of effectively claiming that Saint Petersburg or Sochi must then not be Russian…and the further retardation claiming that Muscovy is separate because of invasion – when no region has lost it’s ancestral roots more, been invaded more and been reject of 3 different empires, than Galicia.

    I’ll just translate the end

    HAHAHAHAHAHAH – why do you keep up with this farce?

    • Replies: @AP
    @Gerard-Mandela

    Your only usefulness in life is to serve as a springboard for others' comments.


    Upper Mesopotamia and Lower Mesopotamia and many others. In none of those place names was there even a hint of separation of people/ethnicity/ or creation of a different state
     
    I guess you never heard of the Netherlands.

    For the Bandera- diaspora, things are so bad for them
     
    You are just bitter because they are so much richer than Russians.

    Average annual household income of Ukrainian-Americans, 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income#By_ancestry

    $72,449

    Average annual household income of Russians, 2019:

    https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/russia/annual-household-income-per-capita

    $6,533 per capita, so around $13,000 for a couple

    You are very angry that while you Sovoks lived in squalor, Banderists had nice lives in America.

    Steven Segal LOL.


    Your BS is based on he joke Volynia- Galicia vision
     
    I posted from the History of Rus or Little Russia which was written in eastern Ukraine in the late 18th century.

    It had little to nothing to do with Galicia-Volhynia. You can't read just like you can't add. Like a real Sovok civil "engineer."

    As for your nonsense about Galicia:


    zero connection to Cossacks
     
    Most famous Hetman after Bohdan Khmelnytsky (who studied in Lviv), Petro Sahaidachny, was a Galician, from Sambir region outside of Lviv.

    zero connection to black sea,or black sea coastline
     
    Even Russian maps show Galicia once having a hold, albeit tenuous, over lands stretching down to the Black Sea:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/Kievan_Rus_in_1237_%28ru%29.svg/800px-Kievan_Rus_in_1237_%28ru%29.svg.png


    zero connection to crossing the Dnieper,or going near it alot, or even using it for anything practical
     
    Galicia was the last ruler of Kiev before the Mongol catastrophe. Galicia and Kiev were both part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They also belonged to the same Orthodox Church, the Metropolia of Kyiv, Halych and all Rus which was separate from the Moscow Patriarchate:

    https://likbez.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/557.jpg

    The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in Galicia is a direct continuation of this Church.

    You are just bitter because Galicia and Volhynia are Eastern Slavic lands that escaped Sovok rule more than did any other East Slavic territory (along with western Belarus), they are the opposite of Sovok. They lack your filth. It really hurts, hence your desperate rants.

    When Soviets came to Galicia for the first time, the difference was clear.

    The locals viewed the Soviets as some half-fed poor ape-like creatures who were also scary because they were often drunk and committed crimes such as rape. Soviet officers were looting everywhere. Their wives wore stolen nightgowns around town because they thought they were fancy dresses.

    Many of the Soviets did not know how to use toilets. They was a source of embarrassment for Galician Ukrainian nationalists in front of their Polish rivals – many of those Soviets were of their own ethnicity and it was painful to hear these “apes” speak the same language. Local writing by both Poles and Ukrainians when encountering Soviets for the first time reveals their impressions – Ukrainian theologian Havril Kostelnyk – “unintelligent, uncultured faces and simple-minded movements.” Lviv mathemetician Hugo Steinhaus was told that mathematics was a “class science.” Stanislaw Lem, who was 17 in Lwow when the Soviets invaded, stated “the Germans evoked only fear, at the Soviets you could also laugh.” He described them as “a terrible, gigantic ape.”

    Soviet filmmaker Dovzhenko had similar impressions, expressed in private of course, worrying about “our boorishness, our tactlessness, our lack of culture” and hoping that one day the Easterners would stop despising the Galicians for being “better and more cultivated.”

  158. @Ano4
    @AP


    a Russian to gloat about
     
    I don't think AnonFromTN is gloating about it. And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.


    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders
     
    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.

    It’s a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about
     
    Again, I don't think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN, @AP

    Again, I don’t think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.

    You are right about this. Personally, I feel pity for normal Ukrainians led into this mess by a bunch of thieves, crooks, and degenerates, which was organized, funded, and directed by the imperial elites (who are thieves, crooks, and degenerates themselves). The only flaw of the Ukrainian populace is gullibility, but they are punished way beyond their guilt. Objectively, Ukraine had everything to be successful. Its downward spiral is only due to the fact that Ukrainians allowed one of the scummiest and greediest elites in the former USSR rule them (I mean ever since 1991, not just after 2014 coup).

    I do hope that there will be at some point enough healthy forces in Ukrainian society to overthrow the ruling compradore scum and revive the country. Hope springs eternal (“Доки жию, сподiваюсь” in Ukrainian).

    • Agree: Ano4, Blinky Bill
  159. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @Gerard-Mandela, @Anatoly Karlin

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    LMAO. So “Ukraine is the new Japan”. LOL…….I thought I had heard all delinquent BS from this guy as possible – but this is a new low.

    Karlin are you reading? As with everything else, this (troll) has under your patronage, immediately and dishonestly made up a fake argument just for the purposes of lying to prolong ad nauseum his own demented disinformation( seriously WTF?) . Somebody can say or argue that Antarctica is in the Northern Hemisphere, if they truly believe it, or are mistaken, or have made a bad educated guess based on bad translation of latin etymology of the name. What they can’t or shouldn’t be allowed to do on a blog is insidiously, obviously lie for the purposes of wasting people’s time just to occupy his sick fantasies. He has not written that garbage because he genuinely believes it, has reasoned it, subconscious bias or educated guess – he has just created a lie from nowhere.

    No, as obvious to any non-cretin, or anybody who actually does have any knowledge or experience of Ukraine knows….. if there is one problem that Ukraine does NOT have…..then it would be “ageing population”. LOL

    Russia has an older life expectancy but even with that, for the years since Maidan it has increased in population for 4 of them (let’s say equal numbers of births and deaths) and decreased for 2. The maximum decrease forecast for the next few years is about 100000 people in a year . Ukraine has had 250000 per year more deaths than births for all the years after Maidan! And that is without thinking about the massive loss from migration and Ukrop “statistics” collection reliability.
    So , with 4-6 times more population, Russia has had in the last year a population loss from births/deaths of 30000 people. In terms of proportion ( though just the pure number itself is huge) that’s 32 to 48 times less natural population loss than Banderastan. If this year reaches our worst estimates than Russia natural population loss will still be 10-15 times less .

    I suspect

    err…hahaha. No, you openly are about to create low-witted disinformation. You don’t have any idea , but created BS to deflect from what you must have realised is the probable truth – is the more accurate description

    Moscow is the second highest region of fertility rate in the country you dimwit. Second to Chechnya but higher than the other kavkaz regions.Most of the kavkaz regions birth rates have actually been going significantly down in fertility/birth rates, still above average but descending since ( coincidentally) the time of and after Evromaidan.

    And of course, non-ethnic Russian regions in Siberia and far north have the lowest birth rates you *****. There are of course, ethnic russian regions with low birth rates…..although this “low” birth rate is still far higher than the “best” Ukrop region – making any implication of comparable situation braindead and of course with yourself, deceitful, trash as with the time you spend on here – there is no way you wouldn’t have come across the information.

    • Troll: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP
    @Gerard-Mandela


    There are of course, ethnic russian regions with low birth rates…..although this “low” birth rate is still far higher than the “best” Ukrop region
     
    I decided to explore your claim, out of curiosity. Naturally, you are completely wrong.

    Lviv oblast birth rate in 2019: 8.7/1,000

    http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/Mult/Dialog/statfile1_c_files/pasport.files/pasport/46_uk.htm#0301

    Russian oblasts with lower birth rates in 2019:

    Novgorod: 8.69/1000
    Lipetsk: 8.63/1,000
    Volgograd: 8.47/1000
    Voronezh: 8.45/1000
    Kursk: 8.45/1,000
    Bryansk: 8.41/1,000
    Ryazan: 8.33/1,000
    Saratov: 8.32/1,000
    Vladimir: 8.21/1000
    Orel: 8.16/1,000
    Ivanov: 7.97/1,000
    Tambov: 7.67/1000
    Smolensk: 7.58/1,000
    Leningrad: 7.18/1,000

    Much of the ethnic Russian heartland has a lower birth rate than does Lviv oblast.

    Lviv oblast isn't Ukraine's birth rate leader; in fact it 's birth rate is rather low for Western Ukraine.

    The oblast with Ukraine's highest birth rate in 2019 was Rivne in Western Ukraine:

    http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/Mult/Dialog/statfile1_c_files/pasport.files/pasport/56_uk.htm#0301

    10.7/1000

    Which is higher than the Russian Federation average of 10.12/1000.

    So while it is correct that Ukraine has a lower overall birth rate than Russia, several of Ukraine's western oblasts have higher birth rates than do many Russia oblasts.


    Moscow is the second highest region of fertility rate in the country you dimwit
     
    Wrong again and as usual.

    Russian TFR's by region:

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

    Moscow city is below average for Russia - Moscow oblast is very far below average. You don't know about Russia.

    Highest TFR are Tuva, Chechnya, Altai, Sakhalin, Buryattia, Ingushetia, Yakutia, Dagestan. Basically, Buddhists and Caucasians.

    In 2019 Rivne in western Ukraine had a TFR of 1.53. That's higher than the Russian Federation average of 1.50. Lviv oblast's TFR of 1.258 still beat Leningrad and Smolensk oblasts.

    (Western Ukraine's birthrate is better than its TFR because Western Ukraine has less of a 90s demographic hole than does Russia, so there are more women of childbearing age within the population).

  160. @Ano4
    @AP


    a Russian to gloat about
     
    I don't think AnonFromTN is gloating about it. And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.


    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders
     
    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.

    It’s a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about
     
    Again, I don't think anyone is gloating about the whole Ukrainian predicament.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN, @AP

    I don’t think AnonFromTN is gloating about it.

    It seemed that way and my comment could apply not only to him but to some other Russians who laugh at Ukraine’s post-Soviet plight.

    And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.

    AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.

    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.

    It’s around 5% or so. Russian medical system is of higher quality, but Russians drink more. My point was that if you account for Ukraine having an older population than Russia (16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians), the difference in death rate between Russia and Ukraine, already not very large, becomes very small, indeed.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.
     
    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence. Ample practice shows. A few corrections.

    First, I grew up in Lugansk, not Donetsk, from the age of ~5.

    Second, my Ukrainian-speaking grandparents lived all their lives in Rovenki, Lugansk region. After moving from Lvov area (where I communicated exclusively in Ukrainian with kids I played with), they were the people I spoke Ukrainian to. Very small fraction of Lugansk region population speaks Ukrainian, most speak surgik, more educated ones speak Russian with characteristic accent.

    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection. Most Russians don’t believe that Ukrainian is a separate language, whereas I know it and read a lot of books in it. Unlike most Ukies, I read Ukrainian literature and other books in Ukrainian, even Stanislaw Lem,. In contrast to globohomo lies, Soviets pushed local languages in all republics. The great majority of books in Lugansk stores and libraries were in Ukrainian, which maybe 5% of the population understood well. So, I had much better choice than most, as I could read in Russian and Ukrainian equally well. BTW, in 2014 Ukie shell hit the library in Lugansk I used to borrow books from. That was one of many crimes of Ukie bandits.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

  161. @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP


    which in order to distinguish itself from Black and White Russia was called Great Russia, and the Rus were called Little Russia
     
    "Velikaya" and "Malo" follow a multi-millenium tradition of naming places purely by reference to geography feature, without separating the state and certainly not even hinting at separating the peoples/ethnicity you demented idiot (Karlin - I am self-regulating here, and will only used "idiot" , quite deserved, only once).

    "Greater" and "Little", "Superior" and "Inferior", "Prima" and "Secunda" . They have always been used for naming places within a country, particularly during Roman era

    Germania Superior and Germania Inferior, I think there was a Greater Britannia and Inferior Britannia in roman era, Moesia Superior and Moesia Inferior, even a Greater Poland, Upper Mesopotamia and Lower Mesopotamia and many others. In none of those place names was there even a hint of separation of people/ethnicity/ or creation of a different state.Most of these other places have a millennium of years more civilisation than Russian world, so the naming evolution in Russian-world perfectly aligns with that fact.

    All the time in your non-life dedicated to disingenuous amateur-level, amateur fake history ( based on your own edits to Wikipedia) could not have teached you this? LOL


    about the Moscow Princes:

    “In 1547 they renamed themselves from Princes and Autocrats of Moscow, and from that time the tsardom of Moscow and its owners…eventually changed from Tsardom of Moscow to Tsardom of Russia
     

    WTF? That demented,disingenuous garbage omits the fact that the particular prince or the "they" is Ivan Grozny - one of the most famous and successful people in history and founder of the modern Russian state. His name has far more recognition and importance in Ukraine and to modern Ukraine and Ukrainians ( Just like other Russians as Nevsky, Vladimir the Great and many others) than the random hobos off the street, sadist scum losers of minimal or even zero interest to true Ukrainians, that you promote(based solely on just copying and pasting wikipedia BS and no actual knowledge or inner conviction) . The structure of a Russian state comes from his vision and success of his leadership. His success made it a time when Russia greatly expanded - making further sense to geographically name places within the area of the same people into Great Russia and Little Russia

    Ukrainian nationalist

     

    LOL.... or as they are usually known as ....bored-out-of their minds liberast Saint Petersburg intellectuals, or late 19th/early 20th century Austrian Intelligence services or sub-human,CIA-smuggled, Banderite diaspora of zero significance

    ideas

     

    LOL - "ideas" imply some sort of thinking process. These are not ideas

    For the Bandera- diaspora, things are so bad for them - that Steven Segal, Gerard Depardieu and even Roy Jones Junior all classify as superior patriots of Russia, than the bastard Bandera diaspora are of Ukraine. They are that non-patriotic to the land of their (subhuman, sub-roma ancestral crimes)that all the high-profile Banderatards follow the same pattern of: creating problem, get appointed to a big job in ukrop elite , corrupt AND highly incompetent at the same time ..... before all then f**king off immediately back to America after failure. It's hugely embarrassing that Steven Seagal, Monson and Depardieu are still there and even doing some positive things and work - while as Yarasko, Suprun and the rest of these freaks exited quicker than they arrived.


    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites
     
    Your BS is based on he joke Volynia- Galicia vision.It has no basis because:

    It's bastard region ,a bastard that exists now with a different religion - making any lineal connection of being "true Rus" amazingly idiotic, traitorous and effectively ending any argument before it has even started

    No connection to black soil of Ukraine - one of the main components of historic national identity,
    zero connection to Cossacks,
    zero connection to black sea,or black sea coastline
    zero connection to crossing the Dnieper,or going near it alot, or even using it for anything practical
    zero connection to any ukrop naval tradition
    zero connection to any ukrop currency

    Except for that it's "great" LOL

    For all those points mentioned above, Russia is intrinsically connected or immersed in these essential pillars of modern Ukrainian state, to the point that it is the same thing .Galicia–Volhynia and Khokholism in general has absolute zero connection.

    It's hugely ironic - the most western region of "Ukraine", not only is the least Eastern, meaning against russia.....it's the least "western" part of the entire Slavic World. LOL - that's somethiing that should be impossible, completely illogical...but that is the sad, farcical reality


    Ukrainian nationalist ideas about Ukrainians being “true Rus” and Russians being Muscovites
     
    Let's see now ( God, this is retarded)

    Novgorod is the "Abraham" of Russian world
    Kievan Rus or let's say Kiev is the " Moses" of it
    Muscovy but let's say Moscow, with direct lineal heritage to Novgorod and Kievan Rus is the "Jacob", Ivan Grozny is probably the King David or Solomon.

    So Russian land is integrally connected to past, present and future of modern Ukrainian state

    Galicia in all this is probably not even the fallen angel ( the Devil), it's the ( aborted) bastard child

    Modern, subhuman, NATO funded Ukrop "nationalism" is based on the nonsense derived from Galicia–Volhynia - an area now that has been more times invaded, discarded and used than a 2 dollar whore. This complete absence of lineal heritage makes any calling it the "successor" as "true Rus" completely dumb. That's without going through the retardation of effectively claiming that Saint Petersburg or Sochi must then not be Russian...and the further retardation claiming that Muscovy is separate because of invasion - when no region has lost it's ancestral roots more, been invaded more and been reject of 3 different empires, than Galicia.


    I’ll just translate the end
     
    HAHAHAHAHAHAH - why do you keep up with this farce?

    Replies: @AP

    Your only usefulness in life is to serve as a springboard for others’ comments.

    Upper Mesopotamia and Lower Mesopotamia and many others. In none of those place names was there even a hint of separation of people/ethnicity/ or creation of a different state

    I guess you never heard of the Netherlands.

    For the Bandera- diaspora, things are so bad for them

    You are just bitter because they are so much richer than Russians.

    Average annual household income of Ukrainian-Americans, 2016:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income#By_ancestry

    $72,449

    Average annual household income of Russians, 2019:

    https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/russia/annual-household-income-per-capita

    $6,533 per capita, so around $13,000 for a couple

    You are very angry that while you Sovoks lived in squalor, Banderists had nice lives in America.

    Steven Segal LOL.

    Your BS is based on he joke Volynia- Galicia vision

    I posted from the History of Rus or Little Russia which was written in eastern Ukraine in the late 18th century.

    It had little to nothing to do with Galicia-Volhynia. You can’t read just like you can’t add. Like a real Sovok civil “engineer.”

    As for your nonsense about Galicia:

    zero connection to Cossacks

    Most famous Hetman after Bohdan Khmelnytsky (who studied in Lviv), Petro Sahaidachny, was a Galician, from Sambir region outside of Lviv.

    zero connection to black sea,or black sea coastline

    Even Russian maps show Galicia once having a hold, albeit tenuous, over lands stretching down to the Black Sea:

    zero connection to crossing the Dnieper,or going near it alot, or even using it for anything practical

    Galicia was the last ruler of Kiev before the Mongol catastrophe. Galicia and Kiev were both part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They also belonged to the same Orthodox Church, the Metropolia of Kyiv, Halych and all Rus which was separate from the Moscow Patriarchate:

    The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in Galicia is a direct continuation of this Church.

    You are just bitter because Galicia and Volhynia are Eastern Slavic lands that escaped Sovok rule more than did any other East Slavic territory (along with western Belarus), they are the opposite of Sovok. They lack your filth. It really hurts, hence your desperate rants.

    When Soviets came to Galicia for the first time, the difference was clear.

    The locals viewed the Soviets as some half-fed poor ape-like creatures who were also scary because they were often drunk and committed crimes such as rape. Soviet officers were looting everywhere. Their wives wore stolen nightgowns around town because they thought they were fancy dresses.

    Many of the Soviets did not know how to use toilets. They was a source of embarrassment for Galician Ukrainian nationalists in front of their Polish rivals – many of those Soviets were of their own ethnicity and it was painful to hear these “apes” speak the same language. Local writing by both Poles and Ukrainians when encountering Soviets for the first time reveals their impressions – Ukrainian theologian Havril Kostelnyk – “unintelligent, uncultured faces and simple-minded movements.” Lviv mathemetician Hugo Steinhaus was told that mathematics was a “class science.” Stanislaw Lem, who was 17 in Lwow when the Soviets invaded, stated “the Germans evoked only fear, at the Soviets you could also laugh.” He described them as “a terrible, gigantic ape.”

    Soviet filmmaker Dovzhenko had similar impressions, expressed in private of course, worrying about “our boorishness, our tactlessness, our lack of culture” and hoping that one day the Easterners would stop despising the Galicians for being “better and more cultivated.”

  162. @AP
    @Ano4


    I don’t think AnonFromTN is gloating about it.
     
    It seemed that way and my comment could apply not only to him but to some other Russians who laugh at Ukraine's post-Soviet plight.

    And according to my understanding AnonFromTN is Ukrainian.
     
    AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.

    The Caucasus populations represent together a small percentage of the population. I believe a more accurate explanation would be Russian medical services being of a better quality.
     
    It's around 5% or so. Russian medical system is of higher quality, but Russians drink more. My point was that if you account for Ukraine having an older population than Russia (16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians), the difference in death rate between Russia and Ukraine, already not very large, becomes very small, indeed.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.

    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence. Ample practice shows. A few corrections.

    First, I grew up in Lugansk, not Donetsk, from the age of ~5.

    Second, my Ukrainian-speaking grandparents lived all their lives in Rovenki, Lugansk region. After moving from Lvov area (where I communicated exclusively in Ukrainian with kids I played with), they were the people I spoke Ukrainian to. Very small fraction of Lugansk region population speaks Ukrainian, most speak surgik, more educated ones speak Russian with characteristic accent.

    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection. Most Russians don’t believe that Ukrainian is a separate language, whereas I know it and read a lot of books in it. Unlike most Ukies, I read Ukrainian literature and other books in Ukrainian, even Stanislaw Lem,. In contrast to globohomo lies, Soviets pushed local languages in all republics. The great majority of books in Lugansk stores and libraries were in Ukrainian, which maybe 5% of the population understood well. So, I had much better choice than most, as I could read in Russian and Ukrainian equally well. BTW, in 2014 Ukie shell hit the library in Lugansk I used to borrow books from. That was one of many crimes of Ukie bandits.

    • Thanks: Jazman
    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence
     
    I specifically preceded my statement with AFAIK, explicitly indicating that I was uncertain about details of your life.
    , @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection.
     
    You are fond of repeating this:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665833

    "As Russians say, Russian is not a nationality, but a state of mind."

    Followed up by:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665888

    "Former commander of Gorlovka in Donetsk People’s Republic Bezler expressed the same thing fairly recently: “My father is German, my mother – Ukrainian. So, who am I? A Russian!”"

    You repeat Bezler's quote rather frequently.

    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words. Have you changed your mind? Or were you simply unclear before.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  163. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.
     
    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence. Ample practice shows. A few corrections.

    First, I grew up in Lugansk, not Donetsk, from the age of ~5.

    Second, my Ukrainian-speaking grandparents lived all their lives in Rovenki, Lugansk region. After moving from Lvov area (where I communicated exclusively in Ukrainian with kids I played with), they were the people I spoke Ukrainian to. Very small fraction of Lugansk region population speaks Ukrainian, most speak surgik, more educated ones speak Russian with characteristic accent.

    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection. Most Russians don’t believe that Ukrainian is a separate language, whereas I know it and read a lot of books in it. Unlike most Ukies, I read Ukrainian literature and other books in Ukrainian, even Stanislaw Lem,. In contrast to globohomo lies, Soviets pushed local languages in all republics. The great majority of books in Lugansk stores and libraries were in Ukrainian, which maybe 5% of the population understood well. So, I had much better choice than most, as I could read in Russian and Ukrainian equally well. BTW, in 2014 Ukie shell hit the library in Lugansk I used to borrow books from. That was one of many crimes of Ukie bandits.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence

    I specifically preceded my statement with AFAIK, explicitly indicating that I was uncertain about details of your life.

  164. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.
     
    You managed to squeeze quite a few errors into a singly sentence. Ample practice shows. A few corrections.

    First, I grew up in Lugansk, not Donetsk, from the age of ~5.

    Second, my Ukrainian-speaking grandparents lived all their lives in Rovenki, Lugansk region. After moving from Lvov area (where I communicated exclusively in Ukrainian with kids I played with), they were the people I spoke Ukrainian to. Very small fraction of Lugansk region population speaks Ukrainian, most speak surgik, more educated ones speak Russian with characteristic accent.

    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection. Most Russians don’t believe that Ukrainian is a separate language, whereas I know it and read a lot of books in it. Unlike most Ukies, I read Ukrainian literature and other books in Ukrainian, even Stanislaw Lem,. In contrast to globohomo lies, Soviets pushed local languages in all republics. The great majority of books in Lugansk stores and libraries were in Ukrainian, which maybe 5% of the population understood well. So, I had much better choice than most, as I could read in Russian and Ukrainian equally well. BTW, in 2014 Ukie shell hit the library in Lugansk I used to borrow books from. That was one of many crimes of Ukie bandits.

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection.

    You are fond of repeating this:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665833

    “As Russians say, Russian is not a nationality, but a state of mind.”

    Followed up by:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665888

    “Former commander of Gorlovka in Donetsk People’s Republic Bezler expressed the same thing fairly recently: “My father is German, my mother – Ukrainian. So, who am I? A Russian!””

    You repeat Bezler’s quote rather frequently.

    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words. Have you changed your mind? Or were you simply unclear before.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words.
     
    As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian: I do not have primeval tribal Hutu-Tutsi mentality. As one old lady said on TV, “we are Russians, but khokhols, they are Russians, but katsaps”. She expressed it better than all “sophisticated” talking heads ever could.

    Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it.

    Replies: @AP

  165. @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP


    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.
     
    LMAO. So "Ukraine is the new Japan". LOL.......I thought I had heard all delinquent BS from this guy as possible - but this is a new low.

    Karlin are you reading? As with everything else, this (troll) has under your patronage, immediately and dishonestly made up a fake argument just for the purposes of lying to prolong ad nauseum his own demented disinformation( seriously WTF?) . Somebody can say or argue that Antarctica is in the Northern Hemisphere, if they truly believe it, or are mistaken, or have made a bad educated guess based on bad translation of latin etymology of the name. What they can't or shouldn't be allowed to do on a blog is insidiously, obviously lie for the purposes of wasting people's time just to occupy his sick fantasies. He has not written that garbage because he genuinely believes it, has reasoned it, subconscious bias or educated guess - he has just created a lie from nowhere.

    No, as obvious to any non-cretin, or anybody who actually does have any knowledge or experience of Ukraine knows..... if there is one problem that Ukraine does NOT have.....then it would be "ageing population". LOL

    Russia has an older life expectancy but even with that, for the years since Maidan it has increased in population for 4 of them (let's say equal numbers of births and deaths) and decreased for 2. The maximum decrease forecast for the next few years is about 100000 people in a year . Ukraine has had 250000 per year more deaths than births for all the years after Maidan! And that is without thinking about the massive loss from migration and Ukrop "statistics" collection reliability.
    So , with 4-6 times more population, Russia has had in the last year a population loss from births/deaths of 30000 people. In terms of proportion ( though just the pure number itself is huge) that's 32 to 48 times less natural population loss than Banderastan. If this year reaches our worst estimates than Russia natural population loss will still be 10-15 times less .


    I suspect
     
    err...hahaha. No, you openly are about to create low-witted disinformation. You don't have any idea , but created BS to deflect from what you must have realised is the probable truth - is the more accurate description

    Moscow is the second highest region of fertility rate in the country you dimwit. Second to Chechnya but higher than the other kavkaz regions.Most of the kavkaz regions birth rates have actually been going significantly down in fertility/birth rates, still above average but descending since ( coincidentally) the time of and after Evromaidan.

    And of course, non-ethnic Russian regions in Siberia and far north have the lowest birth rates you *****. There are of course, ethnic russian regions with low birth rates.....although this "low" birth rate is still far higher than the "best" Ukrop region - making any implication of comparable situation braindead and of course with yourself, deceitful, trash as with the time you spend on here - there is no way you wouldn't have come across the information.

    Replies: @AP

    There are of course, ethnic russian regions with low birth rates…..although this “low” birth rate is still far higher than the “best” Ukrop region

    I decided to explore your claim, out of curiosity. Naturally, you are completely wrong.

    Lviv oblast birth rate in 2019: 8.7/1,000

    http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/Mult/Dialog/statfile1_c_files/pasport.files/pasport/46_uk.htm#0301

    Russian oblasts with lower birth rates in 2019:

    Novgorod: 8.69/1000
    Lipetsk: 8.63/1,000
    Volgograd: 8.47/1000
    Voronezh: 8.45/1000
    Kursk: 8.45/1,000
    Bryansk: 8.41/1,000
    Ryazan: 8.33/1,000
    Saratov: 8.32/1,000
    Vladimir: 8.21/1000
    Orel: 8.16/1,000
    Ivanov: 7.97/1,000
    Tambov: 7.67/1000
    Smolensk: 7.58/1,000
    Leningrad: 7.18/1,000

    Much of the ethnic Russian heartland has a lower birth rate than does Lviv oblast.

    Lviv oblast isn’t Ukraine’s birth rate leader; in fact it ‘s birth rate is rather low for Western Ukraine.

    The oblast with Ukraine’s highest birth rate in 2019 was Rivne in Western Ukraine:

    http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/Mult/Dialog/statfile1_c_files/pasport.files/pasport/56_uk.htm#0301

    10.7/1000

    Which is higher than the Russian Federation average of 10.12/1000.

    So while it is correct that Ukraine has a lower overall birth rate than Russia, several of Ukraine’s western oblasts have higher birth rates than do many Russia oblasts.

    Moscow is the second highest region of fertility rate in the country you dimwit

    Wrong again and as usual.

    Russian TFR’s by region:

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

    Moscow city is below average for Russia – Moscow oblast is very far below average. You don’t know about Russia.

    Highest TFR are Tuva, Chechnya, Altai, Sakhalin, Buryattia, Ingushetia, Yakutia, Dagestan. Basically, Buddhists and Caucasians.

    In 2019 Rivne in western Ukraine had a TFR of 1.53. That’s higher than the Russian Federation average of 1.50. Lviv oblast’s TFR of 1.258 still beat Leningrad and Smolensk oblasts.

    (Western Ukraine’s birthrate is better than its TFR because Western Ukraine has less of a 90s demographic hole than does Russia, so there are more women of childbearing age within the population).

  166. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    Third, I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection.
     
    You are fond of repeating this:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665833

    "As Russians say, Russian is not a nationality, but a state of mind."

    Followed up by:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/major-political-changes-in-russia/#comment-3665888

    "Former commander of Gorlovka in Donetsk People’s Republic Bezler expressed the same thing fairly recently: “My father is German, my mother – Ukrainian. So, who am I? A Russian!”"

    You repeat Bezler's quote rather frequently.

    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words. Have you changed your mind? Or were you simply unclear before.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words.

    As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian: I do not have primeval tribal Hutu-Tutsi mentality. As one old lady said on TV, “we are Russians, but khokhols, they are Russians, but katsaps”. She expressed it better than all “sophisticated” talking heads ever could.

    Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    So I was right the first time :-)

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  167. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    So your self-identity as a Russian was suggested, or implied, by your own words.
     
    As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian: I do not have primeval tribal Hutu-Tutsi mentality. As one old lady said on TV, “we are Russians, but khokhols, they are Russians, but katsaps”. She expressed it better than all “sophisticated” talking heads ever could.

    Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it.

    Replies: @AP

    So I was right the first time 🙂

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Sounds to me like he's spouting off some kind of Orwellian doublespeak, or he's just a two-minded schizophrenic. :-) :-)

    Replies: @AP

  168. @Ano4
    @Simpleguest

    Different Slav ethnic groups in general are most adept at infighting and betraying each other. I have no idea why this is the case, but historically speaking it is undeniable that their German neighbors are much more aware of their general ethnic interests than Slavs have ever been. Starting in the VIIIth century CE the Wends allied to their Germanic neighbors against other Wendish tribes. To the best of my knowledge, the Germanic tribes have never sided up with the Wends against each other. The only way the Slavs can work together is under strong centralizing Imperial rule. This was achieved in Russia because of the example set by the Golden Horde. Of note, by the XIX century the Holstein Gottorp Romanovs were mainly German and so was a large part of the Russian nobility and bureaucrats. Also a great deal of Russian aristocracy had Turkic roots.

    Replies: @Zimriel, @Curmudgeon

    Depending on the source, Wends are either the Germanic tribes bordering Charlemagne’s Empire, or Varangians. Varangians were the Norse, or more specifically East Norse – Swedes. There are claims that Novgorod was essentially Norse.
    https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-ancient-traditions/kievan-rus-0013926
    I differ from the above link as it is not clear that the Norse referenced in the link were “Vikings”. Old Norse viking(u)r were the raiders, essentially pirates. They were primarily the West Norse – Denmark and Norway. The East Norse were primarily traders, but fully capable of being raiders.

    • Disagree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Curmudgeon


    Wends are either the Germanic tribes bordering Charlemagne’s Empire, or Varangians. Varangians were the Norse, or more specifically East Norse – Swedes.
     
    Wends were Balto-Slavic tribes and Western Slavs they have been conquered by the Germans.
  169. @Curmudgeon
    @Ano4

    Depending on the source, Wends are either the Germanic tribes bordering Charlemagne's Empire, or Varangians. Varangians were the Norse, or more specifically East Norse - Swedes. There are claims that Novgorod was essentially Norse.
    https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-ancient-traditions/kievan-rus-0013926
    I differ from the above link as it is not clear that the Norse referenced in the link were "Vikings". Old Norse viking(u)r were the raiders, essentially pirates. They were primarily the West Norse - Denmark and Norway. The East Norse were primarily traders, but fully capable of being raiders.

    Replies: @Ano4

    Wends are either the Germanic tribes bordering Charlemagne’s Empire, or Varangians. Varangians were the Norse, or more specifically East Norse – Swedes.

    Wends were Balto-Slavic tribes and Western Slavs they have been conquered by the Germans.

  170. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    So I was right the first time :-)

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Sounds to me like he’s spouting off some kind of Orwellian doublespeak, or he’s just a two-minded schizophrenic. 🙂 🙂

    • Replies: @AP
    @Mr. Hack

    I wrote about him:

    "AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian."

    He said I was wrong and replied: "I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection"

    But when I confronted him with his own words proving the opposite, he admitted: "As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian...Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it."

    These types (Denis, Beckow, etc.), often from places morally corrupted by Communism, reflect that corruption and lie without batting an eye. And when their dishonesty is demonstrated and called what it is, they whine about "rudeness." (To his credit I don't think AnoninTN has whined about my having demonstrated his numerous false claims.)

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

  171. @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Sounds to me like he's spouting off some kind of Orwellian doublespeak, or he's just a two-minded schizophrenic. :-) :-)

    Replies: @AP

    I wrote about him:

    “AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian.”

    He said I was wrong and replied: “I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection”

    But when I confronted him with his own words proving the opposite, he admitted: “As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian…Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it.”

    These types (Denis, Beckow, etc.), often from places morally corrupted by Communism, reflect that corruption and lie without batting an eye. And when their dishonesty is demonstrated and called what it is, they whine about “rudeness.” (To his credit I don’t think AnoninTN has whined about my having demonstrated his numerous false claims.)

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    He's an interesting guy, and sometimes I feel that I'm a little rough on him. He's probably interesting to you too, sharing a similar profession in the sciences, and the both of you sharing a similar "khokhol" ethnicity (just kidding). :-)

    I try to cut him some slack regarding his hatred towards the Kyivan government center. It looks like he has some personal grievances against the "Ukie" military operations in his area that disrupted his family's (his mother anyway) life in the area. Wars never seem to be a strictly black/white issues.

    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?.....It's usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    , @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    morally corrupted by Communism
     
    Simple question to honest commenters, not to the descendants of Nazi collaborators: does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?

    Replies: @AP, @AP

  172. @AP
    @Mr. Hack

    I wrote about him:

    "AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian."

    He said I was wrong and replied: "I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection"

    But when I confronted him with his own words proving the opposite, he admitted: "As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian...Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it."

    These types (Denis, Beckow, etc.), often from places morally corrupted by Communism, reflect that corruption and lie without batting an eye. And when their dishonesty is demonstrated and called what it is, they whine about "rudeness." (To his credit I don't think AnoninTN has whined about my having demonstrated his numerous false claims.)

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

    He’s an interesting guy, and sometimes I feel that I’m a little rough on him. He’s probably interesting to you too, sharing a similar profession in the sciences, and the both of you sharing a similar “khokhol” ethnicity (just kidding). 🙂

    I try to cut him some slack regarding his hatred towards the Kyivan government center. It looks like he has some personal grievances against the “Ukie” military operations in his area that disrupted his family’s (his mother anyway) life in the area. Wars never seem to be a strictly black/white issues.

    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?…..It’s usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?…..It’s usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.
     
    I’d say that claiming that Shevchenko is the greatest Ukrainian poet belittles and denigrates Ukrainian literature. E.g., Kotlyarevsky, who wrote his poem “Eneida” in rich Ukrainian before Shevchenko was even born, was a lot more talented poet. He wrote plays, too, starting this branch of Ukrainian literature. In sharp contrast to Shevchenko, he was not a drunkard. There are many poets and writers in Ukrainian literature who tower above Shevchenko. He is just a second-rate poet and he also wrote third-rate prose (the latter exclusively in Russian).

    BTW, hatred is a strong feeling. Shevchenko does not deserve it. I do not hate, just despise him.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  173. @AP
    @Mr. Hack

    I wrote about him:

    "AFAIK he is half-Ukrainian, grew up in Donetsk from age 5, moved to Russia at age 17 or 18, and thinks of himself as Russian."

    He said I was wrong and replied: "I can’t think of myself as Russian, that’s your Ukie projection"

    But when I confronted him with his own words proving the opposite, he admitted: "As far as the state of mind is concerned, I am a Russian...Bottom line: I am Russian, but khokhol. Certainly not a Ukie, and proud of it."

    These types (Denis, Beckow, etc.), often from places morally corrupted by Communism, reflect that corruption and lie without batting an eye. And when their dishonesty is demonstrated and called what it is, they whine about "rudeness." (To his credit I don't think AnoninTN has whined about my having demonstrated his numerous false claims.)

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @AnonFromTN

    morally corrupted by Communism

    Simple question to honest commenters, not to the descendants of Nazi collaborators: does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    , @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?
     
    Post-war Germany has been morally corrupt but in a decadent way (overt aggression had been beaten out of the Germans). Several of the founding fathers of post-modernism whose offshoots such as Black Lives Matter movement /Critical Race Theory which plagues the West currently had been Nazi collaborators. If there there is no truth, no morality, everything is "constructed" - than they did nothing wrong.

    The moral corruption of Communism is of course obvious. The 1990s in the former Soviet Union was a perfect demonstration of this. When people raised under Communism were given the freedom that normal people take for granted, they produced a murder rate comparable to that of Detroit or parts of Africa, they produced an HIV epidemic, and they stole everything they could get their hands on. Notably, the parts of the USSR that had the least amount of Communist experience and culture - the Baltics and Western Ukraine - when given the same freedoms, did not do this.

    The explanation cannot be genetic. These peoples are very similar genetically. Nor is it cultural, in the sense that something was just wrong with Russia specifically. By most accounts, the Russian Whites who made it West led good decent lives and contributed enormously to their new homelands. I suspect that if the Far East had managed to become a Japanese protectorate in 1919 and avoided Soviet rule until the 1940s it would have been as decent in the 1990s as were the Baltics and western Ukraine. So Sovok degeneracy is purely an expression of Soviet moral rot. Which we see in Sovok posters here, either in the chronic dishonesty or always thinking about whores by you, or the verbal diarrhea of "Gerard." Thank God modern Russia is leaving it behind.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  174. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    morally corrupted by Communism
     
    Simple question to honest commenters, not to the descendants of Nazi collaborators: does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.
     
    As I did not say that, this is your guilt speaking. My condolences.

    Replies: @AP

  175. @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    He's an interesting guy, and sometimes I feel that I'm a little rough on him. He's probably interesting to you too, sharing a similar profession in the sciences, and the both of you sharing a similar "khokhol" ethnicity (just kidding). :-)

    I try to cut him some slack regarding his hatred towards the Kyivan government center. It looks like he has some personal grievances against the "Ukie" military operations in his area that disrupted his family's (his mother anyway) life in the area. Wars never seem to be a strictly black/white issues.

    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?.....It's usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?…..It’s usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.

    I’d say that claiming that Shevchenko is the greatest Ukrainian poet belittles and denigrates Ukrainian literature. E.g., Kotlyarevsky, who wrote his poem “Eneida” in rich Ukrainian before Shevchenko was even born, was a lot more talented poet. He wrote plays, too, starting this branch of Ukrainian literature. In sharp contrast to Shevchenko, he was not a drunkard. There are many poets and writers in Ukrainian literature who tower above Shevchenko. He is just a second-rate poet and he also wrote third-rate prose (the latter exclusively in Russian).

    BTW, hatred is a strong feeling. Shevchenko does not deserve it. I do not hate, just despise him.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN


    I do not hate, just despise him.
     
    *

    Thanks for the clarity! :-)

    *despise

    SYNONYMS
    detest, hate, loathe, abhor, abominate, execrate, regard with contempt, feel contempt for, shrink from, be repelled by, not be able to bear, not be able to stand, not be able to stomach, find intolerable, deplore, dislike
    scorn, disdain, slight, look down on, heap scorn on, pour scorn on, deride, scoff at, jeer at, sneer at, mock, revile

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  176. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.

    As I did not say that, this is your guilt speaking. My condolences.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    I didn't say you did. I used the word "implication."

    Your dishonesty, again.

  177. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack


    His great hatred towards Shevchenko is very, very strange and inexplicable to me?…..It’s usually a telltale sign of Ukrainaphobia.
     
    I’d say that claiming that Shevchenko is the greatest Ukrainian poet belittles and denigrates Ukrainian literature. E.g., Kotlyarevsky, who wrote his poem “Eneida” in rich Ukrainian before Shevchenko was even born, was a lot more talented poet. He wrote plays, too, starting this branch of Ukrainian literature. In sharp contrast to Shevchenko, he was not a drunkard. There are many poets and writers in Ukrainian literature who tower above Shevchenko. He is just a second-rate poet and he also wrote third-rate prose (the latter exclusively in Russian).

    BTW, hatred is a strong feeling. Shevchenko does not deserve it. I do not hate, just despise him.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    I do not hate, just despise him.

    *

    Thanks for the clarity! 🙂

    *despise

    SYNONYMS
    detest, hate, loathe, abhor, abominate, execrate, regard with contempt, feel contempt for, shrink from, be repelled by, not be able to bear, not be able to stand, not be able to stomach, find intolerable, deplore, dislike
    scorn, disdain, slight, look down on, heap scorn on, pour scorn on, deride, scoff at, jeer at, sneer at, mock, revile

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    In my book you hate someone or something you recognize as important, at least equal to you and/or comparable to the top performers in their occupation. You despise someone or something you consider inferior, not worthy of strong feelings, like hate.

    Replies: @AP

  178. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    Your implication that I am the descendant of Nazi collaborators is another of your many lies.
     
    As I did not say that, this is your guilt speaking. My condolences.

    Replies: @AP

    I didn’t say you did. I used the word “implication.”

    Your dishonesty, again.

  179. @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    morally corrupted by Communism
     
    Simple question to honest commenters, not to the descendants of Nazi collaborators: does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?

    Replies: @AP, @AP

    does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?

    Post-war Germany has been morally corrupt but in a decadent way (overt aggression had been beaten out of the Germans). Several of the founding fathers of post-modernism whose offshoots such as Black Lives Matter movement /Critical Race Theory which plagues the West currently had been Nazi collaborators. If there there is no truth, no morality, everything is “constructed” – than they did nothing wrong.

    The moral corruption of Communism is of course obvious. The 1990s in the former Soviet Union was a perfect demonstration of this. When people raised under Communism were given the freedom that normal people take for granted, they produced a murder rate comparable to that of Detroit or parts of Africa, they produced an HIV epidemic, and they stole everything they could get their hands on. Notably, the parts of the USSR that had the least amount of Communist experience and culture – the Baltics and Western Ukraine – when given the same freedoms, did not do this.

    The explanation cannot be genetic. These peoples are very similar genetically. Nor is it cultural, in the sense that something was just wrong with Russia specifically. By most accounts, the Russian Whites who made it West led good decent lives and contributed enormously to their new homelands. I suspect that if the Far East had managed to become a Japanese protectorate in 1919 and avoided Soviet rule until the 1940s it would have been as decent in the 1990s as were the Baltics and western Ukraine. So Sovok degeneracy is purely an expression of Soviet moral rot. Which we see in Sovok posters here, either in the chronic dishonesty or always thinking about whores by you, or the verbal diarrhea of “Gerard.” Thank God modern Russia is leaving it behind.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    Interesting, How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR, like Khodorkovsky? They stole at least half of what various oligarchs stole in Russia. Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW) for curbing his thievery.

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993. The parliament took the side of the people and impeached Yeltsin. Yeltsin, not being a legitimate president any more, used the military to suppress the revolt in Moscow, spilling a lot of blood. He ordered tanks to shoot at the parliament building, again, murdering quite a few people, and illegally dissolved the parliament. It was an unconstitutional military coup. “Morally superior” Western “democrats” applauded this illegal coup and mayhem.

    There are numerous websites describing grisly corruption scandals in Baltic vaudeville states. Enjoy.

    Replies: @AP, @Jazman

  180. @Mr. Hack
    @AnonFromTN


    I do not hate, just despise him.
     
    *

    Thanks for the clarity! :-)

    *despise

    SYNONYMS
    detest, hate, loathe, abhor, abominate, execrate, regard with contempt, feel contempt for, shrink from, be repelled by, not be able to bear, not be able to stand, not be able to stomach, find intolerable, deplore, dislike
    scorn, disdain, slight, look down on, heap scorn on, pour scorn on, deride, scoff at, jeer at, sneer at, mock, revile

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    In my book you hate someone or something you recognize as important, at least equal to you and/or comparable to the top performers in their occupation. You despise someone or something you consider inferior, not worthy of strong feelings, like hate.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    So you are superior to Taras Shevchenko in your occupation, versus he in his? LOL.

    Granted English is not your first or even second language. Despise is a strong feeling, probably as strong as hatred, however it is not purely hatred but rather mixes hatred with contempt. If you do not feel too strongly about the man, you were probably trying to say that you have contempt for Shevchenko rather than that you despise him.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

  181. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    does Nazism morally corrupt? If not, what’s so good about Nazism (as opposed to communism) that it does not morally corrupt?
     
    Post-war Germany has been morally corrupt but in a decadent way (overt aggression had been beaten out of the Germans). Several of the founding fathers of post-modernism whose offshoots such as Black Lives Matter movement /Critical Race Theory which plagues the West currently had been Nazi collaborators. If there there is no truth, no morality, everything is "constructed" - than they did nothing wrong.

    The moral corruption of Communism is of course obvious. The 1990s in the former Soviet Union was a perfect demonstration of this. When people raised under Communism were given the freedom that normal people take for granted, they produced a murder rate comparable to that of Detroit or parts of Africa, they produced an HIV epidemic, and they stole everything they could get their hands on. Notably, the parts of the USSR that had the least amount of Communist experience and culture - the Baltics and Western Ukraine - when given the same freedoms, did not do this.

    The explanation cannot be genetic. These peoples are very similar genetically. Nor is it cultural, in the sense that something was just wrong with Russia specifically. By most accounts, the Russian Whites who made it West led good decent lives and contributed enormously to their new homelands. I suspect that if the Far East had managed to become a Japanese protectorate in 1919 and avoided Soviet rule until the 1940s it would have been as decent in the 1990s as were the Baltics and western Ukraine. So Sovok degeneracy is purely an expression of Soviet moral rot. Which we see in Sovok posters here, either in the chronic dishonesty or always thinking about whores by you, or the verbal diarrhea of "Gerard." Thank God modern Russia is leaving it behind.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Interesting, How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR, like Khodorkovsky? They stole at least half of what various oligarchs stole in Russia. Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW) for curbing his thievery.

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993. The parliament took the side of the people and impeached Yeltsin. Yeltsin, not being a legitimate president any more, used the military to suppress the revolt in Moscow, spilling a lot of blood. He ordered tanks to shoot at the parliament building, again, murdering quite a few people, and illegally dissolved the parliament. It was an unconstitutional military coup. “Morally superior” Western “democrats” applauded this illegal coup and mayhem.

    There are numerous websites describing grisly corruption scandals in Baltic vaudeville states. Enjoy.

    • Agree: Ano4, Jazman
    • Replies: @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,
     
    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.


    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)
     
    You don't think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.
     
    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    https://i.imgur.com/8VMmlLn.png

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts - both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    Replies: @AP, @AnonFromTN, @Ano4, @Adûnâi

    , @Jazman
    @AnonFromTN

    I remember Milosevic supported Yeltsin opposition 1993 and scum Yeltsin screwed him voting for US proposals at UN

  182. @AnonFromTN
    @Mr. Hack

    In my book you hate someone or something you recognize as important, at least equal to you and/or comparable to the top performers in their occupation. You despise someone or something you consider inferior, not worthy of strong feelings, like hate.

    Replies: @AP

    So you are superior to Taras Shevchenko in your occupation, versus he in his? LOL.

    Granted English is not your first or even second language. Despise is a strong feeling, probably as strong as hatred, however it is not purely hatred but rather mixes hatred with contempt. If you do not feel too strongly about the man, you were probably trying to say that you have contempt for Shevchenko rather than that you despise him.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    you were probably trying to say that you have contempt for Shevchenko rather than that you despise him
     
    You can put it that way, if you prefer. I see Shevchenko for what he was: a middling poet and inferior writer. Not to mention alcoholism and other faults.
  183. @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    Interesting, How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR, like Khodorkovsky? They stole at least half of what various oligarchs stole in Russia. Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW) for curbing his thievery.

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993. The parliament took the side of the people and impeached Yeltsin. Yeltsin, not being a legitimate president any more, used the military to suppress the revolt in Moscow, spilling a lot of blood. He ordered tanks to shoot at the parliament building, again, murdering quite a few people, and illegally dissolved the parliament. It was an unconstitutional military coup. “Morally superior” Western “democrats” applauded this illegal coup and mayhem.

    There are numerous websites describing grisly corruption scandals in Baltic vaudeville states. Enjoy.

    Replies: @AP, @Jazman

    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,

    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.

    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)

    You don’t think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.

    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts – both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    • Replies: @AP
    @AP

    People dead as a result of crime in 2008:

    https://i.imgur.com/hA1ROJP.png

    Follows the 1939 border:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/36/Rzeczpospolita_1922.png

    Effects still evident 17 years after USSR fell.

    Again, note the contrasts between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts. Both were part of the same province of the Russian Empire but at the Treaty of Riga, Rivne became part of Poland and thus avoided a generation of Soviet socialization. Result: Rivne has only 63% as many victims as Zhytomir.

    Galicia had the smallest number of crime deaths in the country.

    , @AnonFromTN
    @AP


    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders
     
    Certainly not, thank goodness. Russian society, even in crime-riddled 1990s, was not full of Khodorkovsky’s, either. Scum represents a small fraction of any society. My point is, that scum did not represent a greater fraction of Soviet society then, say, the US society. Looking at BLM and Antifa hoods, one can even think the opposite is true.
    , @Ano4
    @AP

    Among the first post-Perestroika journalists emulating his Western colleagues style was Vladislav Listiev. His TV show was named Поле чудес (The miracles' field). Anyone raised with Soviet children literature knows that the Miracles Field comes from the Adventures of Buratino tale by Akexeï Tolstoy. Anyone who read this book also knows that the Miracles' Field is located in the Fools' country (Страна дураков).



    When asked about the possible association between the name of his show and the Buratino tale, Listev reportedly replied: "Our country is probably not a country of fools, but as noted by Ilya Ilf it sometimes looks like the country of idiots that have not been frightened (непуганых идиотов)".

    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn't pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain't so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people. Those who survived do not easily trust anyone anymore.

    (Although he was certainly a wise guy, Listiev got killed in 1995. Maybe he should have called his TV show otherwise).

    Replies: @AP

    , @Adûnâi
    @AP

    > Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.

    This is an interesting take. Andrei Lankov, for one, says that the beginnings of capitalism in the DPRK are not coupled with homicidal crime in the slightest, as per his interviews with migrants from northern Korea - when asked whether the roads are safe, they give blank stares and talk about weather. Genetic? Or more successful socialist propaganda?

    Replies: @AP

  184. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,
     
    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.


    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)
     
    You don't think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.
     
    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    https://i.imgur.com/8VMmlLn.png

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts - both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    Replies: @AP, @AnonFromTN, @Ano4, @Adûnâi

    People dead as a result of crime in 2008:

    Follows the 1939 border:

    Effects still evident 17 years after USSR fell.

    Again, note the contrasts between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts. Both were part of the same province of the Russian Empire but at the Treaty of Riga, Rivne became part of Poland and thus avoided a generation of Soviet socialization. Result: Rivne has only 63% as many victims as Zhytomir.

    Galicia had the smallest number of crime deaths in the country.

  185. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,
     
    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.


    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)
     
    You don't think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.
     
    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    https://i.imgur.com/8VMmlLn.png

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts - both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    Replies: @AP, @AnonFromTN, @Ano4, @Adûnâi

    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders

    Certainly not, thank goodness. Russian society, even in crime-riddled 1990s, was not full of Khodorkovsky’s, either. Scum represents a small fraction of any society. My point is, that scum did not represent a greater fraction of Soviet society then, say, the US society. Looking at BLM and Antifa hoods, one can even think the opposite is true.

  186. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    So you are superior to Taras Shevchenko in your occupation, versus he in his? LOL.

    Granted English is not your first or even second language. Despise is a strong feeling, probably as strong as hatred, however it is not purely hatred but rather mixes hatred with contempt. If you do not feel too strongly about the man, you were probably trying to say that you have contempt for Shevchenko rather than that you despise him.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    you were probably trying to say that you have contempt for Shevchenko rather than that you despise him

    You can put it that way, if you prefer. I see Shevchenko for what he was: a middling poet and inferior writer. Not to mention alcoholism and other faults.

  187. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,
     
    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.


    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)
     
    You don't think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.
     
    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    https://i.imgur.com/8VMmlLn.png

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts - both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    Replies: @AP, @AnonFromTN, @Ano4, @Adûnâi

    Among the first post-Perestroika journalists emulating his Western colleagues style was Vladislav Listiev. His TV show was named Поле чудес (The miracles’ field). Anyone raised with Soviet children literature knows that the Miracles Field comes from the Adventures of Buratino tale by Akexeï Tolstoy. Anyone who read this book also knows that the Miracles’ Field is located in the Fools’ country (Страна дураков).

    [MORE]

    When asked about the possible association between the name of his show and the Buratino tale, Listev reportedly replied: “Our country is probably not a country of fools, but as noted by Ilya Ilf it sometimes looks like the country of idiots that have not been frightened (непуганых идиотов)”.

    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn’t pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain’t so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people. Those who survived do not easily trust anyone anymore.

    (Although he was certainly a wise guy, Listiev got killed in 1995. Maybe he should have called his TV show otherwise).

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn’t pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain’t so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.
     
    Were Baltic peoples and Western Ukrainians less naive? I doubt it. There were there simply far fewer killers and criminals among them because their societies had not been as demoralized by Soviet rule due to having experienced it for decades less.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people.
     
    IIRC something like 30% of African American males are criminals. Sadly, it's a huge number, much larger than among other population subgroups. Yet the majority of African American males, 70% or so, are not criminals. But when the numbers of criminals is that large (even if it is a minority of the population) the entire society is basically held hostage by them.

    The majority of Soviet people may not have been criminals but decent people and victims - however the Soviet morals were such that as soon as the Soviet people were given normal freedoms, huge numbers of criminals appeared. Or rather, huge numbers of people socialized by Communism expressed the criminality that developed within themselves under the Communist society as soon as they had the freedom do so. By 1993, Russia's homicide rate was 30.4 per 100,000. This was double or triple Mexico's usual rate - and even slightly higher than Mexico's rate in 2018, it's highest (29.1/100,000).

    As I posted earlier, Zhytomir and Rivne oblasts in Ukraine are the best place in the former USSR to see the impact of Soviet rule on morals and society. Both oblasts had been part of the Volhynian Governate within the Russian Empire. The 20th century saw a natural experiment be conducted on this Governate. Both oblasts have similar demographic profiles, both are Orthodox, and have the same history until 1919. But in 1919 a "treatment" was applied to what is now Zhytomir oblast but not to what is now Rivne oblast. This treatment was 20 years of Communism, an addiotnal generation. Rivne region was annexed to Poland while Zhytomir oblast became part of the Ukrainian SSR. Both became free and relatively lawless after 1990. Here are the effects of the Soviet treatment on the Zhytomir population's morality:

    Killings during the course of a crime:

    https://i.imgur.com/hA1ROJP.png

    Rivne 63% of Zhytomir oblast

    Suicide rate:

    15.4 Rivne, 22.4 Zhytomir: Rivne 69% of Zhytomir

    HIV rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/ZCDdYEr.png

    Rivne 67% of Zhytomir

    Extramarital birth rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/5hU57TS.png

    More than double in Zhytomir vs. Rivne (Rivne 45% of Zhytomir)

    Divorce rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/oDcUZHS.png

    Rivne 78% of Zhytomir

    Abortion percentage, 1999:

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ukraine/ab-ukraineo.html

    Rivne 71% of Zhytomir

    :::::::::::

    Of course, in these areas, the most Sovietized places of all such as Donbas dwarf Zhytomir on these indicators.

    Replies: @Ano4

  188. @AnonFromTN
    @AP

    Interesting, How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR, like Khodorkovsky? They stole at least half of what various oligarchs stole in Russia. Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW) for curbing his thievery.

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993. The parliament took the side of the people and impeached Yeltsin. Yeltsin, not being a legitimate president any more, used the military to suppress the revolt in Moscow, spilling a lot of blood. He ordered tanks to shoot at the parliament building, again, murdering quite a few people, and illegally dissolved the parliament. It was an unconstitutional military coup. “Morally superior” Western “democrats” applauded this illegal coup and mayhem.

    There are numerous websites describing grisly corruption scandals in Baltic vaudeville states. Enjoy.

    Replies: @AP, @Jazman

    I remember Milosevic supported Yeltsin opposition 1993 and scum Yeltsin screwed him voting for US proposals at UN

  189. @Ano4
    @AP

    Among the first post-Perestroika journalists emulating his Western colleagues style was Vladislav Listiev. His TV show was named Поле чудес (The miracles' field). Anyone raised with Soviet children literature knows that the Miracles Field comes from the Adventures of Buratino tale by Akexeï Tolstoy. Anyone who read this book also knows that the Miracles' Field is located in the Fools' country (Страна дураков).



    When asked about the possible association between the name of his show and the Buratino tale, Listev reportedly replied: "Our country is probably not a country of fools, but as noted by Ilya Ilf it sometimes looks like the country of idiots that have not been frightened (непуганых идиотов)".

    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn't pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain't so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people. Those who survived do not easily trust anyone anymore.

    (Although he was certainly a wise guy, Listiev got killed in 1995. Maybe he should have called his TV show otherwise).

    Replies: @AP

    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn’t pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain’t so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.

    Were Baltic peoples and Western Ukrainians less naive? I doubt it. There were there simply far fewer killers and criminals among them because their societies had not been as demoralized by Soviet rule due to having experienced it for decades less.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people.

    IIRC something like 30% of African American males are criminals. Sadly, it’s a huge number, much larger than among other population subgroups. Yet the majority of African American males, 70% or so, are not criminals. But when the numbers of criminals is that large (even if it is a minority of the population) the entire society is basically held hostage by them.

    The majority of Soviet people may not have been criminals but decent people and victims – however the Soviet morals were such that as soon as the Soviet people were given normal freedoms, huge numbers of criminals appeared. Or rather, huge numbers of people socialized by Communism expressed the criminality that developed within themselves under the Communist society as soon as they had the freedom do so. By 1993, Russia’s homicide rate was 30.4 per 100,000. This was double or triple Mexico’s usual rate – and even slightly higher than Mexico’s rate in 2018, it’s highest (29.1/100,000).

    As I posted earlier, Zhytomir and Rivne oblasts in Ukraine are the best place in the former USSR to see the impact of Soviet rule on morals and society. Both oblasts had been part of the Volhynian Governate within the Russian Empire. The 20th century saw a natural experiment be conducted on this Governate. Both oblasts have similar demographic profiles, both are Orthodox, and have the same history until 1919. But in 1919 a “treatment” was applied to what is now Zhytomir oblast but not to what is now Rivne oblast. This treatment was 20 years of Communism, an addiotnal generation. Rivne region was annexed to Poland while Zhytomir oblast became part of the Ukrainian SSR. Both became free and relatively lawless after 1990. Here are the effects of the Soviet treatment on the Zhytomir population’s morality:

    Killings during the course of a crime:

    Rivne 63% of Zhytomir oblast

    Suicide rate:

    15.4 Rivne, 22.4 Zhytomir: Rivne 69% of Zhytomir

    HIV rate:

    Rivne 67% of Zhytomir

    Extramarital birth rate:

    More than double in Zhytomir vs. Rivne (Rivne 45% of Zhytomir)

    Divorce rate:

    Rivne 78% of Zhytomir

    Abortion percentage, 1999:

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ukraine/ab-ukraineo.html

    Rivne 71% of Zhytomir

    :::::::::::

    Of course, in these areas, the most Sovietized places of all such as Donbas dwarf Zhytomir on these indicators.

    • Thanks: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP

    I understand that the statistics you presented are from 2007-2008. This is nearly a generation after the fall of USSR.

    Would you have a compilation of the same statistics for the mid 90ies?

    Also, how does Russian and Belarusian statistics compare with Ukrainian ones in 2007 - 2008?

    Replies: @AP

  190. @AP
    @Ano4


    Russian people were actually very naive in the beginning of the 90ies, they had to learn the hard way and wise up and they had to do it fast. Those who didn’t pass the test got killed or died of despair.

    A lot of them were not prepared to face what was happening. It is easy to kill or rob a naive target, easy to victimize an unsuspecting person. It ain’t so with people who mind their interests and do not trust anyone.
     
    Were Baltic peoples and Western Ukrainians less naive? I doubt it. There were there simply far fewer killers and criminals among them because their societies had not been as demoralized by Soviet rule due to having experienced it for decades less.

    Russians trusted too much, they were too open, to the point of simple mindedness. Those who were cynical and opportunistic made the best of it. A lot of people died. Many of these good, decent people.
     
    IIRC something like 30% of African American males are criminals. Sadly, it's a huge number, much larger than among other population subgroups. Yet the majority of African American males, 70% or so, are not criminals. But when the numbers of criminals is that large (even if it is a minority of the population) the entire society is basically held hostage by them.

    The majority of Soviet people may not have been criminals but decent people and victims - however the Soviet morals were such that as soon as the Soviet people were given normal freedoms, huge numbers of criminals appeared. Or rather, huge numbers of people socialized by Communism expressed the criminality that developed within themselves under the Communist society as soon as they had the freedom do so. By 1993, Russia's homicide rate was 30.4 per 100,000. This was double or triple Mexico's usual rate - and even slightly higher than Mexico's rate in 2018, it's highest (29.1/100,000).

    As I posted earlier, Zhytomir and Rivne oblasts in Ukraine are the best place in the former USSR to see the impact of Soviet rule on morals and society. Both oblasts had been part of the Volhynian Governate within the Russian Empire. The 20th century saw a natural experiment be conducted on this Governate. Both oblasts have similar demographic profiles, both are Orthodox, and have the same history until 1919. But in 1919 a "treatment" was applied to what is now Zhytomir oblast but not to what is now Rivne oblast. This treatment was 20 years of Communism, an addiotnal generation. Rivne region was annexed to Poland while Zhytomir oblast became part of the Ukrainian SSR. Both became free and relatively lawless after 1990. Here are the effects of the Soviet treatment on the Zhytomir population's morality:

    Killings during the course of a crime:

    https://i.imgur.com/hA1ROJP.png

    Rivne 63% of Zhytomir oblast

    Suicide rate:

    15.4 Rivne, 22.4 Zhytomir: Rivne 69% of Zhytomir

    HIV rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/ZCDdYEr.png

    Rivne 67% of Zhytomir

    Extramarital birth rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/5hU57TS.png

    More than double in Zhytomir vs. Rivne (Rivne 45% of Zhytomir)

    Divorce rate:

    https://i.imgur.com/oDcUZHS.png

    Rivne 78% of Zhytomir

    Abortion percentage, 1999:

    http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/ukraine/ab-ukraineo.html

    Rivne 71% of Zhytomir

    :::::::::::

    Of course, in these areas, the most Sovietized places of all such as Donbas dwarf Zhytomir on these indicators.

    Replies: @Ano4

    I understand that the statistics you presented are from 2007-2008. This is nearly a generation after the fall of USSR.

    Would you have a compilation of the same statistics for the mid 90ies?

    Also, how does Russian and Belarusian statistics compare with Ukrainian ones in 2007 – 2008?

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    I understand that the statistics you presented are from 2007-2008. This is nearly a generation after the fall of USSR...Would you have a compilation of the same statistics for the mid 90ies?
     
    The statistics involving crime were from 2007, but for out of wedlock births were from 1995:

    https://i.imgur.com/5hU57TS.png

    And for abortion were from 1999. (abortion rate in Rivne was 71% that of Zhytomir).

    There's a clean line separating the parts of Ukraine that experienced Sovietization in 1920 and those that avoided it until the 1940s.

    The 1990s were not online as much as later so the information is not as easy to google.

    Also, how does Russian and Belarusian statistics compare with Ukrainian ones in 2007 – 2008?
     
    Much of Belarus also avoided Soviet rule until the 1940s; I found less data but the pattern follows Ukraine's:

    1939 border:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Belarus_today_%26_Belorussian_SSR_in_1940.png

    Belarus crime follows the 1939 border less cleanly than in Ukraine for some reason (perhaps the Nazi-killings were more disruptive and there was more population transfers), but there is still a trend of the western parts having less crime.

    Crime rate in Belarus (from relevant wiki page)

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/Crime_rate_in_Belarus_%28%D0%A3%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8C_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D0%B8%29.png/350px-Crime_rate_in_Belarus_%28%D0%A3%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%8C_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%83%D0%BF%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D0%B8%29.png

    Abortion rate 2010:

    https://i.imgur.com/AgycxuV.jpg

    Grodno, Brest and Minsk oblasts (a big piece of Minsk oblast, but not Minsk city, had been part of Poland before World War II) had lower aborttion rates than the rest.

    ::::::::::

    As for Russian statistics, they look worse than Ukraine as a whole but not worse than eastern Ukraine IIRC.
  191. @AP
    @Ano4


    It is better.
     
    I would't doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:

    https://knoema.com/atlas/topics/Demographics/Mortality/Crude-death-rate

    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:

    https://www.prb.org/countries-with-the-oldest-populations/

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad, but also Russia having young Caucasians within its borders.

    Adjusting for age, Russia's death rate is probably some small fraction of a % lower than Ukraine's. It's a stupid thing for a Russian to gloat about.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Gerard-Mandela

    FFS.LOL. Where do start with this sociopathic garbage ( Karlin are you reading – because why do you allow this nonsense?)

    I would doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:

    ….is like saying a 5.2 magnitude earthquake is very similar to 10.7 earthquake.

    I’m refusing to look at your “link” on point of principle , because I know it is sociopathic, instantaneous BS – but because I know its BS, and am relatively well informed on the subject anyway – I can safely know without even looking at your link that:

    1.Russia’s death rate is closer to the west/EU average than it is to Ukraine’s death rate – effectively ending the argument and killing your (already) BS, disingenuous point

    2.Russia’s death rate has rapidly improved in the last decade – Ukraine’s has remained a disaster from 1991 to now……with no sign of escape

    3.Russia’s death rate is closer to Germany’s than it is to Ukraine’s ( maybe even better than Germany’s)

    4.Most of the countries in the west with lower death rate ( though , again, these rates are much closer to Russia’s than Russia’s is to Ukrops) also have a much lower birth rate – population loss is of course a calculation of the two of these factors

    5.Russia’s death rate compared to Ukrops is at such a much better level ……that it’s superior to the level of Japan’s life expectancy relative to Russia’s life expectancy in the 90’s.

    6.The most important thing in all this? Russia has generated a very high and improved birth rate . As you are such a discredited tramp I feel it’s safe to make the risky claim, without checking – that Russia has the highest birth rate of any white country on the planet. At worst, I know it is near the top and by a large distance the most improved. It’s a sign to Russian society that the political system is working – the complete inverse of the Ukrop disaster.
    Ukrops death rate is a catastrophe, it’s birth rate…..even more a catastrophe.

    Literally , you have chosen the worst subject to use for your demented POS fantasies – exacerbating your error further is that you don’t speak the language or literally known anything about the land or actually have any interest in the people on this land – which makes you further propagate BS because you are ignorant at starting point.

    You can’t get worse than the argumentation you have taken. It’s like somebody who hates Usain Bolt paying millions for Kompromat on him……and then use it to try and discredit him for his speed at running. That is the level of stupidity I am encountering here

    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:

    1. Difference in percentage is minimal, and completely irrelevant to the point
    2. If I remember correctly, before pension reform started last year, there was 48 million pensioners in Russia out of 147 million people – there is nowhere near that percentage of pensioners in ukrop population, so their working population as % of population is much higher ( not to forgot the cretinism in not accounting for the much higher birth rates in Russia affecting over-65 year %)
    3. Percentage, though irrelevant to the point, is almost certainly a fake from the Ukrop side

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad,

    lololololololol!!

    AGAIN…I know without wasting time looking at your insidious filth link that Ukraine’s death rate has remained very high before, during and after implementation of the visa-travel regime from the Association agreement.Literally no link to the two things in any way.
    I don’t think going to EU affects the stats because they included all Ukrop citizens irrelevant of where they die – just as MH17 victims in 2014 won’t go into ukrop death rates stats that year. Anyway they are faking their population statistics you idiot – not including the real population loss makes the death rates look smaller than it is.

    As I have said before., “normal” Ukrop nationalists do not make the same retarded false arguments with Russians on the internet on the same issues that you do- because different to fantasists like you – they don’t take pleasure in their peoples mass extinction and have some idea of what is going on in the country . Different to you, despite their idioticness – they do have goals in life higher than somewhere between those of an amoeba and those of a slug. Of course they lie and are full of BS because they are evil and stupid….but at least they do it on issues that are subjective (history and “democracy” and BS on “what Putin is thinking”) and would never try to propagate social disasters for them as successes .

    This weirdo behavior of yours is perfectly typical of North American sub-roma banderatards who have done absolutely NOTHING to help the country in 30 years, only curse it with their presence- that’s because I don’t think there has ever existed such a deranged diaspora in history that has that level of disinterest in their “Mother country’s” improvement.

    You’re a genuinely sick individual ( Karlin- I am self-regulating and will reduce the, justified, volume of negative commentary at this ******* in any following comments). You obviously use enough time in “research” in your laughable waste of a life to fully know the statistics of the points I made about births and deaths….but despite that you have premeditated done this insidious and deceitful comical garbage “defending” Ukraine’s atrocious death statistics ( or any social-economic data in ukropia)

    • Replies: @AP
    @Gerard-Mandela

    LOL, so much desperation by you.

    I already demonstrated that you don't know anything about Russia and Ukraine's birth rate and fertility rates:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/ukro-khazars-trying-to-appropriate-russian-culture/#comment-4158452

    So now about death rates.

    As I wrote, Ukraine's is worse than Russia's but Ukraine has an older population than does Russia and this accounts for much, though not all, of the difference. Ukraine has a death rate of 15.17 (second only to Bulgaria's, but Bulgaria has more old people than Ukraine) to Russia's 12.76 which is 10th worst in the world. Russia's death rate is also horrible so your gloating about Ukraine's death rate is the usual stupidity. Moreover, Ukraine's death rate is higher in the East so you are basically laughing at your fellow Sovoks dying at a high rate.

    You wrote:


    Russia’s death rate is closer to Germany’s than it is to Ukraine’s ( maybe even better than Germany’s)
     
    I should hope so because Germany is a lot older than Russia. 14.6% of Russians are over 65, compared to 21.4% of Germans! Yet Germany still has a death rate lower than Russia's - 11.36 compared to Russia's 12.76.

    Let's compare Russia to countries with a similar percentage of people over 65 - New Zealand, Uruguay, Cuba, Iceland, Belarus (all within .5% of Russia).

    Russia death rate: 12.76

    Belarus: 12.50

    Uruguay: 9.46
    Cuba: 9.15
    New Zealand: 7.04
    Iceland: 6.75

    So in terms of death rate, Russia is a lot closer to Ukraine than it is to other countries with a similar % of old people. A Russian bragging about Ukraine's high death rate doesn't know his own country.

  192. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    You do realise this is largely a function of elderly as % of population. I suspect ethnic Russia isn’t much better.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN, @Gerard-Mandela, @Anatoly Karlin

    Correct. That said, it’s noteworthy that Russia’s LE has overtaken Ukraine since the Maidan, reversing a pattern that has existed since the first records began in the late 19th century.

    • Replies: @Gerard-Mandela
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Not correct ( how the f**k could it be?). Percentage of pensioners ( or at least those receiving pensions in Russia) is far more in Russia than it is in Ukraine, as both % of population and % of adult population.
    That is without even thinking that the only ukrop to do these placebo " reforms" was Yanukovich who started the pension reform in ukraine for women many years before Russia started..therefore further increasing the disparity between the countries in working population vs retired population.
    And of course - children born in Russia since, say, 2008-10 and after is infinitely higher in Russia than it is Ukraine....making the entire premise of "more young workers looking for work abroad" even more idiotic

    You would initially assume that even this clown would know that the retirement ages in Ukraine and Russia are not the same as in US - but even that he doesn't know judging by the post

  193. @AP
    @AnonFromTN

    Since Ukraine's GDP didn't shrink 50 times, IT industry has grown significantly.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    This is also correct. That said, I’m not sure it’s worth writing home about. As has been discussed here a few times, the combination of high human capital + bad institutions => stunning growth in the IT industry, because a video game studio doesn’t require much in the way of capital investment. It is very good for the programmers who get to enjoy near-Western wages in a much cheaper (and less diverse, if they tilt that way) locale, not that relevant to the country as a whole, the companies in question are hardly Google, they skimp on taxes, are frequently registered in places like Cyprus anyway (this is true of GSC, the legendary creators of STALKER – incidentally, they relocated to Cyprus months after the Maidan). In fairness, as per above, this is not a specifically Ukrainian problem, e.g. World of Tanks is more of a Cypriot company than a Belorussian one.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Anatoly Karlin


    That said, I’m not sure it’s worth writing home about. As has been discussed here a few times, the combination of high human capital + bad institutions => stunning growth in the IT industry, because a video game studio doesn’t require much in the way of capital investment. It is very good for the programmers who get to enjoy near-Western wages in a much cheaper (and less diverse, if they tilt that way) locale, not that relevant to the country as a whole, the companies in question are hardly Google, they skimp on taxes, are frequently registered in places like Cyprus anyway (this is true of GSC, the legendary
     
    It is a multi-billion dollar industry in Ukraine ($5 billion revenue in 2019) employing 200,000 people and is growing significantly. It's not just video game studios, there are large outsourcing farms for programming and R & D for IBM etc.

    You are correct that this industry doesn't pay much taxes directly, and doesn't result in a lot of physical plants or infrastructure other than office space. OTOH it's probably fueling much of the construction industry in places like Lviv. I suspect a lot of the new suburban housing subdivisions, malls, and stores are fueled by IT money. That probably generates tax revenue.
  194. @Anatoly Karlin
    @AP

    Correct. That said, it's noteworthy that Russia's LE has overtaken Ukraine since the Maidan, reversing a pattern that has existed since the first records began in the late 19th century.

    Replies: @Gerard-Mandela

    Not correct ( how the f**k could it be?). Percentage of pensioners ( or at least those receiving pensions in Russia) is far more in Russia than it is in Ukraine, as both % of population and % of adult population.
    That is without even thinking that the only ukrop to do these placebo ” reforms” was Yanukovich who started the pension reform in ukraine for women many years before Russia started..therefore further increasing the disparity between the countries in working population vs retired population.
    And of course – children born in Russia since, say, 2008-10 and after is infinitely higher in Russia than it is Ukraine….making the entire premise of “more young workers looking for work abroad” even more idiotic

    You would initially assume that even this clown would know that the retirement ages in Ukraine and Russia are not the same as in US – but even that he doesn’t know judging by the post

  195. @Ano4
    @AP

    I understand that the statistics you presented are from 2007-2008. This is nearly a generation after the fall of USSR.

    Would you have a compilation of the same statistics for the mid 90ies?

    Also, how does Russian and Belarusian statistics compare with Ukrainian ones in 2007 - 2008?

    Replies: @AP

    I understand that the statistics you presented are from 2007-2008. This is nearly a generation after the fall of USSR…Would you have a compilation of the same statistics for the mid 90ies?

    The statistics involving crime were from 2007, but for out of wedlock births were from 1995:

    And for abortion were from 1999. (abortion rate in Rivne was 71% that of Zhytomir).

    There’s a clean line separating the parts of Ukraine that experienced Sovietization in 1920 and those that avoided it until the 1940s.

    The 1990s were not online as much as later so the information is not as easy to google.

    Also, how does Russian and Belarusian statistics compare with Ukrainian ones in 2007 – 2008?

    Much of Belarus also avoided Soviet rule until the 1940s; I found less data but the pattern follows Ukraine’s:

    1939 border:

    Belarus crime follows the 1939 border less cleanly than in Ukraine for some reason (perhaps the Nazi-killings were more disruptive and there was more population transfers), but there is still a trend of the western parts having less crime.

    Crime rate in Belarus (from relevant wiki page)

    Abortion rate 2010:

    Grodno, Brest and Minsk oblasts (a big piece of Minsk oblast, but not Minsk city, had been part of Poland before World War II) had lower aborttion rates than the rest.

    ::::::::::

    As for Russian statistics, they look worse than Ukraine as a whole but not worse than eastern Ukraine IIRC.

    • Thanks: Ano4, Mr. Hack
  196. @Anatoly Karlin
    @AP

    This is also correct. That said, I'm not sure it's worth writing home about. As has been discussed here a few times, the combination of high human capital + bad institutions => stunning growth in the IT industry, because a video game studio doesn't require much in the way of capital investment. It is very good for the programmers who get to enjoy near-Western wages in a much cheaper (and less diverse, if they tilt that way) locale, not that relevant to the country as a whole, the companies in question are hardly Google, they skimp on taxes, are frequently registered in places like Cyprus anyway (this is true of GSC, the legendary creators of STALKER - incidentally, they relocated to Cyprus months after the Maidan). In fairness, as per above, this is not a specifically Ukrainian problem, e.g. World of Tanks is more of a Cypriot company than a Belorussian one.

    Replies: @AP

    That said, I’m not sure it’s worth writing home about. As has been discussed here a few times, the combination of high human capital + bad institutions => stunning growth in the IT industry, because a video game studio doesn’t require much in the way of capital investment. It is very good for the programmers who get to enjoy near-Western wages in a much cheaper (and less diverse, if they tilt that way) locale, not that relevant to the country as a whole, the companies in question are hardly Google, they skimp on taxes, are frequently registered in places like Cyprus anyway (this is true of GSC, the legendary

    It is a multi-billion dollar industry in Ukraine ($5 billion revenue in 2019) employing 200,000 people and is growing significantly. It’s not just video game studios, there are large outsourcing farms for programming and R & D for IBM etc.

    You are correct that this industry doesn’t pay much taxes directly, and doesn’t result in a lot of physical plants or infrastructure other than office space. OTOH it’s probably fueling much of the construction industry in places like Lviv. I suspect a lot of the new suburban housing subdivisions, malls, and stores are fueled by IT money. That probably generates tax revenue.

  197. @Gerard-Mandela
    @AP

    FFS.LOL. Where do start with this sociopathic garbage ( Karlin are you reading - because why do you allow this nonsense?)


    I would doubt it, but the difference is probably very small, and too small for a Russian to gloat about.

    Ukraine has the second highest death rate in the world, 15.17/1,000. Russia is in tenth place, 12.76/1000:
     

    ....is like saying a 5.2 magnitude earthquake is very similar to 10.7 earthquake.

    I'm refusing to look at your "link" on point of principle , because I know it is sociopathic, instantaneous BS - but because I know its BS, and am relatively well informed on the subject anyway - I can safely know without even looking at your link that:

    1.Russia's death rate is closer to the west/EU average than it is to Ukraine's death rate - effectively ending the argument and killing your (already) BS, disingenuous point

    2.Russia's death rate has rapidly improved in the last decade - Ukraine's has remained a disaster from 1991 to now......with no sign of escape

    3.Russia's death rate is closer to Germany's than it is to Ukraine's ( maybe even better than Germany's)

    4.Most of the countries in the west with lower death rate ( though , again, these rates are much closer to Russia's than Russia's is to Ukrops) also have a much lower birth rate - population loss is of course a calculation of the two of these factors

    5.Russia's death rate compared to Ukrops is at such a much better level ......that it's superior to the level of Japan's life expectancy relative to Russia's life expectancy in the 90's.

    6.The most important thing in all this? Russia has generated a very high and improved birth rate . As you are such a discredited tramp I feel it's safe to make the risky claim, without checking - that Russia has the highest birth rate of any white country on the planet. At worst, I know it is near the top and by a large distance the most improved. It's a sign to Russian society that the political system is working - the complete inverse of the Ukrop disaster.
    Ukrops death rate is a catastrophe, it's birth rate.....even more a catastrophe.

    Literally , you have chosen the worst subject to use for your demented POS fantasies - exacerbating your error further is that you don't speak the language or literally known anything about the land or actually have any interest in the people on this land - which makes you further propagate BS because you are ignorant at starting point.

    You can't get worse than the argumentation you have taken. It's like somebody who hates Usain Bolt paying millions for Kompromat on him......and then use it to try and discredit him for his speed at running. That is the level of stupidity I am encountering here


    But 16.5% of Ukrainians are over 65, compared to 14.6% of Russians:
     
    1. Difference in percentage is minimal, and completely irrelevant to the point
    2. If I remember correctly, before pension reform started last year, there was 48 million pensioners in Russia out of 147 million people - there is nowhere near that percentage of pensioners in ukrop population, so their working population as % of population is much higher ( not to forgot the cretinism in not accounting for the much higher birth rates in Russia affecting over-65 year %)
    3. Percentage, though irrelevant to the point, is almost certainly a fake from the Ukrop side

    I suspect a lot of this has to do not only with Ukrainians having the opportunity to easily work abroad,
     
    lololololololol!!

    AGAIN...I know without wasting time looking at your insidious filth link that Ukraine's death rate has remained very high before, during and after implementation of the visa-travel regime from the Association agreement.Literally no link to the two things in any way.
    I don't think going to EU affects the stats because they included all Ukrop citizens irrelevant of where they die - just as MH17 victims in 2014 won't go into ukrop death rates stats that year. Anyway they are faking their population statistics you idiot - not including the real population loss makes the death rates look smaller than it is.

    As I have said before., "normal" Ukrop nationalists do not make the same retarded false arguments with Russians on the internet on the same issues that you do- because different to fantasists like you - they don't take pleasure in their peoples mass extinction and have some idea of what is going on in the country . Different to you, despite their idioticness - they do have goals in life higher than somewhere between those of an amoeba and those of a slug. Of course they lie and are full of BS because they are evil and stupid....but at least they do it on issues that are subjective (history and "democracy" and BS on "what Putin is thinking") and would never try to propagate social disasters for them as successes .

    This weirdo behavior of yours is perfectly typical of North American sub-roma banderatards who have done absolutely NOTHING to help the country in 30 years, only curse it with their presence- that's because I don't think there has ever existed such a deranged diaspora in history that has that level of disinterest in their "Mother country's" improvement.

    You're a genuinely sick individual ( Karlin- I am self-regulating and will reduce the, justified, volume of negative commentary at this ******* in any following comments). You obviously use enough time in "research" in your laughable waste of a life to fully know the statistics of the points I made about births and deaths....but despite that you have premeditated done this insidious and deceitful comical garbage "defending" Ukraine's atrocious death statistics ( or any social-economic data in ukropia)

    Replies: @AP

    LOL, so much desperation by you.

    I already demonstrated that you don’t know anything about Russia and Ukraine’s birth rate and fertility rates:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/ukro-khazars-trying-to-appropriate-russian-culture/#comment-4158452

    So now about death rates.

    As I wrote, Ukraine’s is worse than Russia’s but Ukraine has an older population than does Russia and this accounts for much, though not all, of the difference. Ukraine has a death rate of 15.17 (second only to Bulgaria’s, but Bulgaria has more old people than Ukraine) to Russia’s 12.76 which is 10th worst in the world. Russia’s death rate is also horrible so your gloating about Ukraine’s death rate is the usual stupidity. Moreover, Ukraine’s death rate is higher in the East so you are basically laughing at your fellow Sovoks dying at a high rate.

    You wrote:

    Russia’s death rate is closer to Germany’s than it is to Ukraine’s ( maybe even better than Germany’s)

    I should hope so because Germany is a lot older than Russia. 14.6% of Russians are over 65, compared to 21.4% of Germans! Yet Germany still has a death rate lower than Russia’s – 11.36 compared to Russia’s 12.76.

    Let’s compare Russia to countries with a similar percentage of people over 65 – New Zealand, Uruguay, Cuba, Iceland, Belarus (all within .5% of Russia).

    Russia death rate: 12.76

    Belarus: 12.50

    Uruguay: 9.46
    Cuba: 9.15
    New Zealand: 7.04
    Iceland: 6.75

    So in terms of death rate, Russia is a lot closer to Ukraine than it is to other countries with a similar % of old people. A Russian bragging about Ukraine’s high death rate doesn’t know his own country.

  198. @AP
    @AnonFromTN


    How do you explain then that Western thieves, like Browder, showed themselves to be the same lowly scum as the thieves who grew up in the USSR,
     
    Western (or Baltic, or Western Ukrainian) society is not full of Browders but Browder right felt at home in 1990s post-Soviet Russia.

    Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.


    Browder is still sore at Putin (who grew up in the USSR, BTW)
     
    You don't think Putin who came out of the crime den of Leningrad is corrupt?

    Russians (who grew up in the USSR) revolted against that widespread thievery and compradore Yeltsin regime as early as 1993.
     
    In 1993 Russians with their Soviet morality killed each other as twice higher rate than Mexicans. The further from the USSR Russia goes, the better it gets.

    Serious crime in Ukraine in 2010. Look how it follows the 1939 border:

    https://i.imgur.com/8VMmlLn.png

    Note the difference between Rivne and Zhytomir oblasts - both had been part of the same guberniya in 1919. Only Soviet rule separated them.

    Replies: @AP, @AnonFromTN, @Ano4, @Adûnâi

    > Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.

    This is an interesting take. Andrei Lankov, for one, says that the beginnings of capitalism in the DPRK are not coupled with homicidal crime in the slightest, as per his interviews with migrants from northern Korea – when asked whether the roads are safe, they give blank stares and talk about weather. Genetic? Or more successful socialist propaganda?

    • Replies: @AP
    @Adûnâi


    the beginnings of capitalism in the DPRK are not coupled with homicidal crime in the slightest
     
    I don't know enough about North Korea to comment much. Their police are still intact, I would imagine. The issue in EE wasn't capitalism but the breakdown of the repressive state, which enabled people to express their morality (among other things) freely. When they were unshackled, the least Sovietized ones did not kill one another and engage in other immoral activities nearly as much as the ones whose morality was, collectively, ruined by the communists more.
  199. @Adûnâi
    @AP

    > Rates of homicide, HIV etc. in 1990s Soviet Russia versus Baltic Republics, Western Ukraine, or Europe tell us about society-wide morality.

    This is an interesting take. Andrei Lankov, for one, says that the beginnings of capitalism in the DPRK are not coupled with homicidal crime in the slightest, as per his interviews with migrants from northern Korea - when asked whether the roads are safe, they give blank stares and talk about weather. Genetic? Or more successful socialist propaganda?

    Replies: @AP

    the beginnings of capitalism in the DPRK are not coupled with homicidal crime in the slightest

    I don’t know enough about North Korea to comment much. Their police are still intact, I would imagine. The issue in EE wasn’t capitalism but the breakdown of the repressive state, which enabled people to express their morality (among other things) freely. When they were unshackled, the least Sovietized ones did not kill one another and engage in other immoral activities nearly as much as the ones whose morality was, collectively, ruined by the communists more.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS