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
How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Putin Again
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL 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 once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The title is a bit of an exaggeration.

Even back in 2010, there was plenty to criticize Putin for, and since then, the details haven’t even changed that much so far as I’m concerned (e.g. corruption, bureaucracy, white elephants). And it’s not that I have been unremittingly anti-Putin in the past few years, regardless of the “powerful takes” of random sovoks and the more rabid Putinistas.

That said, there’s no question that my personal “approval rating” of Putin fell from around 75% during the 2008-2013 period, which peaked at close to 90% during the excitement of the Russian Spring in early 2014, to perhaps just 50%-60% during the ensuing period of never-ending zradas on the Donbass Front, the incessant persecutions under 282, and Putin’s own increasingly evident senility.

Typical articles from the former period:

Typical articles from the latter period:

***

The Three Faces of Putin: VVP, putlet, PUTLER!

During 2008-2013, he was Putin – a strong, reasonably effective leader; not a visionary like Peter the Great, but at least a solid, state-building Ivan III. This was reflected in his initials, VVP – which translate to “GDP” in Russian. During the 2000-2014 period, this is exactly what Putin was defined by: Raising the VVP, sprouting malls, consumerism. This might seem crass and materialistic, but only to people in societies that were much richer than Russia thanks to their luck in avoiding Communism. We want what we don’t have. There’s little room for developing spiritual and thymotic values on an empty belly.

In 2014, Putin became PUTLER!*

But soon after the height of his triumphs, he started regressing into a pathetic putlet – so much so that I even ended up voting for Zhirinovsky in protest.

However, the failures in the Ukraine regardless, there have been so many substantive changes for the better in the past year that I am revising his status back to standard issue Putin.

1. Neoliberal Reforms

Putin raising the pension age was a truly heroic and necessary step that demonstrated that he still has vitality and the will to do the right thing, regardless of the wailing of the mob.

Though he did eventually roll back the target retirement age for women to 60 from 63, which was pretty weak.

Nonetheless, this is a very encouraging contrast to the example of Poland, where the retirement age has been reduced by the conservative populists of PiS to the detriment of its long-term fiscal outlook.

This is on the background of raising Russia’s position in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business rankings from 120th to 31st between 2012 and 2018. An unsung achievement that will benefit Russia in the years to come.

2. More Science Funding

One of my biggest peeves with policy in the past decade specifically is that the state of Russian science and R&D has been pretty lamentable – see my article on that.

Though one can’t blame everything on that, the paucity of funding played a significant part. Not clear how one can expect stellar results when Roskomnadzor (the Internet censorship authority that has followed up its blocking of Telegram with a block on Sci-Hub and a bunch of torrenting sites – so much for my suggestions of making Russia into a pirate heaven) gets 10% as much funding as the entire Russian Academy of Sciences (which accounts for about 40% of Russian science production).

However, things are looking up. Researcher salaries were almost doubled in 2018. For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, academia is again a financially viable profession.

3. Ongoing Destruction of Federalism

As I have often pointed out, Russia is more Russian (82%-85%) than the “Jewish state” of Israel is actually Jewish (75%), so why do we have to pretend we are a “multinational” federation? Unlike the US or Switzerland, Russia was not constituted as a federation, a set of independent states that voluntarily joined up in a union while reserving some of their own laws, specific privileges, etc. Russia was always an empire, and it should act as one. And while much work remains to be done in this sphere, there have been at least a couple of concrete and substantial improvements.

First, there were legal changes that made the learning of ethnic minority languages in Russia’s national republics voluntary. This had the biggest effects in Tatarstan, where Russians (Bashkirs, etc.) previously had to learn Tatar. It is bizarre that non-Tatar pupils had to waste hundreds of hours of their lives learning a pointless language thanks basically to sovok-era borders and it is great that this is no longer the case, even if it did make Tatar bureaucrats very sad.

Second, the local, crony powerbreakers of Dagestan have been cleaned out and replaced with a “colonial” administration disproportionately composed of Russians and Laks (a traditionally more modernized and pro-Russian ethnicity). While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation, if they have to stay, it is best that they serve some purpose instead of constituting a bottomless money pit feeding local elites.

4. Immigration Reform

The latest policy moves on immigration reform are highly encouraging. I have written about this in greater detail in previous posts, so I will not dwell long here. But to cut a long story short, current suggestions are are both pro-human capital and pro-Russian, which also makes them implicitly anti-Ukraine. As I pointed out, PUTLER! might as well have been reading my blog.

Another law easing restrictions on asylum policy has also been passed. Unfortunately, this was too late for Olena Boyko, but hopefully the endless ghastly sagas of pro-Russian Ukrainians getting deported straight into Ukrainian jails for “migration violations” can finally come to an end.

5. White Revivalism

The past few years have seen a steady diminution of official identification with the Soviet era in favor of Tsarist and White symbology. In recent months, prominent monuments to Ivan III, Alexander III, and Solzhenitsyn have gone up.

Most strikingly, in a recent competition over the naming of Murmansk Airport, victory went to Nicholas II, the founder of the city, over Ivan Papanin, a Soviet polar explorer who committed atrocities while serving the Bolsheviks during the Civil War.

Though its questionable to what extent this is something driven by the authorities and to what extent it is a natural development, but provincial cities have been getting nicer and more beautified since 2014, despite a long recession.

6. Decriminalization of Article 282

Putin personally submitted a bill to soften Article 282, Russia’s hate speech law. Once again, it is good to see my blog is being read and acted upon at the very highest levels.

Caveat: As usual, this is a halfway measure. It only decriminalized Article 282, so one can still receive a modest fine for “hateful” speech; moreover, if you repeat the offense within a year, it becomes a criminal offense. Still, for all practical purposes, this removes the ability of the residual sovok swine that still dominate the Russian judiciary to jail Russians for saying things like “it’s time to do away with this strange economic system” (Konstantin Krylov), “the great Russian people” (Dmitry Bobrov), and quoting statistics on who subsidized who during the Soviet era (Roman Yushkov).

7. Regathering the Russian Lands

Not much to be done about the Ukraine by now, but there have been some very encouraging developments on the Belorussian sector in recent months.

Honestly, if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.

***

HAIL PUTLER!

Given this impressive record over the past year, and especially the past few months, I am going to start toning down my criticism of Putin.

Indeed, while Putin’s approval rating has fallen to 60% from 80% because normies were sad over losing a few of their gibsmedats, my personal approval of him has crept up from 50%-60% during 2015-2018 back to a solid 70-75%.

True, much remains to be done for Russia to truly become a national state. In my world, all the ethnic republics and oblasts will be replaced with gubernias; all the Lenin statues will be toppled, all the Lenin and Soviet streets renamed; there will be open borders (or no borders) between Russia, Belorussia, and the Ukraine; and it will be the judges and prosecutors who imprisoned people on 282 who will themselves be sitting in Arctic penal colonies.

But Rome wasn’t built in a day.

For now, I am once again ready to serve as “ein strammer Putin-soldat.” Hail Putler!

***

* By PUTLER!, for those very slow people unable or unwilling to catch irony, I mean in the sense that svidomy Ukrainians imagine Putin – not a literal Russian Hitler.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Nationalism, Politics, Russia, Vladimir Putin 
Hide 318 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anon[422] • Disclaimer says:

    With Belarus, I think Russia should stop feeding the limitrophes. This applies even more to places like Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Paying Bat’ka for love with oil needs to stop.

    Merger with Belarus would inevitably lead Russia to dealing with local svidomism. Is bulba dictator going to serve Belarus to Putler without svidomism? I think not…

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now... perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it's far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.
  2. @Anon
    With Belarus, I think Russia should stop feeding the limitrophes. This applies even more to places like Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. Paying Bat'ka for love with oil needs to stop.

    Merger with Belarus would inevitably lead Russia to dealing with local svidomism. Is bulba dictator going to serve Belarus to Putler without svidomism? I think not...

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now… perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it’s far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Dante
    How likely is it in your opinion that Belorussia will join Russia and when might it come about also whats the popular opinion in Russia itself for this ?
    Also do you think the Donetsk & Luhansk Peoples Repubublics will eventually join Russia when it becomes obvious to everyone that they will not return to the Ukraine and again is this popular in Russia with the general public ?

    With 9.5 Million in Belorussia and I believe 3.8 Million in the DPR & LPR there is immediately a huge gain in population if nothing else.

    Thanks
    , @AP

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.
     
    This seems about right. Not interested in full union, but happy with customs union and historical/cultural congruence. But is this stable, or changing? Are they drifting further apart?
    , @Mr. XYZ

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.
     
    Do you have a source for this, please?

    Also, I think that there was a very real possibility of Belarus joining Russia in the late 1990s when Lukashenko believed that he would eventually have the opportunity to be the leader of a joint Russian-Belarusian state in the event of a union. However, Lukashenko appears to have cooled on this idea after Putin came to power in Russia and consolidated his power there.

    In turn, this raises an interesting question--would Belarusian elites actually want to be governors, provincial administrators, and provincial bureaucrats in a joint Russian-Belarusian state or would they prefer to maintain an independent Belarus in order to be kings in their own house? In the case of the Donbass, after the Maidan Revolution, it was clear that they were going to be provincial bureaucrats in either Ukraine or Russia in any case; in Belarus, on the other hand, the elites actually have the choice between being kings in their own house and being Russian provincial bureaucrats.

    , @Mr. XYZ
    Are these Belarusian polls an exception to the general trend? :

    https://belarusdigest.com/story/do-belarusians-want-to-join-the-eu/

    The polls in the link above show a gradual increase in Belarusian support for European integration in the early 21st century.

    Also, for what it's worth, I actually am somewhat attached to the idea of an independent Belarus due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life). In addition to my Russian and Jewish ancestry, I am also--to my knowledge--a quarter Belarusian. Thus, there is some sentimental attachment to Belarus on my own part.

    Plus, Belarus would probably--like Ukraine--be more useful being a part of the no-Muslim bloc in the EU than a part of Russia. After all, Belarus would provide Intermarium with strategic depth. (At least, that would probably be AP's attitude on this issue.)

  3. Honestly, if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.

    True, true. And well said.

    Now, some people might wonder just what you can do with 17,332,785 square km that you can’t do with 17,125,191 square km, but they don’t get that it’s a matter of honor.

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to – at least – recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.

    If the nation can’t live with honor, then it will have to die with honor.

    If that’s sad, don’t blame me – I didn’t write the rules.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I'm concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn't have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don't want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.
    , @Stavros H
    Belarus is not just some random landmass. It's home to 10 million Russians and its territory is Russia's western part. It would be a disaster if it fell into the "loving" hands of Guy Verhofstadt/Merkel/etc as did Ukraine.

    "if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state."

    -> This times 10000000
    , @Swedish Family

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to – at least – recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.
     
    This is Russian reunification Karlin is writing of, not some barbarous Reconquista. It goes without saying that it must never involve bloodshed. Still, there remains the question of getting Lithuania to cede its "Polish Corridor" that separates Kaliningrad from the Russian heartlands.
  4. @silviosilver

    Honestly, if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.
     
    True, true. And well said.

    Now, some people might wonder just what you can do with 17,332,785 square km that you can't do with 17,125,191 square km, but they don't get that it's a matter of honor.

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to - at least - recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.

    If the nation can't live with honor, then it will have to die with honor.

    If that's sad, don't blame me - I didn't write the rules.

    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I’m concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn’t have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    Come now, why so gloomy. Belorus will surely fall. And after it, Poland. While it would have been poetic indeed to avenge the Polish-Soviet war in 2020, it's perhaps a little late for that. But 2039 - fix that date in your mind and, as they say, speak of it never, think of it always.
    , @Mr. XYZ

    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.
     
    Out of curiosity--do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? I mean, all of those countries--like the US--were former British colonies and were historically settled by large numbers of Britons.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I’m concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn’t have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.
     
    Won't you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors' traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?

    (BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry. AFAIK, you need an IQ of 130 or above to pass a Mensa test and considering that the average Lak IQ would probably be something like 85-90, you would probably be smarter than 99.9% of all Laks--a true wunderkind!)

  5. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.

    Dude, when exactly does Putler’s decriminalization of Article 282 come into effect, and does it have a grandfather clause?

    Roskomnadzor… followed up its blocking of Telegram with a block on Sci-Hub

    So pathetic I didn’t even notice. Whenever something somewhere won’t download, I just push the little vpn button in the corner of the browser.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I don't think there has ever been a single 282 prosecution for an English-language text. Would be interesting to set a legal record.

    This is of course a legitimate term given statistics on unemployment, their share of federal transfers, etc.

    It's good that we're both technically literate and know how to use VPN, but that doesn't apply to at least 80% of Russians who use the Internet.
  6. @The Big Red Scary

    If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.
     
    Dude, when exactly does Putler's decriminalization of Article 282 come into effect, and does it have a grandfather clause?

    Roskomnadzor... followed up its blocking of Telegram with a block on Sci-Hub
     
    So pathetic I didn't even notice. Whenever something somewhere won't download, I just push the little vpn button in the corner of the browser.

    I don’t think there has ever been a single 282 prosecution for an English-language text. Would be interesting to set a legal record.

    This is of course a legitimate term given statistics on unemployment, their share of federal transfers, etc.

    It’s good that we’re both technically literate and know how to use VPN, but that doesn’t apply to at least 80% of Russians who use the Internet.

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary

    It’s good that we’re both technically literate and know how to use VPN
     
    I'm not defending Roskomnadzor. On the contrary, I'm complaining that not only are they heavy handed, they are simply incompetent. In the sci-hub case, however, I would guess that the people who want to use sci-hub are a subset of those who can point and click to install a vpn plug-in. So what is Roskomnadzor blocking from the proles?
  7. @Anatoly Karlin
    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I'm concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn't have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don't want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.

    Come now, why so gloomy. Belorus will surely fall. And after it, Poland. While it would have been poetic indeed to avenge the Polish-Soviet war in 2020, it’s perhaps a little late for that. But 2039 – fix that date in your mind and, as they say, speak of it never, think of it always.

  8. @Anatoly Karlin
    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now... perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it's far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.

    How likely is it in your opinion that Belorussia will join Russia and when might it come about also whats the popular opinion in Russia itself for this ?
    Also do you think the Donetsk & Luhansk Peoples Repubublics will eventually join Russia when it becomes obvious to everyone that they will not return to the Ukraine and again is this popular in Russia with the general public ?

    With 9.5 Million in Belorussia and I believe 3.8 Million in the DPR & LPR there is immediately a huge gain in population if nothing else.

    Thanks

  9. Putin is a hero to some in the west……..more hunting and fishing pics please!…….and horse riding.

    • Replies: @Red Don
    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.
  10. Apropos the Murmansk “Nicholas II” airport… That initiative is great, and I noticed that for example Simferopol will be “Aivazovsky”, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky “Vitus Bering” and so on. Just lovely. Actual culture, actual history, actual Russia, yeee-haw!

    There were some Soviet names winning those contests too though, but most seem to be people like engineers (Andrei Tupolev etc) and stuff, which at least represent the better side of the USSR.

    There are some similar trends in things like shipbuilding. To be sure, many new ships have been named after Soviet naval commanders, but after “Yuri Andropov” (yuck!) became “Peter the Great” in the 1990’s, it has expanded to things like “Imperator Alexander III”, “Admiral von Essen” and so on. Even “Admiral Kolchak” was proposed for a new frigate a couple of years back, but that was called off by seriously butthurt sovoks/KPRFers if I recall correctly.

    Anyway, all kinds of sweet White stuff going on in general. I just hope it will be applied to street names, neighborhoods (raions) and so on too, at some point. It’s like the one thing about post-Maidan Ukraine I wholeheartedly agree with, by the way, the mass-ditching of the highly repetitive Soviet names. It went too far when it flipped over to the other extreme with the Petliura/Bandera/yadda yadda and “SS Galicia” fanboyisms everywhere, the schizo toppling of Suvorov statues (what the heck?) and so on though.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @melanf

    Apropos the Murmansk “Nicholas II” airport....xpanded to things like “Imperator Alexander III”
     
    What good is the glorification of the people who brought the Bolsheviks to power?
  11. @Anonymous lurker
    Apropos the Murmansk "Nicholas II" airport... That initiative is great, and I noticed that for example Simferopol will be "Aivazovsky", Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky "Vitus Bering" and so on. Just lovely. Actual culture, actual history, actual Russia, yeee-haw!

    There were some Soviet names winning those contests too though, but most seem to be people like engineers (Andrei Tupolev etc) and stuff, which at least represent the better side of the USSR.

    There are some similar trends in things like shipbuilding. To be sure, many new ships have been named after Soviet naval commanders, but after "Yuri Andropov" (yuck!) became "Peter the Great" in the 1990's, it has expanded to things like "Imperator Alexander III", "Admiral von Essen" and so on. Even "Admiral Kolchak" was proposed for a new frigate a couple of years back, but that was called off by seriously butthurt sovoks/KPRFers if I recall correctly.

    Anyway, all kinds of sweet White stuff going on in general. I just hope it will be applied to street names, neighborhoods (raions) and so on too, at some point. It's like the one thing about post-Maidan Ukraine I wholeheartedly agree with, by the way, the mass-ditching of the highly repetitive Soviet names. It went too far when it flipped over to the other extreme with the Petliura/Bandera/yadda yadda and "SS Galicia" fanboyisms everywhere, the schizo toppling of Suvorov statues (what the heck?) and so on though.

    Apropos the Murmansk “Nicholas II” airport….xpanded to things like “Imperator Alexander III”

    What good is the glorification of the people who brought the Bolsheviks to power?

    • Replies: @El Dato
    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.
    , @Anonymous lurker
    They're just Russian monarchs (and as stated, Nicholas II founded Murmansk, so that's enough reason right there to at least name the airport after him). Ivan Grozny founded Oryol, and a statue to him was erected there a while back, and he sure had some shitty sides to him too. It's history, man, but most of all - it's some organic variation, rather than mass-produced Lenins and 10000x "ulitsa Karla Marksa" or "ploshchad Revolyutsii".
  12. I share your increased optimism, and there’s one thing I’d personally add to that list:

    It’s the fact that Russia’s economic growth, which was at 2.3% in 2018 (I guess everyone/most know that by now), beat expectations quite comfortably. It’s symbolically important in a sense that this was the first time annual growth was above 2% since 2012. Also, that growth is probably already above Western Europe’s and quite likely even US’s long-term average annual growth, certainly so in per capita. And that was achieved with a federal budget surplus of (almost) 3% of GDP.

    It seems growth should still slow down next year, due to the VAT increase and other “structural reforms,” but it should pick up “for good” from 2020-21 onwards, when the large infrastructure build-up and the “National Projects” thing properly kicks off.

    Earlier Rosstat made some other GDP adjustments as well. Now the economy actually only declined in 2015 (annual growth), and even then by a quite modest 2.5%, etc. So I think it’s possible Russia might have already overtaken Germany in PPP GDP in 2018, remains to be seen, it will be very very close.

    Then there’s of course the continuous rapid improvements in most demographic and social indicators, be it life expectancy, homicide rate, infant mortality… It’s probably true you can’t give too much credit to Putin there, because they would have been quite inevitable with any stability (though I guess you say that about most things), but I somehow find those trends very impressive as this improving “normalcy” remains unreported in the Western media, and it of course goes totally against their post-2014 narrative in particular.

    The improvements are also “symbolically” important as Russia is about to overtake American homicide and infant mortality rates. And I just realized that even in regards to life expectancy, the gap between Russia and the US is already comparable to the difference between the US and many/most Western European countries. So much for that “moral” high ground… I do wonder how r/worldnews would react to all of these facts? “Fake news! Fake stats!” Demand more sanctions lol?

    * By PUTLER!, for those very slow people unable or unwilling to catch irony, I mean in the sense that svidomy Ukrainians imagine Putin – not a literal Russian Hitler.

    I assume this is a disclaimer for Russia Insider and its commenters? 😀 If MSM comments are cancer, sites like RI are really not any better.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  13. Peter the great was garbage.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    How many Russian lives and funds did Peter “the Great” sacrifice to achieve his results?

    And Catherine “the Great”?

    Was it worth it? And their reforms, specifically Peters’? As I understand it, he removed a lot of uniqueness and Russianess during his reign.

    I would be very interested in a detailed answer from a Russian history pro.
  14. Given the fact that the price of oil has a floor of 50 a barrel, it does not make much sense for the budget assumptions to be so conservative, and running a small budget deficit of less than 2 percent of GDP in order to spend more on the military, infrastructure, and social services is actually not a bad idea, and considering its fiscal situation, Russia can actually afford to kick the can down the road on pension reform for a few more years or even a decade.

    • Replies: @Randall Parker
    I think the declining price of EV batteries is going to start exerting some pressure on oil prices, if it isn't already. EVs are already over 4% of new cars in China and over 1% in USA. Also, declining prices of wind and solar energy are going to cut electric prices in many areas. Russia needs to diversify its economy.
    , @animalogic
    "running a small budget deficit of less than 2 percent of GDP in order to spend more on the military, infrastructure, and social services is actually not a bad idea"
    I agree. A 2% deficit is usually quite sustainable -- if the money is spent wisely. Investment in needed infrastructure, the military, education & esp' science & technology are priorities for a nation like Russia, beset by sanctions & Western skulldugery.
  15. @melanf

    Apropos the Murmansk “Nicholas II” airport....xpanded to things like “Imperator Alexander III”
     
    What good is the glorification of the people who brought the Bolsheviks to power?

    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.

    • Replies: @melanf

    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.
     
    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks). I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel. But the glorification of Nicholas is the quintessence of idiocy.
  16. @silviosilver

    Honestly, if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.
     
    True, true. And well said.

    Now, some people might wonder just what you can do with 17,332,785 square km that you can't do with 17,125,191 square km, but they don't get that it's a matter of honor.

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to - at least - recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.

    If the nation can't live with honor, then it will have to die with honor.

    If that's sad, don't blame me - I didn't write the rules.

    Belarus is not just some random landmass. It’s home to 10 million Russians and its territory is Russia’s western part. It would be a disaster if it fell into the “loving” hands of Guy Verhofstadt/Merkel/etc as did Ukraine.

    “if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.”

    -> This times 10000000

  17. Russia’s fiscal policy is way too tight, although monetary policy is just about right. They could afford to spend 60 or 70 billion dollars more than they do right now per year without it being a credit negative, maybe buy 3 100000 ton carriers and a dozen squadrons of PAK-FAs with that money?

    • Replies: @Randall Parker
    If you want Russia to be stronger via government spending why not favor projects that make the economy stronger rather than projects that make the Russian Navy stronger with weapons for which there is not even a serious prospect of a war to use them in?

    Speaking as an American: I'd love to shift about $100 billion per year from Department of Defense to roads, bridges, and software development summer school classes for any high school student that wants to attend. I would love to ramp to spending on energy efficiency too. If it has to be DOD spending then I would spend on military sites with solar panels, insulation, ground sink heat pumps, and protecting military bases from extreme weather and other natural disasters (the US military bases have many huge future costs coming at them from the next hurricane that comes to shore at the right location).

    There are plenty of infrastructure projects with high positive ROI that governments ignore. Military infrastructure projects with high positive ROI even make a military stronger by cutting long term repair and utility costs.
  18. @El Dato
    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.

    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.

    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks). I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel. But the glorification of Nicholas is the quintessence of idiocy.

    • Replies: @AP

    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks).
     
    Nonsense, I think Karlin dispelled such myths. Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one. World War I was a massive blunder but he was not alone in stumbling into it - and his own instincts to stay out were correct, but he was too weak to go aganst consensus.

    I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel.
     
    Who was the White leader in charge of Murmansk?
  19. @Dart
    Peter the great was garbage.

    How many Russian lives and funds did Peter “the Great” sacrifice to achieve his results?

    And Catherine “the Great”?

    Was it worth it? And their reforms, specifically Peters’? As I understand it, he removed a lot of uniqueness and Russianess during his reign.

    I would be very interested in a detailed answer from a Russian history pro.

    • Replies: @melanf

    How many Russian lives and funds did Peter “the Great” sacrifice to achieve his results?
    And Catherine “the Great”?
     
    Demographically, the reign of Peter and Catherine did not differ from reign of their predecessors/successors.

    Was it worth it? And their reforms, specifically Peters’? As I understand it, he removed a lot of uniqueness and Russianess during his reign.
     
    The role of Peter in the history of Russia can be compared to the role of Kemal Attaturk in the history of Turkey or the Meiji reformers in Japan . The existence of a" unique " Russia (as an independent state) without reforms seems unlikely.
  20. @Epigon
    How many Russian lives and funds did Peter “the Great” sacrifice to achieve his results?

    And Catherine “the Great”?

    Was it worth it? And their reforms, specifically Peters’? As I understand it, he removed a lot of uniqueness and Russianess during his reign.

    I would be very interested in a detailed answer from a Russian history pro.

    How many Russian lives and funds did Peter “the Great” sacrifice to achieve his results?
    And Catherine “the Great”?

    Demographically, the reign of Peter and Catherine did not differ from reign of their predecessors/successors.

    Was it worth it? And their reforms, specifically Peters’? As I understand it, he removed a lot of uniqueness and Russianess during his reign.

    The role of Peter in the history of Russia can be compared to the role of Kemal Attaturk in the history of Turkey or the Meiji reformers in Japan . The existence of a” unique ” Russia (as an independent state) without reforms seems unlikely.

  21. @melanf

    But the whole of Europe was pretending to be retarded at that time, London to Moscow.
     
    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks). I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel. But the glorification of Nicholas is the quintessence of idiocy.

    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks).

    Nonsense, I think Karlin dispelled such myths. Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one. World War I was a massive blunder but he was not alone in stumbling into it – and his own instincts to stay out were correct, but he was too weak to go aganst consensus.

    I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel.

    Who was the White leader in charge of Murmansk?

    • Replies: @melanf

    Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one
     
    This can be said about Charles I or Louis XVI.
    But Nicholas II is a shameful dirt by any standards. One episode - in 1917 he renounced the rights of his son to the throne (the action on which Nicholas had no right). Nicholas would abdicate and pass the throne to his son (that gave Russia the chance will last until the end of WWII), but Nicholas feared that such a decision would jeopardize the life of his son. For this bastard, the son's life was more important than the fate of the state and the fate of the throne. Ie for purely monarchical standards Nicholas is a person unworthy of the crown.
  22. The role of Peter in the history of Russia can be compared to the role of…the Meiji reformers in Japan .

    Yes, it’s surely a very good analogy.

    But the glorification of Nicholas is the quintessence of idiocy.

    Yes, the UK are not re-titling anything in the name of the less incompetent Charles I of England – and yet the mismanagement of Charles I did not even result in a century of negative consequences for England.

  23. @Anatoly Karlin
    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now... perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it's far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    This seems about right. Not interested in full union, but happy with customs union and historical/cultural congruence. But is this stable, or changing? Are they drifting further apart?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I will have a post on Belorussia hopefully sooner rather than later. It will include direct comparisons of polls of the separate oblasts of South-East Ukraine, on which Belorussian answers are most in line with those of Donbass on virtually all parameters.

    About trends - I haven't actually looked at that closely yet, though from what I recall, zmagarism actually peaked in the 1990s to early 2000s (admittedly, back then, polls on joining NATO were not the ideologically loaded question they are now, back when it seemed that Russia might eventually join the organization as well). But I'll address that better when I do the actual post and look at the data afresh.
    , @Belarusian Anon
    Ukraine conflict temporarily increased Russophilia seeing just how shit the country is now for its Western choice. However I don't think this will last as zoomers and people born shortly before them associate Luka with Russia, while romanticizing PLC/GDL, with EU membership their hope.
  24. @AP

    According to the most reactionary feudal standards, Nicholas II disgraced and discredited the Imperial power with his shameful behavior (and thus opened the way for the Bolsheviks).
     
    Nonsense, I think Karlin dispelled such myths. Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one. World War I was a massive blunder but he was not alone in stumbling into it - and his own instincts to stay out were correct, but he was too weak to go aganst consensus.

    I would fully approve if the airport was named after Denikin or Kornilov or Wrangel.
     
    Who was the White leader in charge of Murmansk?

    Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one

    This can be said about Charles I or Louis XVI.
    But Nicholas II is a shameful dirt by any standards. One episode – in 1917 he renounced the rights of his son to the throne (the action on which Nicholas had no right). Nicholas would abdicate and pass the throne to his son (that gave Russia the chance will last until the end of WWII), but Nicholas feared that such a decision would jeopardize the life of his son. For this bastard, the son’s life was more important than the fate of the state and the fate of the throne. Ie for purely monarchical standards Nicholas is a person unworthy of the crown.

    • Replies: @songbird
    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.
  25. I agree with this view, assessed from a Russian perspective Putin probably reached his nadir in late 2014 when after speaking about the Russian world and seeming to claim Russia would re-gather the lost lands of Little Russia he cucked as hard as is physically possible and wouldn’t even allow the forces in the Donbass to advance to Mariupol. Regarding Belarus, it is inexplicable why Russia continues to subsidise the Belorussian state rather then just absorb it, it makes much more economic and strategic sense simply to integrate Belarus into Russia.

    On the economic front, my main area of disagreement with Putin and his advisers is the obsession with putting away budget surpluses into reserve funds, what the Russian economy needs is investment, the gross investment to GDP ratio in Russia in 2018 was only 23%, it needs to be closer to 30% to stimulate growth, instead of stashing away money in reserve funds where real returns are basically zero, spending surplus revenues in investment in human and physical infrastructure seems to make much more sense. At least money used in the present will not be exposed to depreciation via inflation, putting away money in funds that generate 4% or at best 5% returns in a country where inflation is 5% makes no sense, it is an almost criminal neglect of fiscal resources.

    If excess revenue is simply going to be locked away and its value destroyed by inflation it would be far better not to even run a budget surplus and so avoid sucking money out of the economy.

    Regarding demographics, Russia has managed to increase its life expectancy at a faster rate then other Eastern European nations manged to from the same base so at least in this regard one can say Russia under Putin outperformed other Eastern European nations.

    In Estonia for example LE rose from 69.9 to 71.9 from 1996 to 2003, Russia’s LE rose from 69.8 in 2011 to 73.2 by 2018, a 3.4 year expansion vs 2 in Estonia over the same number of years. It took Estonia until 2006 to hit a LE of 73.2, 10 years after it reached 69.9 vs 7 for Russia

    Romania reached a LE of 69.9 in 1998, after 7 years it reached 71.9, again a rise of 2 years, it took Romania until 2007 to reach a LE of 73.1, 9 years after it reached 69.9.

    In Hungary, LE reached 70 in 1995 and took until 2005 to reach 73, Russia underwent the same increase from 69.8 to 72.7 in 6 years, 2011-2017.

    The story is similar in other Eastern European nations as well, one area therefore in which one could say Putin has excelled is increasing life expectancy, life expectancy has grown in Russia at a rate greater then much of Eastern Europe in the early 2000’s where growth was fairly rapid by global standards.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  26. Neoliberal shock therapy: Examining the Russian Federation in the 1990s

  27. @melanf

    Nicholas II was largely a mediocrity, but a decent one
     
    This can be said about Charles I or Louis XVI.
    But Nicholas II is a shameful dirt by any standards. One episode - in 1917 he renounced the rights of his son to the throne (the action on which Nicholas had no right). Nicholas would abdicate and pass the throne to his son (that gave Russia the chance will last until the end of WWII), but Nicholas feared that such a decision would jeopardize the life of his son. For this bastard, the son's life was more important than the fate of the state and the fate of the throne. Ie for purely monarchical standards Nicholas is a person unworthy of the crown.

    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.

    • Replies: @melanf

    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.
     
    Russia needed to hold out in the war for another 2 maybe 3 months. Such term Alexey undoubtedly would have lived (of course for Alexey other people would rule, he was necessary as a symbol ).
  28. @songbird
    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.

    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.

    Russia needed to hold out in the war for another 2 maybe 3 months. Such term Alexey undoubtedly would have lived (of course for Alexey other people would rule, he was necessary as a symbol ).

    • Replies: @songbird
    His mother was so tainted, it may have made sense to go straight to one of the cousins. I believe Nicholas had one that was 6'6" and popular with the army. Or maybe, the one involved in killing Rasputin (not that Nicky would have approved.) Probably the choice would have been better taken out of his hands entirely. But didn't one claim power ineffectively?

    I believe Wilhelm II actually didn't technically abdicate - he was said to have abdicated. He really wanted to stay a regional king. But the other regional German ones were removed from power anyway. There was a pretty strong pan-European movement against monarchy at that time, since the Left had gained so much power from the war. I don't know if the Romanovs could have retained power for long.
  29. *

    By PUTLER!, for those very slow people unable or unwilling to catch irony, I mean in the sense that svidomy Ukrainians imagine Putin – not a literal Russian Hitler.

    There’s really a difference? Svidomy Ukrainians actually imagine Putler as something other than a Russian Hitler?

  30. @AP

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.
     
    This seems about right. Not interested in full union, but happy with customs union and historical/cultural congruence. But is this stable, or changing? Are they drifting further apart?

    I will have a post on Belorussia hopefully sooner rather than later. It will include direct comparisons of polls of the separate oblasts of South-East Ukraine, on which Belorussian answers are most in line with those of Donbass on virtually all parameters.

    About trends – I haven’t actually looked at that closely yet, though from what I recall, zmagarism actually peaked in the 1990s to early 2000s (admittedly, back then, polls on joining NATO were not the ideologically loaded question they are now, back when it seemed that Russia might eventually join the organization as well). But I’ll address that better when I do the actual post and look at the data afresh.

    • Replies: @AP
    Looking forward to it!
  31. @AP

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.
     
    This seems about right. Not interested in full union, but happy with customs union and historical/cultural congruence. But is this stable, or changing? Are they drifting further apart?

    Ukraine conflict temporarily increased Russophilia seeing just how shit the country is now for its Western choice. However I don’t think this will last as zoomers and people born shortly before them associate Luka with Russia, while romanticizing PLC/GDL, with EU membership their hope.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs, apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Do people in Belarus not read/hear about the rapid Islamization of EU countries and the hourly violence and intimidation against the white Europeans there? Why would they possibly want to join the EU? I pray that they think it over and stay away from the EU.
  32. @Belarusian Anon
    Ukraine conflict temporarily increased Russophilia seeing just how shit the country is now for its Western choice. However I don't think this will last as zoomers and people born shortly before them associate Luka with Russia, while romanticizing PLC/GDL, with EU membership their hope.

    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs, apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated.

    • Replies: @Belarusian Anon
    Frankly I don't quite understand myself, beyond the aesthetics I dotn find much redeeming qualities in those two states for us. A lot of it comes from we wuzzing about being Litvins and shit.
    , @AP

    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs
     
    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia and as % of population similar to that of fertile regions in Russia. Ukraine had a large native Cossack class, in addition to nobles. Cossacks were not always dissatisfied with GDL - they helped capture Moscow and to crush the Turks at Khotyn battle.

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture. Kiev became intellectual center of Orthodoxy:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Киево-Могилянская_академия_(1659—1817)#История

    apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated
     
    Upper nobility tended to do this but middle and petty nobility did not. And it varied with time. Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince - Ostrogsky.
  33. @Epigon
    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs, apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated.

    Frankly I don’t quite understand myself, beyond the aesthetics I dotn find much redeeming qualities in those two states for us. A lot of it comes from we wuzzing about being Litvins and shit.

  34. @Epigon
    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs, apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated.

    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs

    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia and as % of population similar to that of fertile regions in Russia. Ukraine had a large native Cossack class, in addition to nobles. Cossacks were not always dissatisfied with GDL – they helped capture Moscow and to crush the Turks at Khotyn battle.

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture. Kiev became intellectual center of Orthodoxy:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Киево-Могилянская_академия_(1659—1817)#История

    apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated

    Upper nobility tended to do this but middle and petty nobility did not. And it varied with time. Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince – Ostrogsky.

    • Replies: @Adam

    Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince – Ostrogsky.

     

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.
    , @melanf

    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia
     
    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights, and intended only to feed the alien foreign elite (in addition to the poles, the indigenous population had to feed the Jews, becouse the poles inhabited these lands by Jews, in order to oust the indigenous population).

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture.
     
    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture. All minimally significant intellectual achievements of "Ukrainians" (Gogol, Ostrogradsky...) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke). At the same time, the" Ukrainian "(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the" great Russian " (who did not know the Polish-Lithuanian yoke). Belarusians (where Polish rule lasted until the end of the 18th century) have no significant intellectual achievements at all .
  35. @Anatoly Karlin
    I will have a post on Belorussia hopefully sooner rather than later. It will include direct comparisons of polls of the separate oblasts of South-East Ukraine, on which Belorussian answers are most in line with those of Donbass on virtually all parameters.

    About trends - I haven't actually looked at that closely yet, though from what I recall, zmagarism actually peaked in the 1990s to early 2000s (admittedly, back then, polls on joining NATO were not the ideologically loaded question they are now, back when it seemed that Russia might eventually join the organization as well). But I'll address that better when I do the actual post and look at the data afresh.

    Looking forward to it!

  36. @AP

    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs
     
    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia and as % of population similar to that of fertile regions in Russia. Ukraine had a large native Cossack class, in addition to nobles. Cossacks were not always dissatisfied with GDL - they helped capture Moscow and to crush the Turks at Khotyn battle.

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture. Kiev became intellectual center of Orthodoxy:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Киево-Могилянская_академия_(1659—1817)#История

    apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated
     
    Upper nobility tended to do this but middle and petty nobility did not. And it varied with time. Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince - Ostrogsky.

    Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince – Ostrogsky.

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.

    • Replies: @AP

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.
     
    Correct. Still -

    Would people have lived worse lives if this and other long-term trends had been realized for them? Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?
  37. @Adam

    Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince – Ostrogsky.

     

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.

    Correct. Still –

    Would people have lived worse lives if this and other long-term trends had been realized for them? Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?

    • Replies: @Adam
    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion. Personally, I have a preference towards Catholicism over Orthodoxy and Russia would likely be better off if it was historically Catholic, though Orthodoxy has its advantages as well. It's a shame that in Russia Catholicism was associated with Teutons and Poles who had purely malicious intent towards Russians.

    Ultimately I think both Poland and Moscow would have, and to an extent did, assimilate the Ruthenians. As a Russophile I prefer Russia, though it's perfectly understandable why a Ukrainian would prefer the more advanced PLC than historically backwards Russia. Just don't romanticize it too much, the historical record shows that there was much more violence from Ruthenians towards Poles than towards Russians.
    , @melanf

    Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?
     
    The population massively fled from the "Polish" lands, to the lands of the Russian Tsar. Also in the "Polish" lands there were several bloody peasant uprisings under the slogan of the transition to the power of the Russian Tsar (on Russian lands there were no Pro-Polish peasant uprisings)
  38. @melanf

    Alexei had hemophilia. There is no way he would have lived that long or been able to be a strong ruler.
     
    Russia needed to hold out in the war for another 2 maybe 3 months. Such term Alexey undoubtedly would have lived (of course for Alexey other people would rule, he was necessary as a symbol ).

    His mother was so tainted, it may have made sense to go straight to one of the cousins. I believe Nicholas had one that was 6’6″ and popular with the army. Or maybe, the one involved in killing Rasputin (not that Nicky would have approved.) Probably the choice would have been better taken out of his hands entirely. But didn’t one claim power ineffectively?

    I believe Wilhelm II actually didn’t technically abdicate – he was said to have abdicated. He really wanted to stay a regional king. But the other regional German ones were removed from power anyway. There was a pretty strong pan-European movement against monarchy at that time, since the Left had gained so much power from the war. I don’t know if the Romanovs could have retained power for long.

  39. @AP

    Why would anyone other than Poles or Lithuanians romanticize PLC/GDL?
    It is mind-boggling, seeing how everyone else was reduced to peasants/serfs
     
    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia and as % of population similar to that of fertile regions in Russia. Ukraine had a large native Cossack class, in addition to nobles. Cossacks were not always dissatisfied with GDL - they helped capture Moscow and to crush the Turks at Khotyn battle.

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture. Kiev became intellectual center of Orthodoxy:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Киево-Могилянская_академия_(1659—1817)#История

    apart from native nobility that converted to Catholicism or assimilated
     
    Upper nobility tended to do this but middle and petty nobility did not. And it varied with time. Supreme commander of GDL forces against Moscow was a very devout Orthodox prince - Ostrogsky.

    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights, and intended only to feed the alien foreign elite (in addition to the poles, the indigenous population had to feed the Jews, becouse the poles inhabited these lands by Jews, in order to oust the indigenous population).

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture. All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke). At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ” (who did not know the Polish-Lithuanian yoke). Belarusians (where Polish rule lasted until the end of the 18th century) have no significant intellectual achievements at all .

    • Replies: @AP

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights,
     
    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia. Nobles were mostly locals so it was not a colony. Local nobles had more rights in GDL than in Muscovy, where they were subject to arbitrary actions of the Tsar.

    feed the alien foreign elite
     
    I suspect origins of nobles in what is now Ukraine and Belarus were more local than those in Russia, whom Russian serfs were feeding.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture.
     
    First Orthodox bible was printed in PLC. First Orthodox higher learning institute was in PLC.

    All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke)
     
    Eastern Ukraine - Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions (Polish language, western educational norms, etc.). Per travelers, much more civilized and highly educated than Muscovy.

    Gogol - part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC. Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ”
     
    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.
  40. I kind of like the idea of a federation for the possibility of having internal border countrols, which would separate the more problematic groups. Someone should do a cost-benefit analysis on needing to subsidize some of these places though.

  41. @AP

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.
     
    Correct. Still -

    Would people have lived worse lives if this and other long-term trends had been realized for them? Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion. Personally, I have a preference towards Catholicism over Orthodoxy and Russia would likely be better off if it was historically Catholic, though Orthodoxy has its advantages as well. It’s a shame that in Russia Catholicism was associated with Teutons and Poles who had purely malicious intent towards Russians.

    Ultimately I think both Poland and Moscow would have, and to an extent did, assimilate the Ruthenians. As a Russophile I prefer Russia, though it’s perfectly understandable why a Ukrainian would prefer the more advanced PLC than historically backwards Russia. Just don’t romanticize it too much, the historical record shows that there was much more violence from Ruthenians towards Poles than towards Russians.

    • Replies: @AP

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion.
     
    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn't be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Counter-Reformation was very bad for the PLC. It drove the civil war in Ukraine (often falsely described by both Russian and Ukrainian nationalists as an anti-Polish rebellion) in which the Rus magnates were defeated by the Rus peasants and lesser nobles. This of course led to the destruction of the PLC, the loss of the Orthodox was enough to tip the balance of power.
    , @Anon 2
    Re: “I have a preference towards Catholicism”

    In its essence what is Catholicism if not Aristotelian ethics (moderation in all
    things) married to Christian faith? As primates (effectively smart chimps) we
    need something to moderate our animalistic impulses. I think Catholicism
    does it better than Protestantism or Judaism (or Jewish culture in general).
    I don’t know enough about Eastern Christianity (except that its theology is
    fundamentally irrational unlike the rational Catholic theology created by St.
    Augustine and St.Thomas Aquinas, e.g., concept of the just war) to know if
    it’s designed to keep our primitive tendencies (tribalism, aggressiveness,
    territorialism, status seeking, ...) in check. Czesław Miłosz who was part
    Lithuanian, and hence not exactly starry-eyed about Poland, nevertheless states
    in his autobiography Native Realm (1959) that he was struck by the great moral
    restraint shown by the Polish population, esp. in times of war. I don’t know
    about other Russians but Anatoly seems very territorial. IMHO territorial
    impulses are a legacy of our animal origins and if excessive, they need to be curbed.

    Moving now to a wider frame of reference, I think one reason why there may
    be some residual nostalgia about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (and
    about the Hapsburgs) is that in both cases there was the moderating influence
    of Catholic ethics at work, even though I fully realize that even the best system
    when executed by smart chimps like us will be far from perfect (e.g., sexual
    abuse of adolescent boys by gay priests). I would even venture to say that Poland,
    Austria, and Italy, which still remain heavily Catholic, inflicted much less harm on
    the world than Prussia (and later the German Empire), England, and even
    France (which largely rejected Catholicism). Nobody is nostalgic about the
    German Empire, and the Hindus are certainly not nostalgic about the British
    Raj. Unlike France or Britain, Poland never executed its kings. I realize that
    Catholicism is only one moderating factor, there may be genetic effects as well.

    The Brits always claim that whatever greatness they may have achieved, incl. their
    Empire, happened because they rejected the restraints imposed by Catholicism.
    History may decide otherwise. Now that whites are becoming minorities
    everywhere, are colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade seen
    as the greatest moments of triumph for the West? Nor anymore.
  42. @Anatoly Karlin
    I don't think there has ever been a single 282 prosecution for an English-language text. Would be interesting to set a legal record.

    This is of course a legitimate term given statistics on unemployment, their share of federal transfers, etc.

    It's good that we're both technically literate and know how to use VPN, but that doesn't apply to at least 80% of Russians who use the Internet.

    It’s good that we’re both technically literate and know how to use VPN

    I’m not defending Roskomnadzor. On the contrary, I’m complaining that not only are they heavy handed, they are simply incompetent. In the sci-hub case, however, I would guess that the people who want to use sci-hub are a subset of those who can point and click to install a vpn plug-in. So what is Roskomnadzor blocking from the proles?

  43. @AP

    His grandson converted to Catholicism. The long term trends clearly pointed towards the conversion of the elite and ultimately the common people to Roman or Eastern Catholicism, though it is true that the PLC was not universally bad to all Orthodox.
     
    Correct. Still -

    Would people have lived worse lives if this and other long-term trends had been realized for them? Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?

    Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?

    The population massively fled from the “Polish” lands, to the lands of the Russian Tsar. Also in the “Polish” lands there were several bloody peasant uprisings under the slogan of the transition to the power of the Russian Tsar (on Russian lands there were no Pro-Polish peasant uprisings)

    • Replies: @AP

    The population massively fled from the “Polish” lands, to the lands of the Russian Tsar.
     
    They fled to "free territory" where the Tsar did not (yet) impose serfdom. They also fled to Zaporozhian lands, not under the Tsar. And they also settled Polish lands in Ukraine, where serfdom was lighter than in Poland itself.

    Still -

    Is Poland a wealthier and a better place to live the last couple hundred years, or are Belarus and Ukraine?
  44. @melanf

    False nationalist propaganda. Serfdom was no worse than in Russia
     
    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights, and intended only to feed the alien foreign elite (in addition to the poles, the indigenous population had to feed the Jews, becouse the poles inhabited these lands by Jews, in order to oust the indigenous population).

    GDL provided Ukraine and Belarus with a high level of culture.
     
    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture. All minimally significant intellectual achievements of "Ukrainians" (Gogol, Ostrogradsky...) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke). At the same time, the" Ukrainian "(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the" great Russian " (who did not know the Polish-Lithuanian yoke). Belarusians (where Polish rule lasted until the end of the 18th century) have no significant intellectual achievements at all .

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights,

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia. Nobles were mostly locals so it was not a colony. Local nobles had more rights in GDL than in Muscovy, where they were subject to arbitrary actions of the Tsar.

    feed the alien foreign elite

    I suspect origins of nobles in what is now Ukraine and Belarus were more local than those in Russia, whom Russian serfs were feeding.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture.

    First Orthodox bible was printed in PLC. First Orthodox higher learning institute was in PLC.

    All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke)

    Eastern Ukraine – Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions (Polish language, western educational norms, etc.). Per travelers, much more civilized and highly educated than Muscovy.

    Gogol – part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC. Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ”

    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.

    • Replies: @melanf

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.
     
    It's just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression - Catholics-poles and Jews.

    I suspect origins of nobles..
     
    The facts are simple - in the"great Russia" people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite, who hated the indigenous population and wanted to destroy this population.

    Eastern Ukraine – Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions..
     
    Ha nonsense. All intellectual achievements are focused exclusively on the lands of the Russian Tsar, but on the lands of GDL (with their shameful colonial "institutions")- nothing, zero. It's no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.

    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.
     
    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a "great Russian" achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius. Famous (worldwide) architectural achievements - the Kremlin, St. Basil's Cathedral... On the maps of the geographical discoveries can you find a route or Dezhnev, Poyarkov. Even the ballads of the ancient Rus ' remained exclusively in the "great Russia". Here is a modern edition, and where did it come from?

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2Gfxbbo3KAU/WdRc-gtQE3I/AAAAAAAAGtM/gsoPkwqZPisCdWr-4IKZAXChMOgk3F-mwCLcBGAs/s1600/IMG_5505.JPG

    From the "great Russia" 15 - 17th centuries

    But the Western Russian lands had nothing, zero, thanks to GDL.

    , @Mikhail

    Gogol – part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC.
     
    As per his works, he very much opposed Poland in conjunction with favoring Russia.

    Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.
     
    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements. Overall, the ancestors of modern day Ukrainians preferred Russia over Poland.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Russians, Belorussians, Poles, Hungarians, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, whatever, they need to stop arguing who was or is smarter or more civilized or less corrupt, etc.

    START HAVING CHILDREN AGAIN, GET TOGETHER, AND GET READY TO FIGHT THE MUSLIM AND AFRICAN INVADERS WHO ARE COMING YOUR WAY. TOGETHER. Here in the USA, there are many millions of us real Americans, without political power and against our regime, rooting for you and praying for you all.

  45. @melanf

    Who have had better lives in the long run, people in Poland or people in Belarus or Ukraine who had gone under Moscow?
     
    The population massively fled from the "Polish" lands, to the lands of the Russian Tsar. Also in the "Polish" lands there were several bloody peasant uprisings under the slogan of the transition to the power of the Russian Tsar (on Russian lands there were no Pro-Polish peasant uprisings)

    The population massively fled from the “Polish” lands, to the lands of the Russian Tsar.

    They fled to “free territory” where the Tsar did not (yet) impose serfdom. They also fled to Zaporozhian lands, not under the Tsar. And they also settled Polish lands in Ukraine, where serfdom was lighter than in Poland itself.

    Still –

    Is Poland a wealthier and a better place to live the last couple hundred years, or are Belarus and Ukraine?

  46. @melanf

    Apropos the Murmansk “Nicholas II” airport....xpanded to things like “Imperator Alexander III”
     
    What good is the glorification of the people who brought the Bolsheviks to power?

    They’re just Russian monarchs (and as stated, Nicholas II founded Murmansk, so that’s enough reason right there to at least name the airport after him). Ivan Grozny founded Oryol, and a statue to him was erected there a while back, and he sure had some shitty sides to him too. It’s history, man, but most of all – it’s some organic variation, rather than mass-produced Lenins and 10000x “ulitsa Karla Marksa” or “ploshchad Revolyutsii”.

    • Replies: @melanf

    Ivan Grozny founded Oryol, and a statue to him was erected there a while back, and he sure had some shitty sides to him too.
     
    To compare Ivan IV with such a jerk as Nicholas II is a heavy insult to Ivan.

    The monument to Ivan is a good idea, but the sculpture in the Oryol is is completely idiotic .
  47. @Adam
    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion. Personally, I have a preference towards Catholicism over Orthodoxy and Russia would likely be better off if it was historically Catholic, though Orthodoxy has its advantages as well. It's a shame that in Russia Catholicism was associated with Teutons and Poles who had purely malicious intent towards Russians.

    Ultimately I think both Poland and Moscow would have, and to an extent did, assimilate the Ruthenians. As a Russophile I prefer Russia, though it's perfectly understandable why a Ukrainian would prefer the more advanced PLC than historically backwards Russia. Just don't romanticize it too much, the historical record shows that there was much more violence from Ruthenians towards Poles than towards Russians.

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion.

    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn’t be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Counter-Reformation was very bad for the PLC. It drove the civil war in Ukraine (often falsely described by both Russian and Ukrainian nationalists as an anti-Polish rebellion) in which the Rus magnates were defeated by the Rus peasants and lesser nobles. This of course led to the destruction of the PLC, the loss of the Orthodox was enough to tip the balance of power.

    • Replies: @Adam
    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn't want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they'd be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be 'better off' in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn't mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
    , @songbird
    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.

    Part of the excuse for many of them coming over was to flee reprisal. They were the beachhead for others. French counterterrorism efforts formed part of the grievance politics which they use so effectively to accrue power in France.

    Maybe, cheap labor would have been enough of an excuse.
    , @Mr. XYZ

    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn’t be part of France. That turned out great for them.
     
    Is that really so surprising, though? I mean, if you're not going to get treated as an equal in the country that you live in, then it's perfectly sensible to push for secession and try creating your own country. Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn't have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.

    Thus, in the grand scheme of things, Yes, Algerians could have lived quite well under French rule if they were given citizenship and treated as equals. The same could have also been true for Tunisians, Moroccans, Senegalese, et cetera had France been willing to also annex these territories and give citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living there. However, to my knowledge, France had no desire to actually do this. It's like with the West Bank--sure, West Bank Arabs could live very well if Israel annexed them and gave them citizenship and legal equality--but this is something that Israel simply isn't offering and is unlikely to offer anytime soon (if ever). Thus, is it really irrational for West Bank Arabs to push for their own state--either with or without the Gaza Strip?

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn't it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)? After all, the only moral alternative to this would have been granting citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living in these territories--and that would have meant that Europeans in France would have lost a lot of their political power. Plus, in such a scenario, France would have likely experienced a significant drop in its average IQ and would have had to aggressively subsidize these territories.
  48. Poor choice of words. Why would anyone “love” any politician, including a leader of a country? Would any other word than “moron” come to mind if you hear than someone “loves” Trump, May, Macron, or Merkel?

    On Putin: his rule was a mixed bag. On the one hand, he inherited a country that was totally devastated and robbed in the “democratic” 1990s and did a lot to develop it and bring back its glory. He was certainly helped in that by the continuing suicide of the West (ruling Empire included). Reminds me of a joke I saw on this site: “FBI uncovered a new Al Qaida plot: sit back and watch America destroy itself”. Still, with a fairly weak hand of cards he managed to outmaneuver pathetic Western “leaders” in many areas. He was not afraid to make bold anti-imperial moves like taking Crimea back to Russia, where the great majority of its population always wanted to be. He manages the “alliance” with China, essentially forced on Russia by crazy imperial bullying, fairly well, promoting balancing relations with South Korea, India, and even Japan, which is still occupied by the US more than 70 years after the war. As Russia was not inclined to become a subservient vassal of the Empire, it should not be inclined to become Chinese vassal, either.

    On the other hand, his internal policies leave a lot to be desired. His power structure pushed through education “reforms” that made the education at the school and college level inferior to what it was in the USSR. His coterie essentially destroyed Russian science, emasculating even the National Academy (which was not very good to begin with), wasting huge resources on doomed white elephants like Skolkovo. As a biologist, I can look at PubMed, where practically all biomedical papers worth reading are listed: there are plenty of Russian names (including mine), but virtually none of them work in Russia. Many notorious compradore mega-thieves of the 1990s are still near the trough, the loot of none was confiscated. What’s more, punishment of these thieves is very selective: scum like Berezovsky or Khodorkovsky were punished, but similar scum like Chubais, Deripaska, Sechin, Miller, and many others keep their loot and enjoy tsar’s favors. No wonder that capital flight continues: compradore thieves transfer their ill-gotten wealth to offshores, more than $100 billion annually.

    Pension reform was a mixed bag, as well. It would have been justified if it weren’t for the fact that mega-thieves close to the throne steal a lot more every year than pension reform is expected to save.

    His propaganda overuses the example of Ukraine, presenting people with a false choice between that economic and humanitarian cesspool and Putin’s model for Russia. Of course, given this kind of choice, any sane person would choose even devil with horns over Ukrainian scenario, but Russia has better options. His propaganda also overuses the fact that so-called “opposition” (pathetic Navalny and his ilk) is actually financed by the US, which makes them despised traitors in the eyes of most Russians. But Russia does need a real patriotic opposition, which current power structure does not allow to emerge.

    Yet Putin did a lot of good far-sighted things internally, too. The bridge to Crimea might enjoy high visibility in the West, but projects like pipelines to China and huge Yamal LNG plant that dramatically reduces the dependence of Russian gas exports on neighboring morons are more important. So are new Russian ports in the Baltic and Arctic, including a huge Ust-Luga project, that is literally choking Baltic parasites, both their ports and railways, depriving them of business.

    So, “love” is out of place. Putin deserves reserved respect and one hopes that constructive criticism can further change his policies for the better.

  49. @AP

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion.
     
    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn't be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Counter-Reformation was very bad for the PLC. It drove the civil war in Ukraine (often falsely described by both Russian and Ukrainian nationalists as an anti-Polish rebellion) in which the Rus magnates were defeated by the Rus peasants and lesser nobles. This of course led to the destruction of the PLC, the loss of the Orthodox was enough to tip the balance of power.

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.

    • Replies: @AP

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well.
     
    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky's uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) - I'd still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions.
     
    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn't have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.
    , @Mr. XYZ

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Yeah, Algeria doesn't appear to be faring exceptionally bad by the standards of the region that it is located in. True, Tunisia and Morocco didn't have a brutal bloody civil war like Algeria had, but at the same time, Libya does appear to have had a long period of warfare and chaos in the 2010s similar to what Algeria had in the 1990s.

    Anyway, in my honest opinion, one needs to understand why exactly one's colonial subjects (or de facto colonial subjects, in the case of the Algerians) would want independence. Personally, I suspect that when one's colonial subjects are given citizenship en masse and treated as legal equals, the odds of one's colonial subjects demanding independence would go way down. As examples I would cite Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, and Central Asia up to 1991. All of these areas didn't have large-scale movements (until 1991 in the case of Central Asia), and what all of these areas have in common is that the population there was treated relatively well (in comparison to their other countrymen) by the governing authorities of the country that they lived in. For instance, AFAIK, the Soviet Union brought education, infrastructure, women's rights, et cetera to Central Asia (and the famines that Central Asia endured in the 1930s, while extremely tragic, were not unique to this region; after all, Ukraine and perhaps southern Russia also suffered from these famines). One would think that all of these things resulted in the Russian/Soviet brand being strengthened in Central Asia and in Central Asians being nostalgic for the USSR after it collapsed. Had Algerians and other colonial subjects been given citizenship, treated as legal equals, and experienced a large improvement in their lives under colonialism, it is entirely possible that support for independence in these territories would have been much smaller than it was in real life.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Actually, in terms of average IQ, Poles, Estonians, Finns, and Russians aren't much lower than Germans are. Latvia and Lithuania are a bit lower, but not too much. The part of Europe that is a true backwater is Moldova, Romania, and the Balkans. Personally, I don't think that AP would have objected much if Austria-Hungary would have conquered the Balkans--at least as long as the Balkan peoples would have been given citizenship and legal equality within Austria-Hungary afterwards.

    In the grand scheme of things, though, I completely agree with you that forcibly ruling over other peoples because one believes that one could do a better job governing their territories is a terrible idea. For instance, while Cambodians were probably very happy with the Vietnamese for overthrowing the Khmer Rouge, they were not particularly interested in having the Vietnamese remain in Cambodia for the long-haul. Thus, various Cambodians--and not only the remnants of the Khmer Rouge--fought against the Vietnamese in the hopes of getting the Vietnamese to leave Cambodia (something which ultimately happened in 1989-1991). Anyway, my point here is that while Vietnam could very possibly do a better job of governing Laos and Cambodia than the Laotians and Cambodians themselves (due to the Vietnamese likely having a higher average IQ), it would nevertheless be perfectly legitimate for both the Laotians and the Cambodians to resist any Vietnamese invasion of their countries.
  50. @tyrone
    Putin is a hero to some in the west……..more hunting and fishing pics please!…….and horse riding.

    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.

    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.
     
    Hehe. You should get one of these too

    https://theshirtprinter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/putin-t-shirts.jpg
    , @Mikhail
    https://www.spreadshirt.com/russian+empire+coat+arms+men-s+premium+t-shirt-D1003906952

    Below the eagle, Россия could be added with white, blue and red lettering. Dye sublimated much better than screen printed.
  51. @Anonymous lurker
    They're just Russian monarchs (and as stated, Nicholas II founded Murmansk, so that's enough reason right there to at least name the airport after him). Ivan Grozny founded Oryol, and a statue to him was erected there a while back, and he sure had some shitty sides to him too. It's history, man, but most of all - it's some organic variation, rather than mass-produced Lenins and 10000x "ulitsa Karla Marksa" or "ploshchad Revolyutsii".

    Ivan Grozny founded Oryol, and a statue to him was erected there a while back, and he sure had some shitty sides to him too.

    To compare Ivan IV with such a jerk as Nicholas II is a heavy insult to Ivan.

    The monument to Ivan is a good idea, but the sculpture in the Oryol is is completely idiotic .

  52. “This might seem crass and materialistic, but only to people in societies that were much richer than Russia thanks to their luck in avoiding Communism. We want what we don’t have. There’s little room for developing spiritual and thymotic values on an empty belly.”

    Apparently, there is even less room for developing spiritual and thymotic values on a full stomach, (judging by the current state of affairs in the West, so frequently and vehemently discussed on these very pages).

  53. @AP

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion.
     
    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn't be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Counter-Reformation was very bad for the PLC. It drove the civil war in Ukraine (often falsely described by both Russian and Ukrainian nationalists as an anti-Polish rebellion) in which the Rus magnates were defeated by the Rus peasants and lesser nobles. This of course led to the destruction of the PLC, the loss of the Orthodox was enough to tip the balance of power.

    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.

    Part of the excuse for many of them coming over was to flee reprisal. They were the beachhead for others. French counterterrorism efforts formed part of the grievance politics which they use so effectively to accrue power in France.

    Maybe, cheap labor would have been enough of an excuse.

    • Replies: @AP

    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.
     
    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It's good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).
  54. @AP

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights,
     
    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia. Nobles were mostly locals so it was not a colony. Local nobles had more rights in GDL than in Muscovy, where they were subject to arbitrary actions of the Tsar.

    feed the alien foreign elite
     
    I suspect origins of nobles in what is now Ukraine and Belarus were more local than those in Russia, whom Russian serfs were feeding.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture.
     
    First Orthodox bible was printed in PLC. First Orthodox higher learning institute was in PLC.

    All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke)
     
    Eastern Ukraine - Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions (Polish language, western educational norms, etc.). Per travelers, much more civilized and highly educated than Muscovy.

    Gogol - part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC. Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ”
     
    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.

    It’s just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression – Catholics-poles and Jews.

    I suspect origins of nobles..

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite, who hated the indigenous population and wanted to destroy this population.

    Eastern Ukraine – Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions..

    Ha nonsense. All intellectual achievements are focused exclusively on the lands of the Russian Tsar, but on the lands of GDL (with their shameful colonial “institutions”)- nothing, zero. It’s no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.

    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.

    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a “great Russian” achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius. Famous (worldwide) architectural achievements – the Kremlin, St. Basil’s Cathedral… On the maps of the geographical discoveries can you find a route or Dezhnev, Poyarkov. Even the ballads of the ancient Rus ‘ remained exclusively in the “great Russia”. Here is a modern edition, and where did it come from?

    From the “great Russia” 15 – 17th centuries

    But the Western Russian lands had nothing, zero, thanks to GDL.

    • Replies: @AP

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.

    It’s just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression – Catholics-poles and Jews.
     
    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century. As I pointed out, Orthodox Rus from GDL freely and happily went to war against Orthodox in Moscow.

    I suspect origins of nobles..

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite
     
    Elite of Great Russia whom Russian serfs fed were mostly of foreign stock - descendants of Scandinavians, Germans, Tatars or Lithuanians.

    Nobles in GDL were probably more local in origin than in Moscow. Khmelnytsky - the renegade noble, was of local origin. His antagonist, the magnate Wisniowecki, admittedly was from a Rurukid family (Scandinavian origin).

    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a “great Russian” achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius.
     
    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky's movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.

    , St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect built this church for the Orthodox of that city:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Lviv_Kornakta_2007.jpg

    It’s no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.
     
    Let's look at "cattle with no culture."

    Level of education of Orthodox in PLC vs. in Muscovy says you a lot. Muscovy had nothing on the level of Kiev Academy.

    Danish envoy Jul Just visited Russia and Ukraine in the early 1700s. About Muscovy:

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

    He noted that all of the teacher's in the Moscow higher school were Orthodox from Poland.

    Contrast to the lands that had recently been part of PLC, in Ukraine:

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

    He noted that the monks in the Pecherska Lavra could converse with him in Latin. He saw peasants in Ukraine carrying prayer books, implying that they were literate. Unlike Prince Menshikov of Moscow.

    French diplomat, Jean Baluse, writing about Mazepa:

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

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

    Ironically, because of the higher level of education and culture among the Rus people in the PLC vs. those in Moscow, Orthodox from PLC contributed significantly even to Russia's culture. Without PLC, who knows if Russia would even have had much of a high culture.

    As Dostoyevsky (himself the product of PLC) noted, modern Russian literature comes largely from Gogol - a product of the Hetmanate and ultimately of PLC. Let's look at Russian music.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677...

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    Those three were from the Hetmanate - child of PLC.

    So Russia's classical music tradition derives to a large extent from PLC.

    You appear to be as ill-informed as you are ungrateful :-)
  55. @songbird
    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.

    Part of the excuse for many of them coming over was to flee reprisal. They were the beachhead for others. French counterterrorism efforts formed part of the grievance politics which they use so effectively to accrue power in France.

    Maybe, cheap labor would have been enough of an excuse.

    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.

    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It’s good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).

    • Replies: @songbird
    Relative poverty just means that their ethnic base is safer from Africans. I wish the place where my folks came from were as poor right now.

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they'd probably be half black by now.
    , @Mr. XYZ
    Had France actually been willing to give citizenship to Algerians en masse without forcing them to renounce their Muslim personal status (which I think that French Prime Minister Leon Blum actually proposed in 1936--albeit on a much smaller scale), then maybe much more Algerians would have supported continued French rule. After all, I don't see a large-scale independence movement in either Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands--which is perhaps unsurprising since their populations were given US citizenship en masse in the early 20th century.

    BTW, by your logic, maybe it would have been better for France to stay in Cambodia. After all, that would have certainly ensured that the Khmer Rouge would have never become a serious threat and problem there. For that matter, maybe it would have been better for Ukraine to join Russia in 1992. At least that way they would have experienced a much larger economic recovery under Putin.

    Anyway, Algeria's poverty was largely unavoidable due to its low average IQ--as is the poverty of neighboring Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries (with the exception of oil-rich Libya, which could have become pretty wealthy in spite of a low average IQ due to its oil reserves if it would have had a better government and much more stability). Had France been willing to aggressively subsidize Algeria (I suppose sort of how the US subsidizes Puerto Rico), then Algeria could have been in better shape. However, I haven't heard of the French government actually willing to do this back when Algeria was still French.

    As for Algeria's civil war, this was ironically caused by Algeria's leadership being too friendly towards democracy. Had Algeria's leadership refused to allow Islamists to participate in the 1991-1992 presidential elections in Algeria, then it would have had no reason to cancel the second round of these elections at the last minute--which in turn might have ensured that there would have been either no Islamist insurgency or a much smaller Islamist insurgency in Algeria. Raising the hopes of Islamists and then crushing these hopes wasn't a very good move on the part of Algeria's leadership--though probably better than having Algeria become a hardcore Islamic state as a result of Islamists actually being allowed to come to power there.

    Finally, I want to make one last point here--I agree that not being selective with immigration from the Muslim world is a terrible idea. However, the one group of Algerians whom I would have supported allowing to settle in France en masse would have been the harkis. After all, they risked their lives for France and that should have entitled them to move to France after Algeria acquired its independence. Of course, it would have been even better had France not conquered Algeria in the first place.

  56. If I understand the term “sovok” correctly we have a few in America, like AOC and Bernie.

  57. @AP

    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.
     
    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It's good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).

    Relative poverty just means that their ethnic base is safer from Africans. I wish the place where my folks came from were as poor right now.

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they’d probably be half black by now.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they’d probably be half black by now.
     
    I don't know if it is true or not, but mainstream media have quietly, without the hysteria that a white state doing so would provoke, reported for some time that Algeria is deliberately abandoning thousands of black migrants in the southern desert.

    I find it rather cruel, I would rather execute mercy killing instead.
  58. @melanf

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.
     
    It's just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression - Catholics-poles and Jews.

    I suspect origins of nobles..
     
    The facts are simple - in the"great Russia" people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite, who hated the indigenous population and wanted to destroy this population.

    Eastern Ukraine – Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions..
     
    Ha nonsense. All intellectual achievements are focused exclusively on the lands of the Russian Tsar, but on the lands of GDL (with their shameful colonial "institutions")- nothing, zero. It's no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.

    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.
     
    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a "great Russian" achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius. Famous (worldwide) architectural achievements - the Kremlin, St. Basil's Cathedral... On the maps of the geographical discoveries can you find a route or Dezhnev, Poyarkov. Even the ballads of the ancient Rus ' remained exclusively in the "great Russia". Here is a modern edition, and where did it come from?

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-2Gfxbbo3KAU/WdRc-gtQE3I/AAAAAAAAGtM/gsoPkwqZPisCdWr-4IKZAXChMOgk3F-mwCLcBGAs/s1600/IMG_5505.JPG

    From the "great Russia" 15 - 17th centuries

    But the Western Russian lands had nothing, zero, thanks to GDL.

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.

    It’s just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression – Catholics-poles and Jews.

    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century. As I pointed out, Orthodox Rus from GDL freely and happily went to war against Orthodox in Moscow.

    I suspect origins of nobles..

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite

    Elite of Great Russia whom Russian serfs fed were mostly of foreign stock – descendants of Scandinavians, Germans, Tatars or Lithuanians.

    Nobles in GDL were probably more local in origin than in Moscow. Khmelnytsky – the renegade noble, was of local origin. His antagonist, the magnate Wisniowecki, admittedly was from a Rurukid family (Scandinavian origin).

    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a “great Russian” achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius.

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.

    , St. Basil’s Cathedral

    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect built this church for the Orthodox of that city:

    It’s no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.

    Let’s look at “cattle with no culture.”

    Level of education of Orthodox in PLC vs. in Muscovy says you a lot. Muscovy had nothing on the level of Kiev Academy.

    Danish envoy Jul Just visited Russia and Ukraine in the early 1700s. About Muscovy:

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

    He noted that all of the teacher’s in the Moscow higher school were Orthodox from Poland.

    Contrast to the lands that had recently been part of PLC, in Ukraine:

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

    He noted that the monks in the Pecherska Lavra could converse with him in Latin. He saw peasants in Ukraine carrying prayer books, implying that they were literate. Unlike Prince Menshikov of Moscow.

    French diplomat, Jean Baluse, writing about Mazepa:

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

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

    Ironically, because of the higher level of education and culture among the Rus people in the PLC vs. those in Moscow, Orthodox from PLC contributed significantly even to Russia’s culture. Without PLC, who knows if Russia would even have had much of a high culture.

    As Dostoyevsky (himself the product of PLC) noted, modern Russian literature comes largely from Gogol – a product of the Hetmanate and ultimately of PLC. Let’s look at Russian music.

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

    One of Russia’s earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky’s fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677…

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    Those three were from the Hetmanate – child of PLC.

    So Russia’s classical music tradition derives to a large extent from PLC.

    You appear to be as ill-informed as you are ungrateful 🙂

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Swedish Family

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.
     
    Theophanes the Greek is in the film too.
    , @melanf

    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century.
     
    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals). Such order was established gradually, well so Jews in the third Reich were sent to gas chambers not instantly.

    Elite of Great Russia whom blah blah blah
     
    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite - Polish and Jewish parasites. Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie
     
    But about "Ukrainian" painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard. Probably these (Ukrainian) icon painters are unknown in Ukraine itself (but Rublev and Dionysius are known)


    , St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect
     
    The criterion is simple - about what achievements in the field of art/science people know all over the world. St. Basil's Cathedral is known to people all over the world. Any buildings created on the territory of modern Ukraine in the 15-17 centuries are completely unknown. So the "great Russians" of 15-17 centuries far superior to"Ukrainians" in the achievements per capita. This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands

    Level of education ....Danish envoy Jul Just ... About Muscovy...“Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write.
     
    It's just stuff (Prince Menshikov could read and write, that's for sure proven, etc.), but most importantly it is completely irrelevant. About the achievements of Peter's elite in the field of art / science you can read in any book on the history of Europe of the 18th century (construction of St. Petersburg, Bering expedition, etc.). But the achievements of the enslaved indigenous population in the GDL lands is nothing, zero. Cattle have no culture
  59. @Adam
    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn't want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they'd be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be 'better off' in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn't mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well.

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) – I’d still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions.

    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.

    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn’t have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It’s good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).
     
    I don't know precisely how secular it is, but the Algerian army and state was quite willing to liquidate islamist rebels during the 1990s civil war.

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.
     
    But the best land and the well-paying occupations were held by ethnic Frenchmen. The revenues for natural resources would also then have accrued to the French state instead of Arabs and Berbers.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do.
     
    If Algerians were allowed to vote then they would most likely have voted for socialist or similar parties.

    Although, in a roundabout way, if the 1961 coup d'état had succeeded France would have been more culturally isolated and intact.
    , @Mr. XYZ

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.
     
    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?

    European countries could have had a greater chance of keeping more of their colonies if they would have been willing to do things such as grant citizenship to their colonial subjects en masse. This is what the US did with Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands in the early 20th century and it really paid off for the US in ensuring that the US brand would remain heavily popular in these territories up to the present-day. The problem with Europeans doing this, though, would have been that there would have eventually been too many non-Europeans who would have had voting rights in European countries. I don't think that Europeans would have been prepared to give voting rights to so many non-Europeans--just like Israelis currently aren't prepared to give voting rights to the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank. In turn, when integration to the metropole becomes an unrealistic option, what else is left? Why, independence, of course!

    Rather than ruling over Third Worlders and denying them a say in their own destiny, why not push in favor of things such as IQ-enhancing technology (combating malnutrition, iodine deficiency, and parasitic disease load and also, in the long(er)-run, doing things such as editing the genes of embryos in order to increase their IQs) so that the Third World would significantly improve its level of human capital and thus be more capable of decently ruling itself.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) – I’d still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.
     
    Be careful what you wish for. After all, I would think that LGBT French people strongly appreciate things such as the legalization of same-sex marriage in France. Indeed, I certainly wouldn't want the legalization of same-sex marriage in France to have been much harder as a result of the homophobic Algerian population being French voters (and, of course, ruling over Algerians without granting them the right to vote in French elections would have also been immoral).

    Likewise, I would think that many French women greatly value their right to have legal abortions.

    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.
     
    I'm not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.

    What was truly catastrophic was the rise of Nazism in Germany and the Western democracies' unwillingness to do anything meaningful about this in its early stages. Had the Nazis never come to power in Germany, things in the former Austria-Hungary could have continued looking upwards. To my knowledge, a non-Nazi Germany would have only had territorial claims on Poland and no one else--and it might have actually been able to get its territorial claims on Poland (or at least most of them) satisfied without war had Britain been unwilling to fight for Poland in this scenario (which is certainly very plausible, considering that it was the events in Czechoslovakia in 1938-1939 which caused Britain to sour on Germany and to issue its guarantee to Poland).

    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn’t have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.
     
    Frankly, a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.
    , @Mr. Hack

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.
     
    I don't see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians? Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the 'middle' and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement? Besides, the Polish element within the PLC sealed Ukraine's fate of not becoming a valued and equal third member of the Commonwealth by quickly abrogating the Treaty of Hadiach (1658) that would have created a third Duchy of Ruthenia.


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Coat_of_arms_of_the_January_Uprising.svg/150px-Coat_of_arms_of_the_January_Uprising.svg.png

    Alas, this proposed coat of arms, was not to be.

  60. @Adam
    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion. Personally, I have a preference towards Catholicism over Orthodoxy and Russia would likely be better off if it was historically Catholic, though Orthodoxy has its advantages as well. It's a shame that in Russia Catholicism was associated with Teutons and Poles who had purely malicious intent towards Russians.

    Ultimately I think both Poland and Moscow would have, and to an extent did, assimilate the Ruthenians. As a Russophile I prefer Russia, though it's perfectly understandable why a Ukrainian would prefer the more advanced PLC than historically backwards Russia. Just don't romanticize it too much, the historical record shows that there was much more violence from Ruthenians towards Poles than towards Russians.

    Re: “I have a preference towards Catholicism”

    In its essence what is Catholicism if not Aristotelian ethics (moderation in all
    things) married to Christian faith? As primates (effectively smart chimps) we
    need something to moderate our animalistic impulses. I think Catholicism
    does it better than Protestantism or Judaism (or Jewish culture in general).
    I don’t know enough about Eastern Christianity (except that its theology is
    fundamentally irrational unlike the rational Catholic theology created by St.
    Augustine and St.Thomas Aquinas, e.g., concept of the just war) to know if
    it’s designed to keep our primitive tendencies (tribalism, aggressiveness,
    territorialism, status seeking, …) in check. Czesław Miłosz who was part
    Lithuanian, and hence not exactly starry-eyed about Poland, nevertheless states
    in his autobiography Native Realm (1959) that he was struck by the great moral
    restraint shown by the Polish population, esp. in times of war. I don’t know
    about other Russians but Anatoly seems very territorial. IMHO territorial
    impulses are a legacy of our animal origins and if excessive, they need to be curbed.

    Moving now to a wider frame of reference, I think one reason why there may
    be some residual nostalgia about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (and
    about the Hapsburgs) is that in both cases there was the moderating influence
    of Catholic ethics at work, even though I fully realize that even the best system
    when executed by smart chimps like us will be far from perfect (e.g., sexual
    abuse of adolescent boys by gay priests). I would even venture to say that Poland,
    Austria, and Italy, which still remain heavily Catholic, inflicted much less harm on
    the world than Prussia (and later the German Empire), England, and even
    France (which largely rejected Catholicism). Nobody is nostalgic about the
    German Empire, and the Hindus are certainly not nostalgic about the British
    Raj. Unlike France or Britain, Poland never executed its kings. I realize that
    Catholicism is only one moderating factor, there may be genetic effects as well.

    The Brits always claim that whatever greatness they may have achieved, incl. their
    Empire, happened because they rejected the restraints imposed by Catholicism.
    History may decide otherwise. Now that whites are becoming minorities
    everywhere, are colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade seen
    as the greatest moments of triumph for the West? Nor anymore.

  61. @silviosilver

    Honestly, if Russia can’t even get back the six Belorussian oblasts, I am not sure it deserves to survive as a state.
     
    True, true. And well said.

    Now, some people might wonder just what you can do with 17,332,785 square km that you can't do with 17,125,191 square km, but they don't get that it's a matter of honor.

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to - at least - recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.

    If the nation can't live with honor, then it will have to die with honor.

    If that's sad, don't blame me - I didn't write the rules.

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to – at least – recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.

    This is Russian reunification Karlin is writing of, not some barbarous Reconquista. It goes without saying that it must never involve bloodshed. Still, there remains the question of getting Lithuania to cede its “Polish Corridor” that separates Kaliningrad from the Russian heartlands.

    • Replies: @byrresheim
    Königsberg.
  62. @Red Don
    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.

    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.

    Hehe. You should get one of these too

    • Replies: @Red Don
    Thanks Swedish Family! I have seen this on postcards [and sent a few] but never on t-shirts. What a miracle is the Internet ;) I grew up w/o it ..
  63. @AP

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.

    It’s just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression – Catholics-poles and Jews.
     
    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century. As I pointed out, Orthodox Rus from GDL freely and happily went to war against Orthodox in Moscow.

    I suspect origins of nobles..

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite
     
    Elite of Great Russia whom Russian serfs fed were mostly of foreign stock - descendants of Scandinavians, Germans, Tatars or Lithuanians.

    Nobles in GDL were probably more local in origin than in Moscow. Khmelnytsky - the renegade noble, was of local origin. His antagonist, the magnate Wisniowecki, admittedly was from a Rurukid family (Scandinavian origin).

    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a “great Russian” achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius.
     
    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky's movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.

    , St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect built this church for the Orthodox of that city:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Lviv_Kornakta_2007.jpg

    It’s no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.
     
    Let's look at "cattle with no culture."

    Level of education of Orthodox in PLC vs. in Muscovy says you a lot. Muscovy had nothing on the level of Kiev Academy.

    Danish envoy Jul Just visited Russia and Ukraine in the early 1700s. About Muscovy:

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

    He noted that all of the teacher's in the Moscow higher school were Orthodox from Poland.

    Contrast to the lands that had recently been part of PLC, in Ukraine:

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

    He noted that the monks in the Pecherska Lavra could converse with him in Latin. He saw peasants in Ukraine carrying prayer books, implying that they were literate. Unlike Prince Menshikov of Moscow.

    French diplomat, Jean Baluse, writing about Mazepa:

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

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

    Ironically, because of the higher level of education and culture among the Rus people in the PLC vs. those in Moscow, Orthodox from PLC contributed significantly even to Russia's culture. Without PLC, who knows if Russia would even have had much of a high culture.

    As Dostoyevsky (himself the product of PLC) noted, modern Russian literature comes largely from Gogol - a product of the Hetmanate and ultimately of PLC. Let's look at Russian music.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677...

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    Those three were from the Hetmanate - child of PLC.

    So Russia's classical music tradition derives to a large extent from PLC.

    You appear to be as ill-informed as you are ungrateful :-)

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.

    Theophanes the Greek is in the film too.

  64. These days Russian funding for Eureka projects is extremely generous; 100% up to €11m. Not exactly neglecting science.

  65. @AP

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights,
     
    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia. Nobles were mostly locals so it was not a colony. Local nobles had more rights in GDL than in Muscovy, where they were subject to arbitrary actions of the Tsar.

    feed the alien foreign elite
     
    I suspect origins of nobles in what is now Ukraine and Belarus were more local than those in Russia, whom Russian serfs were feeding.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture.
     
    First Orthodox bible was printed in PLC. First Orthodox higher learning institute was in PLC.

    All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke)
     
    Eastern Ukraine - Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions (Polish language, western educational norms, etc.). Per travelers, much more civilized and highly educated than Muscovy.

    Gogol - part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC. Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ”
     
    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.

    Gogol – part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC.

    As per his works, he very much opposed Poland in conjunction with favoring Russia.

    Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements. Overall, the ancestors of modern day Ukrainians preferred Russia over Poland.

    • Replies: @AP

    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements
     
    Correct, for after PLC fell. Not before.
  66. An addendum about my philosophy of life

    As I stated before, I believe that life is about optimization, not maximization.
    In fact, much of physics (e.g., Classical Mechanics and Quantum Field Theory)
    can be derived from the Principle of Least Effort, so minimization is definitely
    more relevant than maximization. Hence, unlike most people here, I believe
    there is a sweet spot for IQ. Extremely intelligent people (in addition to having
    bloated egos) can inflict a tremendous amount of damage, for example when
    employed by the military-industrial complex, and, as we know, the latter does
    love to employ a lot of Ph.D.’s.

    I also believe there is a sweet spot for aggression. We may be primates but we
    are smart primates so we are perfectly capable of modulating our violent
    response depending on the circumstances. Hence historically there is no
    question that the Germanics, Jews, and sub-Saharan blacks have displayed
    excessive levels of aggressiveness, whereas the Slavs and (northern) Italians
    have been only moderately aggressive. That’s one reason why I’m glad that
    Russia is at last ruled by Russians, and not by Germans (the Romanovs were
    90% German) or Jews or that Georgian guy.

  67. @Mikhail

    Gogol – part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC.
     
    As per his works, he very much opposed Poland in conjunction with favoring Russia.

    Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.
     
    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements. Overall, the ancestors of modern day Ukrainians preferred Russia over Poland.

    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements

    Correct, for after PLC fell. Not before.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    So what. Rus in its prime was a leading center, before the Polish dominated PLC.
  68. @Anatoly Karlin
    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now... perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it's far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    Do you have a source for this, please?

    Also, I think that there was a very real possibility of Belarus joining Russia in the late 1990s when Lukashenko believed that he would eventually have the opportunity to be the leader of a joint Russian-Belarusian state in the event of a union. However, Lukashenko appears to have cooled on this idea after Putin came to power in Russia and consolidated his power there.

    In turn, this raises an interesting question–would Belarusian elites actually want to be governors, provincial administrators, and provincial bureaucrats in a joint Russian-Belarusian state or would they prefer to maintain an independent Belarus in order to be kings in their own house? In the case of the Donbass, after the Maidan Revolution, it was clear that they were going to be provincial bureaucrats in either Ukraine or Russia in any case; in Belarus, on the other hand, the elites actually have the choice between being kings in their own house and being Russian provincial bureaucrats.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Do you have a source for this, please?
     
    Yes, but I want to leave that for the Belorussia thread. They are quite precisely similar to Donetsk/Lugansk, as opposed to Kharkov/Odessa or Crimea.
  69. @Anatoly Karlin
    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I'm concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn't have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don't want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.

    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? I mean, all of those countries–like the US–were former British colonies and were historically settled by large numbers of Britons.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I’m concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn’t have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.

    Won’t you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors’ traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?

    (BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry. AFAIK, you need an IQ of 130 or above to pass a Mensa test and considering that the average Lak IQ would probably be something like 85-90, you would probably be smarter than 99.9% of all Laks–a true wunderkind!)

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
     
    Fifth of June 2018:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-case-for-annexing-canada/
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
     
    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada's, at any rate).

    Won’t you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors’ traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?
     
    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.

    BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry.
     
    Well, first, a quarter Lak. The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables - they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that's quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.
  70. @Anatoly Karlin
    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.

    For now... perhaps not in another 2 decades.

    PS. Belorussian svidomism = zmagarism. And it's far, far less prevalent than in the Ukraine.

    Are these Belarusian polls an exception to the general trend? :

    https://belarusdigest.com/story/do-belarusians-want-to-join-the-eu/

    The polls in the link above show a gradual increase in Belarusian support for European integration in the early 21st century.

    Also, for what it’s worth, I actually am somewhat attached to the idea of an independent Belarus due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life). In addition to my Russian and Jewish ancestry, I am also–to my knowledge–a quarter Belarusian. Thus, there is some sentimental attachment to Belarus on my own part.

    Plus, Belarus would probably–like Ukraine–be more useful being a part of the no-Muslim bloc in the EU than a part of Russia. After all, Belarus would provide Intermarium with strategic depth. (At least, that would probably be AP’s attitude on this issue.)

    • Replies: @Adam
    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.

    Belarus doesn't have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.

    Belarus wouldn't really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that's about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you're some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.
    , @AP

    due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life).
     
    One branch of my family left Belarus for Galicia in the early 18th century, where they intermarried with local Greek Catholics, fellow Rus. Some of the ones who stayed behind left cultural marks, their estate is a museum. Since it's not my surname, I'll post it:

    https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/press-release/wankowicz-house-in-minsk-reopens-after-restoration_i_7998.html

    Melanf claimed Belarus was a cultural desert, but there was this guy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walenty_Wa%C5%84kowicz

    Family originated from a local Slavic warrior Vanko, who was ennobled by the Lithuanian prince Kęstutis after a battle in the 14th century.
  71. Also, one minor nitpick (FTR, I agree with most of your article here)–the 75% Jewish figure for Israel excludes patrilineal Jews. Thus, the real Jewish percentage for Israel would probably be a couple of/several points higher. Of course, even under my definition, Russia would likely still be more Russian than Israel is Jewish.

    And Yes, I do think that forcing students to learn minority languages isn’t a particularly productive idea–and I would also apply this to the US.

  72. @Mr. XYZ
    Are these Belarusian polls an exception to the general trend? :

    https://belarusdigest.com/story/do-belarusians-want-to-join-the-eu/

    The polls in the link above show a gradual increase in Belarusian support for European integration in the early 21st century.

    Also, for what it's worth, I actually am somewhat attached to the idea of an independent Belarus due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life). In addition to my Russian and Jewish ancestry, I am also--to my knowledge--a quarter Belarusian. Thus, there is some sentimental attachment to Belarus on my own part.

    Plus, Belarus would probably--like Ukraine--be more useful being a part of the no-Muslim bloc in the EU than a part of Russia. After all, Belarus would provide Intermarium with strategic depth. (At least, that would probably be AP's attitude on this issue.)

    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you’re some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.

    • Replies: @AP

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all.
     
    It's marginal, but not indistinct. Something like 90% of Belarussians speak Russian.

    Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history.
     
    True, but it is mutual as their histories overlap. Ruthenian was the court language in Lithuania before it was replaced by Polish.

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.
     
    This part is true. Although, IF Russia were to simply invade and if Lukashenko gave the order to fight back, resulting in casualties and collateral civilian damage, who knows? Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.
    , @Mr. XYZ

    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.
     
    Yes, I am American--specifically an Israeli-American (but with strong emphasis on the American part).

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.
     
    What exactly is wrong with "stealing" Lithuanian history? I mean, Belarusians were under the rule of Lithuania for centuries, no?

    The way that I see it, Ukrainian culture is a Polish-Russian hybrid and Belarusian culture is a Lithuanian-Russian hybrid (albeit with much more emphasis on the Russian part).

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.
     
    IMHO, this would depend on whether Lukashenko would have given orders for the Belarusian military to fight.

    Also, Yes, Belarusians could eventually get used to Russian rule (just like Novorossians could have eventually gotten used to Russian rule had Russia conquered them back in 2014). However, there would still be the possibility of them racing for the exits if Russia experiences significant democratization and liberalization.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you’re some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.
     
    I was talking about creating a no-Muslim zone within the EU, though.
  73. @Mr. XYZ
    Are these Belarusian polls an exception to the general trend? :

    https://belarusdigest.com/story/do-belarusians-want-to-join-the-eu/

    The polls in the link above show a gradual increase in Belarusian support for European integration in the early 21st century.

    Also, for what it's worth, I actually am somewhat attached to the idea of an independent Belarus due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life). In addition to my Russian and Jewish ancestry, I am also--to my knowledge--a quarter Belarusian. Thus, there is some sentimental attachment to Belarus on my own part.

    Plus, Belarus would probably--like Ukraine--be more useful being a part of the no-Muslim bloc in the EU than a part of Russia. After all, Belarus would provide Intermarium with strategic depth. (At least, that would probably be AP's attitude on this issue.)

    due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life).

    One branch of my family left Belarus for Galicia in the early 18th century, where they intermarried with local Greek Catholics, fellow Rus. Some of the ones who stayed behind left cultural marks, their estate is a museum. Since it’s not my surname, I’ll post it:

    https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/press-release/wankowicz-house-in-minsk-reopens-after-restoration_i_7998.html

    Melanf claimed Belarus was a cultural desert, but there was this guy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walenty_Wa%C5%84kowicz

    Family originated from a local Slavic warrior Vanko, who was ennobled by the Lithuanian prince Kęstutis after a battle in the 14th century.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Thanks for sharing these links, AP! Indeed, that Wankowicz House in Minsk looks very cool!

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?
    , @Dmitry
    Lol seriously, you family had the house in the house.

    You need to prepare a legal case against Lukashenko to return your beautiful family house. It is his criminal friend who has converted it to a restaurant.
    https://belaruspartisan.by/economic/216960/

    Time to end this disgrace...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8i5TsrAw1o

  74. @Adam
    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.

    Belarus doesn't have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.

    Belarus wouldn't really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that's about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you're some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all.

    It’s marginal, but not indistinct. Something like 90% of Belarussians speak Russian.

    Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history.

    True, but it is mutual as their histories overlap. Ruthenian was the court language in Lithuania before it was replaced by Polish.

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    This part is true. Although, IF Russia were to simply invade and if Lukashenko gave the order to fight back, resulting in casualties and collateral civilian damage, who knows? Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Agreed with your post here. I have just one quibble:

    Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.
     
    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.

    Also, if Russia invades Belarus, expect there to be crippling Western sanctions on Russia. For instance, Russia would likely get kicked out of the SWIFT banking system in such a scenario.
  75. @AP

    Russian literature and science is certainly not inferior to Polish achievements
     
    Correct, for after PLC fell. Not before.

    So what. Rus in its prime was a leading center, before the Polish dominated PLC.

    • Replies: @Adam
    Rus had a few architectural and literary achievements of note, but was overall a backwater in comparison to Poland, and certainly the Holy Roman Empire. France, and Italy.
  76. @Red Don
    Hear, hear! I always wear my Россия вперёд! t-shirt to the gym. It features the standard pic of camo-clad, Dragunov-toting VVP riding a bear. We need more stuff like that, if only to trigger the neo-progressi-cons.

    https://www.spreadshirt.com/russian+empire+coat+arms+men-s+premium+t-shirt-D1003906952

    Below the eagle, Россия could be added with white, blue and red lettering. Dye sublimated much better than screen printed.

  77. @Ender
    Russia's fiscal policy is way too tight, although monetary policy is just about right. They could afford to spend 60 or 70 billion dollars more than they do right now per year without it being a credit negative, maybe buy 3 100000 ton carriers and a dozen squadrons of PAK-FAs with that money?

    If you want Russia to be stronger via government spending why not favor projects that make the economy stronger rather than projects that make the Russian Navy stronger with weapons for which there is not even a serious prospect of a war to use them in?

    Speaking as an American: I’d love to shift about $100 billion per year from Department of Defense to roads, bridges, and software development summer school classes for any high school student that wants to attend. I would love to ramp to spending on energy efficiency too. If it has to be DOD spending then I would spend on military sites with solar panels, insulation, ground sink heat pumps, and protecting military bases from extreme weather and other natural disasters (the US military bases have many huge future costs coming at them from the next hurricane that comes to shore at the right location).

    There are plenty of infrastructure projects with high positive ROI that governments ignore. Military infrastructure projects with high positive ROI even make a military stronger by cutting long term repair and utility costs.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    I certainly agree with you re: cutting US defence budgets. I also would need to hear argument in favour of increased spending on the Russian navy.
    However, the US & Russian military situations are entirely different.
    US defence spending is a grotesque sink-hole of corruption & negligence designed to engorge elites, the deep state & further dangerous imperial aims.
    Russia, by comparison has (for its size etc)a minimalist military. Also, Russia is beset with enemies, who must be constantly discouraged from interfering with Russia's sovereignty.
    Therefore investment in Russia's military is really just that: an investment.
  78. @Mikhail
    So what. Rus in its prime was a leading center, before the Polish dominated PLC.

    Rus had a few architectural and literary achievements of note, but was overall a backwater in comparison to Poland, and certainly the Holy Roman Empire. France, and Italy.

    • Replies: @AP
    Prior to Christianization, certainly. Afterwards - I'm not sure. Rus was a cultural appendage of Byzantium, which was far more advanced than western Europe of the time. I suspect urban literacy rates were higher in Rus. In the year 1100, Kiev matched Paris in size and had twice the population of London:

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

    , @AnonFromTN
    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.
  79. @Adam
    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.

    Belarus doesn't have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.

    Belarus wouldn't really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that's about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you're some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.

    Who cares if you have a Belarusian grandmother. Are you American? Pretend attachment to the old country is really lame.

    Yes, I am American–specifically an Israeli-American (but with strong emphasis on the American part).

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all. Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history. At least the Ukrainians have the hetmenate and a relatively healthy language. Belarus has nothing.

    What exactly is wrong with “stealing” Lithuanian history? I mean, Belarusians were under the rule of Lithuania for centuries, no?

    The way that I see it, Ukrainian culture is a Polish-Russian hybrid and Belarusian culture is a Lithuanian-Russian hybrid (albeit with much more emphasis on the Russian part).

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.

    IMHO, this would depend on whether Lukashenko would have given orders for the Belarusian military to fight.

    Also, Yes, Belarusians could eventually get used to Russian rule (just like Novorossians could have eventually gotten used to Russian rule had Russia conquered them back in 2014). However, there would still be the possibility of them racing for the exits if Russia experiences significant democratization and liberalization.

    As for the Muslim issue, just kick out the Central Asian guestworkers and grant the North Caucasians and Russia would cease to have a Muslim problems. The remaining Tatars and Bashkirs are perfectly civilized and not a cause for concern in the slightest, unless you’re some autist who demand absolutes homogeneity.

    I was talking about creating a no-Muslim zone within the EU, though.

  80. @AP

    Belarus doesn’t have a distinctive culture at all.
     
    It's marginal, but not indistinct. Something like 90% of Belarussians speak Russian.

    Their national mythology is based entirely on stealing Lithuanian and Polish history.
     
    True, but it is mutual as their histories overlap. Ruthenian was the court language in Lithuania before it was replaced by Polish.

    Belarus wouldn’t really resist Russian annexation. There would be resentment and grumbling, but that’s about it. On the other hand, Russia would get almost 10 million more Slavs.
     
    This part is true. Although, IF Russia were to simply invade and if Lukashenko gave the order to fight back, resulting in casualties and collateral civilian damage, who knows? Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.

    Agreed with your post here. I have just one quibble:

    Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.

    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.

    Also, if Russia invades Belarus, expect there to be crippling Western sanctions on Russia. For instance, Russia would likely get kicked out of the SWIFT banking system in such a scenario.

    • Replies: @AP

    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.
     
    The first. If the first happened (basically zero likelihood), Lukashenko fighting back to preserve his kingdom would be somewhat likely. His grip is tight enough that his orders would be followed by at least some of his forces.
  81. @Adam
    Rus had a few architectural and literary achievements of note, but was overall a backwater in comparison to Poland, and certainly the Holy Roman Empire. France, and Italy.

    Prior to Christianization, certainly. Afterwards – I’m not sure. Rus was a cultural appendage of Byzantium, which was far more advanced than western Europe of the time. I suspect urban literacy rates were higher in Rus. In the year 1100, Kiev matched Paris in size and had twice the population of London:

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

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    What do you think that the total population of Kievan Rus was back then?

    Also, for what it's worth, Anne of Kiev married a French King in the 11th century and was literate while her husband appears to have been illiterate:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_of_Kiev
  82. @AP

    due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life).
     
    One branch of my family left Belarus for Galicia in the early 18th century, where they intermarried with local Greek Catholics, fellow Rus. Some of the ones who stayed behind left cultural marks, their estate is a museum. Since it's not my surname, I'll post it:

    https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/press-release/wankowicz-house-in-minsk-reopens-after-restoration_i_7998.html

    Melanf claimed Belarus was a cultural desert, but there was this guy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walenty_Wa%C5%84kowicz

    Family originated from a local Slavic warrior Vanko, who was ennobled by the Lithuanian prince Kęstutis after a battle in the 14th century.

    Thanks for sharing these links, AP! Indeed, that Wankowicz House in Minsk looks very cool!

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?

    • Replies: @silviosilver

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?
     
    You could make the same point about Canadian and Australian, and even American culture. Are these cultures also "fake"? Were they duty bound to forever consider themselves English (or British)?
    , @Hyperborean

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?
     
    I would pick better examples, you are unnecessarily weakening your argument.
  83. @AP
    Prior to Christianization, certainly. Afterwards - I'm not sure. Rus was a cultural appendage of Byzantium, which was far more advanced than western Europe of the time. I suspect urban literacy rates were higher in Rus. In the year 1100, Kiev matched Paris in size and had twice the population of London:

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

    What do you think that the total population of Kievan Rus was back then?

    Also, for what it’s worth, Anne of Kiev married a French King in the 11th century and was literate while her husband appears to have been illiterate:

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

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Consensus estimates range around 6 million, where it would remain until the Mongol invasion (4 million in 1000).
  84. @Mr. XYZ
    Agreed with your post here. I have just one quibble:

    Chance of this happening would probably be about zero of course.
     
    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.

    Also, if Russia invades Belarus, expect there to be crippling Western sanctions on Russia. For instance, Russia would likely get kicked out of the SWIFT banking system in such a scenario.

    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.

    The first. If the first happened (basically zero likelihood), Lukashenko fighting back to preserve his kingdom would be somewhat likely. His grip is tight enough that his orders would be followed by at least some of his forces.

    • Agree: Mr. XYZ
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Yeah, that makes sense. Also, if Russia didn't conquer all of Novorossiya in 2014 due to the fear of crippling Western sanctions, then it is unlikely to conquer Belarus for the same reason. After all, one would think that conquering Novorossiya in 2014 would have been more rewarding for Russia than conquering Belarus would have been due to Novorossiya's larger population (in comparison to Belarus, of course). Still, even this reward couldn't persuade Putin to conquer all of Novorossiya back in 2014.
    , @animalogic
    ANY kind of Russian military action against Belarus would need to be within the context of massive popular support (in Belarus and Russia) for such actions. Russia lacks the US luxury of wars & thuggishness generally based on ridiculous lies, propaganda & the slavish, dog-like support of most of the West.
  85. @Adam
    Rus had a few architectural and literary achievements of note, but was overall a backwater in comparison to Poland, and certainly the Holy Roman Empire. France, and Italy.

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Hey! I'm not Polish and I absolutely LOVE Polish kielbasas!
    , @Adam
    Poland is a great country with plenty to be proud of, though their victim mentality and American dick sucking gets old.
    , @AP

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

     

    So you never heard of Chopin?
  86. @AnonFromTN
    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

    Hey! I’m not Polish and I absolutely LOVE Polish kielbasas!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    I like Polish kielbasa, too. But is kielbasa culture?
    , @songbird
    I once bit into one and encountered a piece of plastic. It was almost like a piece of a credit card. Name-brand in America. I shall save my hamburger story for another day, though I still eat both. Kielbasa is kind of gross to eat on a cold day outside though.

    I don't know if hotdogs are "missiles of death" like Nader said, but kielbasy probably are.
  87. @AP

    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.
     
    The first. If the first happened (basically zero likelihood), Lukashenko fighting back to preserve his kingdom would be somewhat likely. His grip is tight enough that his orders would be followed by at least some of his forces.

    Yeah, that makes sense. Also, if Russia didn’t conquer all of Novorossiya in 2014 due to the fear of crippling Western sanctions, then it is unlikely to conquer Belarus for the same reason. After all, one would think that conquering Novorossiya in 2014 would have been more rewarding for Russia than conquering Belarus would have been due to Novorossiya’s larger population (in comparison to Belarus, of course). Still, even this reward couldn’t persuade Putin to conquer all of Novorossiya back in 2014.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    Yes, agreed. But Russia also wanted the political advantages of keeping Novorossiya within Ukraine: the Lugansk etc are a permanent albatross around the neck of the Ukrainian gangster government .
  88. @AnonFromTN
    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

    Poland is a great country with plenty to be proud of, though their victim mentality and American dick sucking gets old.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Polish victim mentality has some basis in reality. Poland managed to antagonize both of its stronger neighbors, Russia and Germany, and for its stupidity and arrogance was divided between the two many times in history. The sucking of the American dick by the current elites is a clear continuation of the same combination of subservience and delusions of grandeur that led Pilsudski to believe that Hitler would honor the treaty he signed with Germany as early as 1934 (i.e., long before the treason of Munich) and treat Poland as an equal. He allowed Poland to snatch a piece of Czechoslovakia in 1938 (for which Churchill called Poland “the hyena of Europe”), knowing full well that he will take the whole Poland shortly. Poles supporting Pilsudski were sadly disappointed in 1939.

    BTW, the only real defense Poland has today is that nobody wants it. It’s like an old and ugly prostitute is absolutely safe from rapists. If someone is mad enough to attack useless Poland, the Americans will defend it exactly like the British and French did in 1939 (remember “Phoney War” in English, the same as “Drôle de guerre” in French?).
  89. @Mr. XYZ

    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.
     
    Out of curiosity--do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? I mean, all of those countries--like the US--were former British colonies and were historically settled by large numbers of Britons.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I’m concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn’t have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.
     
    Won't you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors' traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?

    (BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry. AFAIK, you need an IQ of 130 or above to pass a Mensa test and considering that the average Lak IQ would probably be something like 85-90, you would probably be smarter than 99.9% of all Laks--a true wunderkind!)

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?

    Fifth of June 2018:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-case-for-annexing-canada/

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    What about Australia and New Zealand?
    , @Josep
    1. I have since learned about the destruction wrought by the Federal Reserve. The last thing we need to see is another country surrendering to the American empire (I'm not making this up; ask Mr. Buchanan), and by extension the Fed. What doesn't help is that the US' debt is 107.8% of GDP, compared with Canada's 87.3%.
    Maybe then they'll regret losing the "stupid looking Canadian money". "Stupid" from an American perspective, but "normal" from the perspective of, say, an average Russian. Heck, Russia has been using colorful banknotes for decades.

    2. The Canadian $1 coin ("loonie") was introduced in the late 1980s, and the $2 coin ("toonie") came out in the 1990s. Both replaced the equivalent notes successfully. On the other side of the border, to this day, the Sacagawea dollar has not seen as much support, and as a result we are stuck with using $1 bills that last less than two whole years, and vending machines give out change in stacks of quarters. There's nothing stupid about competently replacing bills with coins.

    I am honestly starting to believe that Anarcho-Supremacist said it best. I also wholeheartedly agree with AquariusAnon (197) when he/she said this:


    Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all branch states of the former British Empire. So no, they are not gay, nor fake. They might not be independent civilizations, belonging to the Greater Anglo Civilization. But they are indeed legit independent states with their own histories, forms of government, and own national heroes and martyrs. All of which are actually distinct from the US or UK, but like all branch states, the founder is always a citizen of the main state it branched from (in this case the UK).
     
    Throw in as many ad-hominems as you want, but
  90. @Adam
    Poland is a great country with plenty to be proud of, though their victim mentality and American dick sucking gets old.

    Polish victim mentality has some basis in reality. Poland managed to antagonize both of its stronger neighbors, Russia and Germany, and for its stupidity and arrogance was divided between the two many times in history. The sucking of the American dick by the current elites is a clear continuation of the same combination of subservience and delusions of grandeur that led Pilsudski to believe that Hitler would honor the treaty he signed with Germany as early as 1934 (i.e., long before the treason of Munich) and treat Poland as an equal. He allowed Poland to snatch a piece of Czechoslovakia in 1938 (for which Churchill called Poland “the hyena of Europe”), knowing full well that he will take the whole Poland shortly. Poles supporting Pilsudski were sadly disappointed in 1939.

    BTW, the only real defense Poland has today is that nobody wants it. It’s like an old and ugly prostitute is absolutely safe from rapists. If someone is mad enough to attack useless Poland, the Americans will defend it exactly like the British and French did in 1939 (remember “Phoney War” in English, the same as “Drôle de guerre” in French?).

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    What exactly did Poland do to provoke its neighbors before the partitions, though?

    As for the US, I expect the US response to any hypothetical invasion of Poland to be much more active and severe than what the Anglo-French did in 1939. After all, the US has a can-do attitude and doesn't like wimps very much!
  91. @Mr. XYZ
    Hey! I'm not Polish and I absolutely LOVE Polish kielbasas!

    I like Polish kielbasa, too. But is kielbasa culture?

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Food is a part of culture, no?
  92. @Hyperborean

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
     
    Fifth of June 2018:

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-case-for-annexing-canada/

    What about Australia and New Zealand?

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    What about Australia and New Zealand?
     
    Oceania is too far away. Rather Australia and New Zealand should be one state. If places like Western Australia and Newfoundland were eventually amalgated then New Zealand could be too.
  93. @AnonFromTN
    I like Polish kielbasa, too. But is kielbasa culture?

    Food is a part of culture, no?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    In nations that have culture, food is a small part of it. In nations that don’t have any, on the other hand…
  94. @AnonFromTN
    Polish victim mentality has some basis in reality. Poland managed to antagonize both of its stronger neighbors, Russia and Germany, and for its stupidity and arrogance was divided between the two many times in history. The sucking of the American dick by the current elites is a clear continuation of the same combination of subservience and delusions of grandeur that led Pilsudski to believe that Hitler would honor the treaty he signed with Germany as early as 1934 (i.e., long before the treason of Munich) and treat Poland as an equal. He allowed Poland to snatch a piece of Czechoslovakia in 1938 (for which Churchill called Poland “the hyena of Europe”), knowing full well that he will take the whole Poland shortly. Poles supporting Pilsudski were sadly disappointed in 1939.

    BTW, the only real defense Poland has today is that nobody wants it. It’s like an old and ugly prostitute is absolutely safe from rapists. If someone is mad enough to attack useless Poland, the Americans will defend it exactly like the British and French did in 1939 (remember “Phoney War” in English, the same as “Drôle de guerre” in French?).

    What exactly did Poland do to provoke its neighbors before the partitions, though?

    As for the US, I expect the US response to any hypothetical invasion of Poland to be much more active and severe than what the Anglo-French did in 1939. After all, the US has a can-do attitude and doesn’t like wimps very much!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    The US readily talks can-do talk, but does not walk can-do walk. Remember threatening noises the US made against puny North Korea? What came of it, except sailing three (!) aircraft carrier groups sort of in that direction and drowning two military planes? The US never attacks a country that has weapons of mass destruction. The US attacks on Iraq and Syria meant that the US was 100% sure that those countries have none. If Poland is attacked by Germany or Russia, the US would make a lot of stink, but no action would follow. The US military is always gang-ho against something like Grenada or Panama, but never against an adversary who can bloody its nose. Some would call this wisdom, some cowardice. Take your pick.
  95. @Mr. XYZ
    Thanks for sharing these links, AP! Indeed, that Wankowicz House in Minsk looks very cool!

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?

    You could make the same point about Canadian and Australian, and even American culture. Are these cultures also “fake”? Were they duty bound to forever consider themselves English (or British)?

    • Replies: @Adam
    Yes, Canada is fake and gay.

    There is an order of magnitude more difference between Americans and English than Russians and Belarusians. Furthermore, they are separated by a vast ocean while Russia and Belarus are not. Americans are for the most part not even the physical descendants of Englishmen, but Germans, Irish, Italians etc.
  96. @Mr. XYZ
    Food is a part of culture, no?

    In nations that have culture, food is a small part of it. In nations that don’t have any, on the other hand…

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  97. @AP

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well.
     
    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky's uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) - I'd still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions.
     
    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn't have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.

    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It’s good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).

    I don’t know precisely how secular it is, but the Algerian army and state was quite willing to liquidate islamist rebels during the 1990s civil war.

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    But the best land and the well-paying occupations were held by ethnic Frenchmen. The revenues for natural resources would also then have accrued to the French state instead of Arabs and Berbers.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do.

    If Algerians were allowed to vote then they would most likely have voted for socialist or similar parties.

    Although, in a roundabout way, if the 1961 coup d’état had succeeded France would have been more culturally isolated and intact.

  98. @AP

    due to the fact that my maternal grandmother was ethnically Belarusian (though she was born in Russia and lived in Russia her entire life).
     
    One branch of my family left Belarus for Galicia in the early 18th century, where they intermarried with local Greek Catholics, fellow Rus. Some of the ones who stayed behind left cultural marks, their estate is a museum. Since it's not my surname, I'll post it:

    https://www.belarus.by/en/press-center/press-release/wankowicz-house-in-minsk-reopens-after-restoration_i_7998.html

    Melanf claimed Belarus was a cultural desert, but there was this guy:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walenty_Wa%C5%84kowicz

    Family originated from a local Slavic warrior Vanko, who was ennobled by the Lithuanian prince Kęstutis after a battle in the 14th century.

    Lol seriously, you family had the house in the house.

    You need to prepare a legal case against Lukashenko to return your beautiful family house. It is his criminal friend who has converted it to a restaurant.
    https://belaruspartisan.by/economic/216960/

    Time to end this disgrace…

    • Replies: @AP
    There would probably be a thousand people ahead of me, My people left Belarus in the 1720s. But if there was justice some distant cousin would own the place.
  99. @songbird
    Relative poverty just means that their ethnic base is safer from Africans. I wish the place where my folks came from were as poor right now.

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they'd probably be half black by now.

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they’d probably be half black by now.

    I don’t know if it is true or not, but mainstream media have quietly, without the hysteria that a white state doing so would provoke, reported for some time that Algeria is deliberately abandoning thousands of black migrants in the southern desert.

    I find it rather cruel, I would rather execute mercy killing instead.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I don't trust the AP very much, for instance, but if we presume it is true, the desert was probably judged to be more politically expedient than bullets.

    There is a recurring irony in these things. Minimal casualties in the longterm would probably be to decimate them and let the remaining 9 out of 10 record it. Repeat, as long as necessary. But that is only if globohomo were a hobgoblin, and not a global force backed with drones and cruise missiles.
  100. @Mr. XYZ
    What exactly did Poland do to provoke its neighbors before the partitions, though?

    As for the US, I expect the US response to any hypothetical invasion of Poland to be much more active and severe than what the Anglo-French did in 1939. After all, the US has a can-do attitude and doesn't like wimps very much!

    The US readily talks can-do talk, but does not walk can-do walk. Remember threatening noises the US made against puny North Korea? What came of it, except sailing three (!) aircraft carrier groups sort of in that direction and drowning two military planes? The US never attacks a country that has weapons of mass destruction. The US attacks on Iraq and Syria meant that the US was 100% sure that those countries have none. If Poland is attacked by Germany or Russia, the US would make a lot of stink, but no action would follow. The US military is always gang-ho against something like Grenada or Panama, but never against an adversary who can bloody its nose. Some would call this wisdom, some cowardice. Take your pick.

  101. @silviosilver

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?
     
    You could make the same point about Canadian and Australian, and even American culture. Are these cultures also "fake"? Were they duty bound to forever consider themselves English (or British)?

    Yes, Canada is fake and gay.

    There is an order of magnitude more difference between Americans and English than Russians and Belarusians. Furthermore, they are separated by a vast ocean while Russia and Belarus are not. Americans are for the most part not even the physical descendants of Englishmen, but Germans, Irish, Italians etc.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    The original Americans were overwhelmingly British, but had undoubtedly developed a separate identity by the time of independence.
  102. @Mr. XYZ
    Thanks for sharing these links, AP! Indeed, that Wankowicz House in Minsk looks very cool!

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?

    Also, for the people who are saying that Belarusian culture is fake and not real, is Belarusian culture any more fake than, say, Kosovar culture or Macedonian culture or Moldovan culture or Laotian culture or Transnistrian culture or Taiwanese culture?

    I would pick better examples, you are unnecessarily weakening your argument.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  103. @Mr. XYZ
    What about Australia and New Zealand?

    What about Australia and New Zealand?

    Oceania is too far away. Rather Australia and New Zealand should be one state. If places like Western Australia and Newfoundland were eventually amalgated then New Zealand could be too.

    • Replies: @animalogic
    Maybe. But I suspect most NZ'ers & Australians would disagree with you. (NZ'ers have a lot of pride...& as for Australia, they still haven't forgiven the "underarm bowling" incident from 40 years ago-- some of the more cranky NZ'ers would probably like to go to war with Australia (joke))
  104. @Adam
    Yes, Canada is fake and gay.

    There is an order of magnitude more difference between Americans and English than Russians and Belarusians. Furthermore, they are separated by a vast ocean while Russia and Belarus are not. Americans are for the most part not even the physical descendants of Englishmen, but Germans, Irish, Italians etc.

    The original Americans were overwhelmingly British, but had undoubtedly developed a separate identity by the time of independence.

  105. @Ender
    Given the fact that the price of oil has a floor of 50 a barrel, it does not make much sense for the budget assumptions to be so conservative, and running a small budget deficit of less than 2 percent of GDP in order to spend more on the military, infrastructure, and social services is actually not a bad idea, and considering its fiscal situation, Russia can actually afford to kick the can down the road on pension reform for a few more years or even a decade.

    I think the declining price of EV batteries is going to start exerting some pressure on oil prices, if it isn’t already. EVs are already over 4% of new cars in China and over 1% in USA. Also, declining prices of wind and solar energy are going to cut electric prices in many areas. Russia needs to diversify its economy.

  106. @Mr. XYZ
    Hey! I'm not Polish and I absolutely LOVE Polish kielbasas!

    I once bit into one and encountered a piece of plastic. It was almost like a piece of a credit card. Name-brand in America. I shall save my hamburger story for another day, though I still eat both. Kielbasa is kind of gross to eat on a cold day outside though.

    I don’t know if hotdogs are “missiles of death” like Nader said, but kielbasy probably are.

  107. @Dmitry
    Lol seriously, you family had the house in the house.

    You need to prepare a legal case against Lukashenko to return your beautiful family house. It is his criminal friend who has converted it to a restaurant.
    https://belaruspartisan.by/economic/216960/

    Time to end this disgrace...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8i5TsrAw1o

    There would probably be a thousand people ahead of me, My people left Belarus in the 1720s. But if there was justice some distant cousin would own the place.

    • Replies: @songbird
    They say the further back you go, the more rich ancestors you tend to have, since rich people used to have more surviving children than poor. Though all I can get to is one or two small, ruinous-looking Georgian-style houses. I have wondered about some ruinous-looking castles though.
    , @Dmitry
    That is disappointing - I didn't read carefully and thought it would be the house your grandfather was born, or something. I read Lukashenko's criminal friend now has this manor and converted it to a restaurant.

    Your relatives should be like Zhirinovsky, who is always mad for restitution of his grandfather's industrial properties in Ukraine.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CkBk6_5qg
  108. @AP
    There would probably be a thousand people ahead of me, My people left Belarus in the 1720s. But if there was justice some distant cousin would own the place.

    They say the further back you go, the more rich ancestors you tend to have, since rich people used to have more surviving children than poor. Though all I can get to is one or two small, ruinous-looking Georgian-style houses. I have wondered about some ruinous-looking castles though.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    All, is citations to the great Plato:

    When he hears a tyrant or king eulogized, he fancies that he is listening to the praises of some keeper of cattle-a swineherd, or shepherd, or perhaps a cowherd, who is congratulated on the quantity of milk which he squeezes from them; and he remarks that the creature whom they tend, and out of whom they squeeze the wealth, is of a less traitable and more insidious nature.

    Then, again, he observes that the great leader is of necessity as ill-mannered and uneducated as any shepherd-for he has no leisure, and he is surrounded by a wall, which is his mountain-pen.

    Hearing of enormous landed proprietors of ten thousand acres and more, our philosopher deems this to be a trifle, because he has been accustomed to think of the whole earth; and when they sing the praises of family, and say that someone is a gentleman because he can show seven generations of wealthy ancestors, he thinks that their sentiments only betray a dull and narrow vision in those who utter them, and who are not educated enough to look at the whole, nor to consider that every man has had thousands and ten thousands of progenitors, and among them have been rich and poor, kings and slaves, Hellenes and barbarians, innumerable.

    And when people pride themselves on having a pedigree of twenty-five ancestors, which goes back to Heracles, the son of Amphitryon, he cannot understand their poverty of ideas. Why are they unable to calculate that Amphitryon had a twenty-fifth ancestor, who might have been anybody, and was such as fortune made him and he had a fiftieth, and so on?

    He amuses himself with the notion that they cannot count, and thinks that a little arithmetic would have got rid of their senseless vanity.
     

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Theaetetus
  109. @Swedish Family

    And no nation can live with honor if it fails to – at least – recover the maximal territory that has at any point in time ever been under its control.
     
    This is Russian reunification Karlin is writing of, not some barbarous Reconquista. It goes without saying that it must never involve bloodshed. Still, there remains the question of getting Lithuania to cede its "Polish Corridor" that separates Kaliningrad from the Russian heartlands.

    Königsberg.

  110. @Hyperborean

    May not prevent them from being completely Africanized, in time, but they have a better political apparatus to combat it. If they were a part of France, they’d probably be half black by now.
     
    I don't know if it is true or not, but mainstream media have quietly, without the hysteria that a white state doing so would provoke, reported for some time that Algeria is deliberately abandoning thousands of black migrants in the southern desert.

    I find it rather cruel, I would rather execute mercy killing instead.

    I don’t trust the AP very much, for instance, but if we presume it is true, the desert was probably judged to be more politically expedient than bullets.

    There is a recurring irony in these things. Minimal casualties in the longterm would probably be to decimate them and let the remaining 9 out of 10 record it. Repeat, as long as necessary. But that is only if globohomo were a hobgoblin, and not a global force backed with drones and cruise missiles.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    I don’t trust the AP very much, for instance, but if we presume it is true, the desert was probably judged to be more politically expedient than bullets.
     
    Seems like most of them are just expelled to Niger and Mali and only some of them are left in the desert, which is a bit lame, because the Algerians have to do it over and over again.

    https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2017/12/237238/algeria-sub-saharan-migrants-migration/amp/
  111. @AP

    Well, a lot of these people valued their Orthodoxy enough that they were willing to kill and die to resist conversion.
     
    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn't be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Counter-Reformation was very bad for the PLC. It drove the civil war in Ukraine (often falsely described by both Russian and Ukrainian nationalists as an anti-Polish rebellion) in which the Rus magnates were defeated by the Rus peasants and lesser nobles. This of course led to the destruction of the PLC, the loss of the Orthodox was enough to tip the balance of power.

    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn’t be part of France. That turned out great for them.

    Is that really so surprising, though? I mean, if you’re not going to get treated as an equal in the country that you live in, then it’s perfectly sensible to push for secession and try creating your own country. Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn’t have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.

    Thus, in the grand scheme of things, Yes, Algerians could have lived quite well under French rule if they were given citizenship and treated as equals. The same could have also been true for Tunisians, Moroccans, Senegalese, et cetera had France been willing to also annex these territories and give citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living there. However, to my knowledge, France had no desire to actually do this. It’s like with the West Bank–sure, West Bank Arabs could live very well if Israel annexed them and gave them citizenship and legal equality–but this is something that Israel simply isn’t offering and is unlikely to offer anytime soon (if ever). Thus, is it really irrational for West Bank Arabs to push for their own state–either with or without the Gaza Strip?

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn’t it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)? After all, the only moral alternative to this would have been granting citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living in these territories–and that would have meant that Europeans in France would have lost a lot of their political power. Plus, in such a scenario, France would have likely experienced a significant drop in its average IQ and would have had to aggressively subsidize these territories.

    • Replies: @AP

    Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn’t have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.
     
    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn’t it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)?
     
    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there). My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.
  112. @AP

    I think Algerians made out pretty well, comparing their situations over time.
     
    Mass murder and civil unrest and relative poverty since rejecting being part of France. It's good for France that Algeria chose Islamism and Arabism over secular French-hood and left (but stupid of France for allowing all those Algerians back in).

    Had France actually been willing to give citizenship to Algerians en masse without forcing them to renounce their Muslim personal status (which I think that French Prime Minister Leon Blum actually proposed in 1936–albeit on a much smaller scale), then maybe much more Algerians would have supported continued French rule. After all, I don’t see a large-scale independence movement in either Puerto Rico or the US Virgin Islands–which is perhaps unsurprising since their populations were given US citizenship en masse in the early 20th century.

    BTW, by your logic, maybe it would have been better for France to stay in Cambodia. After all, that would have certainly ensured that the Khmer Rouge would have never become a serious threat and problem there. For that matter, maybe it would have been better for Ukraine to join Russia in 1992. At least that way they would have experienced a much larger economic recovery under Putin.

    Anyway, Algeria’s poverty was largely unavoidable due to its low average IQ–as is the poverty of neighboring Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries (with the exception of oil-rich Libya, which could have become pretty wealthy in spite of a low average IQ due to its oil reserves if it would have had a better government and much more stability). Had France been willing to aggressively subsidize Algeria (I suppose sort of how the US subsidizes Puerto Rico), then Algeria could have been in better shape. However, I haven’t heard of the French government actually willing to do this back when Algeria was still French.

    As for Algeria’s civil war, this was ironically caused by Algeria’s leadership being too friendly towards democracy. Had Algeria’s leadership refused to allow Islamists to participate in the 1991-1992 presidential elections in Algeria, then it would have had no reason to cancel the second round of these elections at the last minute–which in turn might have ensured that there would have been either no Islamist insurgency or a much smaller Islamist insurgency in Algeria. Raising the hopes of Islamists and then crushing these hopes wasn’t a very good move on the part of Algeria’s leadership–though probably better than having Algeria become a hardcore Islamic state as a result of Islamists actually being allowed to come to power there.

    Finally, I want to make one last point here–I agree that not being selective with immigration from the Muslim world is a terrible idea. However, the one group of Algerians whom I would have supported allowing to settle in France en masse would have been the harkis. After all, they risked their lives for France and that should have entitled them to move to France after Algeria acquired its independence. Of course, it would have been even better had France not conquered Algeria in the first place.

  113. @AP

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well.
     
    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky's uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) - I'd still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions.
     
    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn't have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?

    European countries could have had a greater chance of keeping more of their colonies if they would have been willing to do things such as grant citizenship to their colonial subjects en masse. This is what the US did with Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands in the early 20th century and it really paid off for the US in ensuring that the US brand would remain heavily popular in these territories up to the present-day. The problem with Europeans doing this, though, would have been that there would have eventually been too many non-Europeans who would have had voting rights in European countries. I don’t think that Europeans would have been prepared to give voting rights to so many non-Europeans–just like Israelis currently aren’t prepared to give voting rights to the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank. In turn, when integration to the metropole becomes an unrealistic option, what else is left? Why, independence, of course!

    Rather than ruling over Third Worlders and denying them a say in their own destiny, why not push in favor of things such as IQ-enhancing technology (combating malnutrition, iodine deficiency, and parasitic disease load and also, in the long(er)-run, doing things such as editing the genes of embryos in order to increase their IQs) so that the Third World would significantly improve its level of human capital and thus be more capable of decently ruling itself.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) – I’d still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Be careful what you wish for. After all, I would think that LGBT French people strongly appreciate things such as the legalization of same-sex marriage in France. Indeed, I certainly wouldn’t want the legalization of same-sex marriage in France to have been much harder as a result of the homophobic Algerian population being French voters (and, of course, ruling over Algerians without granting them the right to vote in French elections would have also been immoral).

    Likewise, I would think that many French women greatly value their right to have legal abortions.

    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.

    What was truly catastrophic was the rise of Nazism in Germany and the Western democracies’ unwillingness to do anything meaningful about this in its early stages. Had the Nazis never come to power in Germany, things in the former Austria-Hungary could have continued looking upwards. To my knowledge, a non-Nazi Germany would have only had territorial claims on Poland and no one else–and it might have actually been able to get its territorial claims on Poland (or at least most of them) satisfied without war had Britain been unwilling to fight for Poland in this scenario (which is certainly very plausible, considering that it was the events in Czechoslovakia in 1938-1939 which caused Britain to sour on Germany and to issue its guarantee to Poland).

    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn’t have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.

    Frankly, a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.

    • Replies: @AP

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?
     
    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.
     
    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture - it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language. Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn't really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.
     
    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1
  114. The US already has Hawaii–which is halfway between the continental US and Australia/New Zealand, no?

  115. @songbird
    I don't trust the AP very much, for instance, but if we presume it is true, the desert was probably judged to be more politically expedient than bullets.

    There is a recurring irony in these things. Minimal casualties in the longterm would probably be to decimate them and let the remaining 9 out of 10 record it. Repeat, as long as necessary. But that is only if globohomo were a hobgoblin, and not a global force backed with drones and cruise missiles.

    I don’t trust the AP very much, for instance, but if we presume it is true, the desert was probably judged to be more politically expedient than bullets.

    Seems like most of them are just expelled to Niger and Mali and only some of them are left in the desert, which is a bit lame, because the Algerians have to do it over and over again.

    https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2017/12/237238/algeria-sub-saharan-migrants-migration/amp/

  116. @Mr. XYZ

    Sure. And Algerians killed and died so they wouldn’t be part of France. That turned out great for them.
     
    Is that really so surprising, though? I mean, if you're not going to get treated as an equal in the country that you live in, then it's perfectly sensible to push for secession and try creating your own country. Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn't have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.

    Thus, in the grand scheme of things, Yes, Algerians could have lived quite well under French rule if they were given citizenship and treated as equals. The same could have also been true for Tunisians, Moroccans, Senegalese, et cetera had France been willing to also annex these territories and give citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living there. However, to my knowledge, France had no desire to actually do this. It's like with the West Bank--sure, West Bank Arabs could live very well if Israel annexed them and gave them citizenship and legal equality--but this is something that Israel simply isn't offering and is unlikely to offer anytime soon (if ever). Thus, is it really irrational for West Bank Arabs to push for their own state--either with or without the Gaza Strip?

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn't it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)? After all, the only moral alternative to this would have been granting citizenship and legal equality to all of the people who were living in these territories--and that would have meant that Europeans in France would have lost a lot of their political power. Plus, in such a scenario, France would have likely experienced a significant drop in its average IQ and would have had to aggressively subsidize these territories.

    Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn’t have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.

    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn’t it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)?

    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there). My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.
     
    As far as I can tell, while France might have indeed done this in 1947 (I will have to do more research on this; after all, acquiring French citizenship means acquiring the right to move to metropolitan France, no? And yet, I seem to recall France not always being willing to accept Algerian harkis at the end of the Algerian War in 1962), France still appears to have rigged the rules in favor of the Europeans in Algeria. For instance, it states here that while Algeria received its own legislature, two electoral colleges [/b]of equal size[b] were created--one for the Europeans (and a few Muslims) and one for the Muslims:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=cJ9sBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&dq=algerians+french+citizenship+1947+electoral+college&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTxZ-1vLDgAhUEI6wKHaoLA1sQ6AEIRjAF#v=onepage&q=algerians%20french%20citizenship%201947%20electoral%20college&f=false

    Also, please keep in mind that (as stated in the book above) one needed a two-thirds majority to get anything done in the Algerian assembly--which ensured that Algerian Muslims wouldn't be able to get anything done without the approval of the Europeans in Algeria.

    Given that Muslims had something like a 9 to 1 (or 7 to 1, as is stated in a link below) population advantage over Europeans in Algeria (even if one includes Algerian Jews as Europeans), this seems like nothing less than blatant gerrymandering in favor of Europeans. Also, something similar appears to have been in play for French legislative elections:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_French_legislative_election_in_Algeria

    Specifically, it says in the article above that (Europeans plus Jews) and Muslims elected the same number of deputies to the French National Assembly in spite of the Muslims having a 7 to 1 population advantage over the (Europeans plus Jews) in Algeria.

    In turn, what all of this shows is that France was very much determined to continue rigging the rules against Algerian Muslims even after the end of WWII. In turn, this is unsurprising that separatism became very popular among Algerian Muslims. After all, one would think that they simply gave up hope of France ever agreeing to either let them rule themselves or giving them a share in the French National Assembly which was equal to their total population.

    If you have any information in regards to this which I am unaware of and which undermines my arguments here, please let me know.

    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.
     
    Ah! Makes sense. Indeed, such attitudes are probably quite normal in Eastern Europe and Israel. In fact, even the Algerians themselves had such attitudes given how they expelled the European population of Algeria after Algeria acquired independence. Indeed, not everyone likes diversity--especially in huge numbers.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there).
     
    Personally, I am not very fond of ethnic cleansing. If France did want to keep a part of Algeria (and I would think that Oran and the surrounding areas were its best bet due to their higher European percentage), then I think that the moral thing for France to do would have been to let the Muslims living in this territory to stay where they are (and, of course, not to gerrymander any elections against them afterwards).

    My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.
     
    I would have agreed with you if France would have stopped gerrymandering elections against the Muslims in Algeria and if Algerians would have still wanted to secede from France afterwards. Based on the set of facts which I am currently aware of, though, I think that the Algerians' decision to secede from France was perfectly justified. I just wish that the post-independence period--specifically the 1990s--would have been much better for them.
  117. @Adam
    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn't want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they'd be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be 'better off' in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn't mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.

    Yeah, Algeria doesn’t appear to be faring exceptionally bad by the standards of the region that it is located in. True, Tunisia and Morocco didn’t have a brutal bloody civil war like Algeria had, but at the same time, Libya does appear to have had a long period of warfare and chaos in the 2010s similar to what Algeria had in the 1990s.

    Anyway, in my honest opinion, one needs to understand why exactly one’s colonial subjects (or de facto colonial subjects, in the case of the Algerians) would want independence. Personally, I suspect that when one’s colonial subjects are given citizenship en masse and treated as legal equals, the odds of one’s colonial subjects demanding independence would go way down. As examples I would cite Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, and Central Asia up to 1991. All of these areas didn’t have large-scale movements (until 1991 in the case of Central Asia), and what all of these areas have in common is that the population there was treated relatively well (in comparison to their other countrymen) by the governing authorities of the country that they lived in. For instance, AFAIK, the Soviet Union brought education, infrastructure, women’s rights, et cetera to Central Asia (and the famines that Central Asia endured in the 1930s, while extremely tragic, were not unique to this region; after all, Ukraine and perhaps southern Russia also suffered from these famines). One would think that all of these things resulted in the Russian/Soviet brand being strengthened in Central Asia and in Central Asians being nostalgic for the USSR after it collapsed. Had Algerians and other colonial subjects been given citizenship, treated as legal equals, and experienced a large improvement in their lives under colonialism, it is entirely possible that support for independence in these territories would have been much smaller than it was in real life.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.

    Actually, in terms of average IQ, Poles, Estonians, Finns, and Russians aren’t much lower than Germans are. Latvia and Lithuania are a bit lower, but not too much. The part of Europe that is a true backwater is Moldova, Romania, and the Balkans. Personally, I don’t think that AP would have objected much if Austria-Hungary would have conquered the Balkans–at least as long as the Balkan peoples would have been given citizenship and legal equality within Austria-Hungary afterwards.

    In the grand scheme of things, though, I completely agree with you that forcibly ruling over other peoples because one believes that one could do a better job governing their territories is a terrible idea. For instance, while Cambodians were probably very happy with the Vietnamese for overthrowing the Khmer Rouge, they were not particularly interested in having the Vietnamese remain in Cambodia for the long-haul. Thus, various Cambodians–and not only the remnants of the Khmer Rouge–fought against the Vietnamese in the hopes of getting the Vietnamese to leave Cambodia (something which ultimately happened in 1989-1991). Anyway, my point here is that while Vietnam could very possibly do a better job of governing Laos and Cambodia than the Laotians and Cambodians themselves (due to the Vietnamese likely having a higher average IQ), it would nevertheless be perfectly legitimate for both the Laotians and the Cambodians to resist any Vietnamese invasion of their countries.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Yeah, Algeria doesn’t appear to be faring exceptionally bad by the standards of the region that it is located in.
     
    In that neighborhood Algeria is doing fairly well. Just wait until some busybody brings democracy to it, like NATO did in Libya. Then all hell is going to break loose.
  118. @Mr. XYZ

    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.
     
    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?

    European countries could have had a greater chance of keeping more of their colonies if they would have been willing to do things such as grant citizenship to their colonial subjects en masse. This is what the US did with Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands in the early 20th century and it really paid off for the US in ensuring that the US brand would remain heavily popular in these territories up to the present-day. The problem with Europeans doing this, though, would have been that there would have eventually been too many non-Europeans who would have had voting rights in European countries. I don't think that Europeans would have been prepared to give voting rights to so many non-Europeans--just like Israelis currently aren't prepared to give voting rights to the Palestinian Arabs in the West Bank. In turn, when integration to the metropole becomes an unrealistic option, what else is left? Why, independence, of course!

    Rather than ruling over Third Worlders and denying them a say in their own destiny, why not push in favor of things such as IQ-enhancing technology (combating malnutrition, iodine deficiency, and parasitic disease load and also, in the long(er)-run, doing things such as editing the genes of embryos in order to increase their IQs) so that the Third World would significantly improve its level of human capital and thus be more capable of decently ruling itself.

    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) – I’d still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.
     
    Be careful what you wish for. After all, I would think that LGBT French people strongly appreciate things such as the legalization of same-sex marriage in France. Indeed, I certainly wouldn't want the legalization of same-sex marriage in France to have been much harder as a result of the homophobic Algerian population being French voters (and, of course, ruling over Algerians without granting them the right to vote in French elections would have also been immoral).

    Likewise, I would think that many French women greatly value their right to have legal abortions.

    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.
     
    I'm not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.

    What was truly catastrophic was the rise of Nazism in Germany and the Western democracies' unwillingness to do anything meaningful about this in its early stages. Had the Nazis never come to power in Germany, things in the former Austria-Hungary could have continued looking upwards. To my knowledge, a non-Nazi Germany would have only had territorial claims on Poland and no one else--and it might have actually been able to get its territorial claims on Poland (or at least most of them) satisfied without war had Britain been unwilling to fight for Poland in this scenario (which is certainly very plausible, considering that it was the events in Czechoslovakia in 1938-1939 which caused Britain to sour on Germany and to issue its guarantee to Poland).

    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn’t have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.
     
    Frankly, a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture – it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language. Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.

    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.
     
    Thanks for this information, AP!

    Anyway, this comment of mine was in reference to Third World peoples such as Algerians, Tunisians, Moroccans, and Senegalese.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.
     
    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was. If you'll look at a map of the 1931 Yugoslav census, the formerly Austro-Hungarian areas (with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina) were the most literate areas in Yugoslavia during this time:

    https://i.redd.it/zdt5xc7glq001.jpg

    Still, one could argue that having a bunch of literate Serbs and Croats inside of Yugoslavia would be a boon for it. Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities--sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture – it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language.
     
    I'm not really sure that interwar Czechoslovakia was useless. I mean, as far as I can tell, it appears to have done a reasonably good job in regards to the economy, et cetera. Plus, it was able to remain democratic when all of the other Central and Eastern European countries became dictatorships in the interwar era.

    Also, Yes, I am certainly not disputing that A-H was great for Czech culture. However, even without A-H, Czech culture could have thrived. Heck, even if the Czechs would have been annexed to Germany, they could have done pretty well for themselves--especially if this Germany would have had a tolerant nationalities policy. In addition, I don't think that A-H was vital for establishing Czech literacy; rather, I suspect that even a small independent Czech state could have eventually been able to attain mass literacy.

    Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.
     
    One could argue, though, that like with the more educated Serbs and Croats from A-H which ended up in Yugoslavia after the end of WWI, having a lot of educated people from the former A-H might have really helped countries such as Romania. I don't know if Romania actually did this, but Transylvanians and Bukovinians would have been great candidates to fill the Romanian bureaucracy, et cetera in the interwar era due to their history of being under A-H rule.

    Same for Italy. Northern Italians (of whom there were plenty in Italy even in 1914) ensured that southern Italy will get a more competent, less corrupt government than it would have gotten had it been its own country.

    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1
     
    Was it the work of local activists in 19th and early 20th century France, though? I mean, the various French patois underwent a significant decline in popularity as a result of French schoolchildren being taught in standard French.
    , @Hyperborean

    Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones.
     
    But it was the North Italians who chose to unify Italy, and even if they suffered from being connected with South Italians they could just as well be in a unified North Italy under Sardinia-Piedmont while leaving the Two Sicilies separate.
    , @Mikhail

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself.
     
    The “PLC” was Polish dominated ot the point that the Lithuanians were to sour on it. The ancestors of modern day Ukrainians had influential roles in the Russian Empire.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education.
     
    Maybe not. Austria benefited from the minorities it subjugated.

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.
  119. @AP

    Indeed, had the US conquered all of Mexico in 1848 but refused to give US citizenship to most of these Mexicans and their descendants, then I certainly wouldn’t have been surprised to see a large-scale secessionist movement eventually developing in Mexico as well.
     
    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.

    BTW, given your hostility towards Sunni Islam, wouldn’t it be a good thing that France left Algeria and other Muslim territories (Tunisia, Morocco, Senegal, et cetera)?
     
    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there). My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.

    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.

    As far as I can tell, while France might have indeed done this in 1947 (I will have to do more research on this; after all, acquiring French citizenship means acquiring the right to move to metropolitan France, no? And yet, I seem to recall France not always being willing to accept Algerian harkis at the end of the Algerian War in 1962), France still appears to have rigged the rules in favor of the Europeans in Algeria. For instance, it states here that while Algeria received its own legislature, two electoral colleges [/b]of equal size[b] were created–one for the Europeans (and a few Muslims) and one for the Muslims:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=cJ9sBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&dq=algerians+french+citizenship+1947+electoral+college&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTxZ-1vLDgAhUEI6wKHaoLA1sQ6AEIRjAF#v=onepage&q=algerians%20french%20citizenship%201947%20electoral%20college&f=false

    Also, please keep in mind that (as stated in the book above) one needed a two-thirds majority to get anything done in the Algerian assembly–which ensured that Algerian Muslims wouldn’t be able to get anything done without the approval of the Europeans in Algeria.

    Given that Muslims had something like a 9 to 1 (or 7 to 1, as is stated in a link below) population advantage over Europeans in Algeria (even if one includes Algerian Jews as Europeans), this seems like nothing less than blatant gerrymandering in favor of Europeans. Also, something similar appears to have been in play for French legislative elections:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_French_legislative_election_in_Algeria

    Specifically, it says in the article above that (Europeans plus Jews) and Muslims elected the same number of deputies to the French National Assembly in spite of the Muslims having a 7 to 1 population advantage over the (Europeans plus Jews) in Algeria.

    In turn, what all of this shows is that France was very much determined to continue rigging the rules against Algerian Muslims even after the end of WWII. In turn, this is unsurprising that separatism became very popular among Algerian Muslims. After all, one would think that they simply gave up hope of France ever agreeing to either let them rule themselves or giving them a share in the French National Assembly which was equal to their total population.

    If you have any information in regards to this which I am unaware of and which undermines my arguments here, please let me know.

    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.

    Ah! Makes sense. Indeed, such attitudes are probably quite normal in Eastern Europe and Israel. In fact, even the Algerians themselves had such attitudes given how they expelled the European population of Algeria after Algeria acquired independence. Indeed, not everyone likes diversity–especially in huge numbers.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there).

    Personally, I am not very fond of ethnic cleansing. If France did want to keep a part of Algeria (and I would think that Oran and the surrounding areas were its best bet due to their higher European percentage), then I think that the moral thing for France to do would have been to let the Muslims living in this territory to stay where they are (and, of course, not to gerrymander any elections against them afterwards).

    My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.

    I would have agreed with you if France would have stopped gerrymandering elections against the Muslims in Algeria and if Algerians would have still wanted to secede from France afterwards. Based on the set of facts which I am currently aware of, though, I think that the Algerians’ decision to secede from France was perfectly justified. I just wish that the post-independence period–specifically the 1990s–would have been much better for them.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean
    I think it was a mistake for France not to encourage Berber nationalism against the Arabs in Algeria (and Morocco).

    Even if the French eventually lost they would have still have weakened the Arabs.

  120. @AP

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?
     
    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.
     
    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture - it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language. Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn't really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.
     
    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Thanks for this information, AP!

    Anyway, this comment of mine was in reference to Third World peoples such as Algerians, Tunisians, Moroccans, and Senegalese.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was. If you’ll look at a map of the 1931 Yugoslav census, the formerly Austro-Hungarian areas (with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina) were the most literate areas in Yugoslavia during this time:

    Still, one could argue that having a bunch of literate Serbs and Croats inside of Yugoslavia would be a boon for it. Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities–sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture – it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language.

    I’m not really sure that interwar Czechoslovakia was useless. I mean, as far as I can tell, it appears to have done a reasonably good job in regards to the economy, et cetera. Plus, it was able to remain democratic when all of the other Central and Eastern European countries became dictatorships in the interwar era.

    Also, Yes, I am certainly not disputing that A-H was great for Czech culture. However, even without A-H, Czech culture could have thrived. Heck, even if the Czechs would have been annexed to Germany, they could have done pretty well for themselves–especially if this Germany would have had a tolerant nationalities policy. In addition, I don’t think that A-H was vital for establishing Czech literacy; rather, I suspect that even a small independent Czech state could have eventually been able to attain mass literacy.

    Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    One could argue, though, that like with the more educated Serbs and Croats from A-H which ended up in Yugoslavia after the end of WWI, having a lot of educated people from the former A-H might have really helped countries such as Romania. I don’t know if Romania actually did this, but Transylvanians and Bukovinians would have been great candidates to fill the Romanian bureaucracy, et cetera in the interwar era due to their history of being under A-H rule.

    Same for Italy. Northern Italians (of whom there were plenty in Italy even in 1914) ensured that southern Italy will get a more competent, less corrupt government than it would have gotten had it been its own country.

    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1

    Was it the work of local activists in 19th and early 20th century France, though? I mean, the various French patois underwent a significant decline in popularity as a result of French schoolchildren being taught in standard French.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities–sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.
     
    The people of the Balkans outside Austria-Hungary had the opportunity to study in Paris and Berlin before and after the Empire collapsed.

    The competence of local governance is the key point.
    , @Mikhail

    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was.
     
    Serbia was subjugated by an entity for an extended period unlike the Austrians. In any event, Serbia was to play the lead role in the development of Yugoslavia.
  121. @Mr. XYZ

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.
     
    Thanks for this information, AP!

    Anyway, this comment of mine was in reference to Third World peoples such as Algerians, Tunisians, Moroccans, and Senegalese.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.
     
    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was. If you'll look at a map of the 1931 Yugoslav census, the formerly Austro-Hungarian areas (with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina) were the most literate areas in Yugoslavia during this time:

    https://i.redd.it/zdt5xc7glq001.jpg

    Still, one could argue that having a bunch of literate Serbs and Croats inside of Yugoslavia would be a boon for it. Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities--sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture – it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language.
     
    I'm not really sure that interwar Czechoslovakia was useless. I mean, as far as I can tell, it appears to have done a reasonably good job in regards to the economy, et cetera. Plus, it was able to remain democratic when all of the other Central and Eastern European countries became dictatorships in the interwar era.

    Also, Yes, I am certainly not disputing that A-H was great for Czech culture. However, even without A-H, Czech culture could have thrived. Heck, even if the Czechs would have been annexed to Germany, they could have done pretty well for themselves--especially if this Germany would have had a tolerant nationalities policy. In addition, I don't think that A-H was vital for establishing Czech literacy; rather, I suspect that even a small independent Czech state could have eventually been able to attain mass literacy.

    Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.
     
    One could argue, though, that like with the more educated Serbs and Croats from A-H which ended up in Yugoslavia after the end of WWI, having a lot of educated people from the former A-H might have really helped countries such as Romania. I don't know if Romania actually did this, but Transylvanians and Bukovinians would have been great candidates to fill the Romanian bureaucracy, et cetera in the interwar era due to their history of being under A-H rule.

    Same for Italy. Northern Italians (of whom there were plenty in Italy even in 1914) ensured that southern Italy will get a more competent, less corrupt government than it would have gotten had it been its own country.

    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1
     
    Was it the work of local activists in 19th and early 20th century France, though? I mean, the various French patois underwent a significant decline in popularity as a result of French schoolchildren being taught in standard French.

    Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities–sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.

    The people of the Balkans outside Austria-Hungary had the opportunity to study in Paris and Berlin before and after the Empire collapsed.

    The competence of local governance is the key point.

    • Agree: Mr. XYZ
  122. @AP

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?
     
    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.
     
    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture - it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language. Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn't really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.
     
    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1

    Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones.

    But it was the North Italians who chose to unify Italy, and even if they suffered from being connected with South Italians they could just as well be in a unified North Italy under Sardinia-Piedmont while leaving the Two Sicilies separate.

  123. @AP

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well.
     
    Sure, but what if it peacefully had remained an integral part of France, as it had been? Leaving France was a dumb move for Algerians.

    Khmelnytsky's uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Or maybe Algerians plus conservative Catholics would have shielded France from all that, something Catholics alone could not do. Although Islam is worse than modern secular humanism (which is just spoiled Christianity) - I'd still rather live in Sweden than in Saudi Arabia.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions.
     
    Probably. Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Well, for hundreds of years Ukrainians didn't have independence, either. They left Poland and fell into Russia. Given what this meant (expansion and worsening of serfdom, joining in on the Bolshevik debacle to the loss of millions, followed by relative poverty) this has been a disaster. I doubt Ukraine would have been any more Polonized than it became Russified. Kiev would probably have remained a Polish-speaking city as it had been in the 17th-18th centuries, until industrialization and peasants poured into it.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I don’t see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians? Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the ‘middle’ and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement? Besides, the Polish element within the PLC sealed Ukraine’s fate of not becoming a valued and equal third member of the Commonwealth by quickly abrogating the Treaty of Hadiach (1658) that would have created a third Duchy of Ruthenia.

    Alas, this proposed coat of arms, was not to be.

    • Replies: @AP

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I don’t see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians?
     
    Kept them out of Moscow's embrace. Kept them within the West at a time when the West was ascendant. Prevented the mass devastation that the civil war ushered in. Khmelytsky's Tatar allies went on a rampage across Ukraine, and then there was the Ruin, followed by about 50 years of bright history under the Hetmanate, followed by centuries of disasters. Overall, on balance, it was very bad.

    Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the ‘middle’ and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement?
     
    The plight of peasants was bad everywhere and would remain bad long afterwards. Admittedly the civil war resulted in a reprieve for the peasants. Maybe this reprieve (temporary, because when the Russians came things got back to normal) was even worth the mass Tatar devastation the rebellion brought to the peasants. The lower gentry were upset that the Rus magnates were getting more power at their expense. But after the rebellion they just imitated them and faced their own rebellion so this did not really change.

    Long-term, the rebellion meant exit from the Polish world and entrance into the Russian world, which meant expansion and worsening of serfdom in accordance with Russian norms, then Bolshevism misadventure along with the rest of the Russian world (so loss of millions) and now post-Soviet relative poverty. On balance, a disaster for Ukraine.
  124. @AP

    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia.

    It’s just a blatant lie. In Russia Orthodoxy was the state religion, and in Poland the Orthodox population was legally deprived of the rights and lived under double oppression – Catholics-poles and Jews.
     
    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century. As I pointed out, Orthodox Rus from GDL freely and happily went to war against Orthodox in Moscow.

    I suspect origins of nobles..

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite
     
    Elite of Great Russia whom Russian serfs fed were mostly of foreign stock - descendants of Scandinavians, Germans, Tatars or Lithuanians.

    Nobles in GDL were probably more local in origin than in Moscow. Khmelnytsky - the renegade noble, was of local origin. His antagonist, the magnate Wisniowecki, admittedly was from a Rurukid family (Scandinavian origin).

    In the 15-17 centuries undoubtedly a “great Russian” achievements per capita, surpassed the achievements of the enslaved Western Russian. Who of the cultural figures at least a little known in other countries? Andrei Rublev, Theophanes The Greek, Dionysius.
     
    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky's movie.

    Theophanes was from Constantinople.

    , St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect built this church for the Orthodox of that city:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Lviv_Kornakta_2007.jpg

    It’s no wonder the indigenous population on the lands of the GDL were turned into cattle, and cattle has no culture.
     
    Let's look at "cattle with no culture."

    Level of education of Orthodox in PLC vs. in Muscovy says you a lot. Muscovy had nothing on the level of Kiev Academy.

    Danish envoy Jul Just visited Russia and Ukraine in the early 1700s. About Muscovy:

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

    He noted that all of the teacher's in the Moscow higher school were Orthodox from Poland.

    Contrast to the lands that had recently been part of PLC, in Ukraine:

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

    He noted that the monks in the Pecherska Lavra could converse with him in Latin. He saw peasants in Ukraine carrying prayer books, implying that they were literate. Unlike Prince Menshikov of Moscow.

    French diplomat, Jean Baluse, writing about Mazepa:

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

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

    Ironically, because of the higher level of education and culture among the Rus people in the PLC vs. those in Moscow, Orthodox from PLC contributed significantly even to Russia's culture. Without PLC, who knows if Russia would even have had much of a high culture.

    As Dostoyevsky (himself the product of PLC) noted, modern Russian literature comes largely from Gogol - a product of the Hetmanate and ultimately of PLC. Let's look at Russian music.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677...

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    Those three were from the Hetmanate - child of PLC.

    So Russia's classical music tradition derives to a large extent from PLC.

    You appear to be as ill-informed as you are ungrateful :-)

    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century.

    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals). Such order was established gradually, well so Jews in the third Reich were sent to gas chambers not instantly.

    Elite of Great Russia whom blah blah blah

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite – Polish and Jewish parasites. Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie

    But about “Ukrainian” painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard. Probably these (Ukrainian) icon painters are unknown in Ukraine itself (but Rublev and Dionysius are known)

    , St. Basil’s Cathedral

    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect

    The criterion is simple – about what achievements in the field of art/science people know all over the world. St. Basil’s Cathedral is known to people all over the world. Any buildings created on the territory of modern Ukraine in the 15-17 centuries are completely unknown. So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita. This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands

    Level of education ….Danish envoy Jul Just … About Muscovy…“Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write.

    It’s just stuff (Prince Menshikov could read and write, that’s for sure proven, etc.), but most importantly it is completely irrelevant. About the achievements of Peter’s elite in the field of art / science you can read in any book on the history of Europe of the 18th century (construction of St. Petersburg, Bering expedition, etc.). But the achievements of the enslaved indigenous population in the GDL lands is nothing, zero. Cattle have no culture

    • Replies: @AP

    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals).
     
    Serfs were not oppressed as "Orthodox" at all. Where were anti-Orthodox pogroms, laws, etc for serfs? Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than that of Catholic serf in PLC, or of Orthodox serf in Russia. Actually Orthodox serf in PLC lived better than Catholic serfs did - restrictions were lighter due to frontier conditions. This is why a lot of Mazovian peasants moved to Ukrainian lands, where they mixed with Rus people and became Orthodox.

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.

    Supreme commander of GDL forced in war against Moscow (prince Ostrogsky) - indigenous Orthodox.

    One hundred years later, co-commander of PLC forces against Turks (Sahaidachny) and partner against Moscow - indigenous Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_campaigns

    Member of Polish Senate and negotiatior with Khmelnytsky (Kysil) - indigenous Orthodox.

    "Animals", indeed.

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite – Polish and Jewish parasites
     
    The greatest magnate in Ukraine was a native Rus prince. Converted to Catholicism, but spent lavishly on Orthodox monasteries and defended them from Tatar raids. Romanovs were Germans.

    I assume you are of serf descent? Is that why you are bitter, that your people served foreigners for centuries while your brethren of PLC did not?

    Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL
     
    Again, facts of Orthodox from PLC huge role in Moscow culture after incorporation of these lands contradicts lie of "absence of won culture" in PLC.

    "Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie"

    But about “Ukrainian” painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard.

     

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It's about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.

    Here is a Ukrainian icon painter from PLC:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD

    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil's Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings. And probably St. Basil's is only famous because Russia became a great power long after St. Basil's was built, and St. Basils' is on Rd Square that is shown on TV etc. Silly and desperate argument to use its fame now as evidence of high cultural level in 15th-17th century Muscovy relative to Rus of PLC.

    So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.
     
    Repeating nonsense doesn't make it true.

    Meanwhile, the facts - classical music tradition in Russia came from an emigrant from PLC. Moscow kids were taught mostly by teachers who were Orthodox from Poland. Moscow Church for 80- years was led by people from PLC. This is what naturally happens when people from superior culture have access to career advancement in a place where the cultural level is lower. It's why the Russian historian Vernadsky stated that the acquisition of Kiev was no less important than St. Petersburg for the modernization and Westernization of Russia.

    This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands
     
    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture. But a Muscovite tsar once hired an Italian to build a famous church :-)
  125. @Mr. XYZ

    IIRC after World War II all Algerians were given French citizenship, and Algeria was legally as French as any province in France itself. It was like Hawaii is for the USA now, not like the West Bank. There was probably a lot of informal discrimination, Europeans owned the best land, etc. but legally they were French people living in a part of France.
     
    As far as I can tell, while France might have indeed done this in 1947 (I will have to do more research on this; after all, acquiring French citizenship means acquiring the right to move to metropolitan France, no? And yet, I seem to recall France not always being willing to accept Algerian harkis at the end of the Algerian War in 1962), France still appears to have rigged the rules in favor of the Europeans in Algeria. For instance, it states here that while Algeria received its own legislature, two electoral colleges [/b]of equal size[b] were created--one for the Europeans (and a few Muslims) and one for the Muslims:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=cJ9sBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&dq=algerians+french+citizenship+1947+electoral+college&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTxZ-1vLDgAhUEI6wKHaoLA1sQ6AEIRjAF#v=onepage&q=algerians%20french%20citizenship%201947%20electoral%20college&f=false

    Also, please keep in mind that (as stated in the book above) one needed a two-thirds majority to get anything done in the Algerian assembly--which ensured that Algerian Muslims wouldn't be able to get anything done without the approval of the Europeans in Algeria.

    Given that Muslims had something like a 9 to 1 (or 7 to 1, as is stated in a link below) population advantage over Europeans in Algeria (even if one includes Algerian Jews as Europeans), this seems like nothing less than blatant gerrymandering in favor of Europeans. Also, something similar appears to have been in play for French legislative elections:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1951_French_legislative_election_in_Algeria

    Specifically, it says in the article above that (Europeans plus Jews) and Muslims elected the same number of deputies to the French National Assembly in spite of the Muslims having a 7 to 1 population advantage over the (Europeans plus Jews) in Algeria.

    In turn, what all of this shows is that France was very much determined to continue rigging the rules against Algerian Muslims even after the end of WWII. In turn, this is unsurprising that separatism became very popular among Algerian Muslims. After all, one would think that they simply gave up hope of France ever agreeing to either let them rule themselves or giving them a share in the French National Assembly which was equal to their total population.

    If you have any information in regards to this which I am unaware of and which undermines my arguments here, please let me know.

    I am no more hostile towards Sunni Islam than I am towards any other non-Christian faith, I just oppose flooding of Europe by non-natives and support the preservation of indigenous culture in Europe.
     
    Ah! Makes sense. Indeed, such attitudes are probably quite normal in Eastern Europe and Israel. In fact, even the Algerians themselves had such attitudes given how they expelled the European population of Algeria after Algeria acquired independence. Indeed, not everyone likes diversity--especially in huge numbers.

    But sure, it was good for France to leave Algeria (though I think it would have been better to engage in some population transfer and leave a piece of Europe beyond the sea for the Europeans living there).
     
    Personally, I am not very fond of ethnic cleansing. If France did want to keep a part of Algeria (and I would think that Oran and the surrounding areas were its best bet due to their higher European percentage), then I think that the moral thing for France to do would have been to let the Muslims living in this territory to stay where they are (and, of course, not to gerrymander any elections against them afterwards).

    My point was that it was dumb of Algerians to leave France.
     
    I would have agreed with you if France would have stopped gerrymandering elections against the Muslims in Algeria and if Algerians would have still wanted to secede from France afterwards. Based on the set of facts which I am currently aware of, though, I think that the Algerians' decision to secede from France was perfectly justified. I just wish that the post-independence period--specifically the 1990s--would have been much better for them.

    I think it was a mistake for France not to encourage Berber nationalism against the Arabs in Algeria (and Morocco).

    Even if the French eventually lost they would have still have weakened the Arabs.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?
  126. @Hyperborean
    I think it was a mistake for France not to encourage Berber nationalism against the Arabs in Algeria (and Morocco).

    Even if the French eventually lost they would have still have weakened the Arabs.

    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?
     
    The Algerians for revenge. The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.
  127. @Mr. XYZ
    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?

    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?

    The Algerians for revenge. The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!
    , @Hyperborean

    The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.
     
    The Algerians are rather angry about this.

    https://www.echoroukonline.com/marianne-exposes-moroccan-influence-in-french-decisions/
  128. @Ender
    Given the fact that the price of oil has a floor of 50 a barrel, it does not make much sense for the budget assumptions to be so conservative, and running a small budget deficit of less than 2 percent of GDP in order to spend more on the military, infrastructure, and social services is actually not a bad idea, and considering its fiscal situation, Russia can actually afford to kick the can down the road on pension reform for a few more years or even a decade.

    “running a small budget deficit of less than 2 percent of GDP in order to spend more on the military, infrastructure, and social services is actually not a bad idea”
    I agree. A 2% deficit is usually quite sustainable — if the money is spent wisely. Investment in needed infrastructure, the military, education & esp’ science & technology are priorities for a nation like Russia, beset by sanctions & Western skulldugery.

  129. @Hyperborean

    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?
     
    The Algerians for revenge. The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.

    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!
     
    Although there were peaks and throughs, it was only the efforts of European countries and America in the early nineteenth century that finally pacified the Barbary petty warlord governments and their Ottoman suzerains.

    What is most striking about Barbary slaving raids is their scale and reach. Pirates took most of their slaves from ships, but they also organized huge, amphibious assaults that practically depopulated parts of the Italian coast. Italy was the most popular target, partly because Sicily is only 125 miles from Tunis, but also because it did not have strong central rulers who could resist invasion. Large raiding parties might be essentially unopposed. When pirates sacked Vieste in southern Italy in 1554, for example, they took an astonishing 6,000 captives. Algerians took 7,000 slaves in the Bay of Naples in 1544, in a raid that drove the price of slaves so low it was said you could “swap a Christian for an onion.” Spain, too, suffered large-scale attacks. After a raid on Granada in 1566 netted 4,000 men, women, and children, it was said to be “raining Christians in Algiers.” For every large-scale raid of this kind there would have been dozens of smaller ones. The appearance of a large fleet could send the entire population inland, emptying coastal areas. In 1566, a party of 6,000 Turks and Corsairs sailed up the Adriatic and landed at Fracaville. The authorities could do nothing, and urged complete evacuation, leaving the Turks in control of over 500 square miles of abandoned villages all the way to Serracapriola.
     
    https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/barbary-barbarity/
    , @reiner Tor
    History always started the exact moment the Europeans started winning the game everyone else was playing, too. The French invasion struck the peaceful pirates, slave hunters and slave traders out of the blue. They did nothing which might have provoked a European invasion or made it easy for colonization advocates to justify the invasion to the public. Not to mention their suzerain, the Ottoman emperor, who never engaged in the invasion of European countries.
  130. The French (based on the interests of France) had to be held partition of Algeria. Allocate land where to resettle the Algerian French and expel the Arabs from these lands. For the rest of the territories to grant independence.

  131. @Randall Parker
    If you want Russia to be stronger via government spending why not favor projects that make the economy stronger rather than projects that make the Russian Navy stronger with weapons for which there is not even a serious prospect of a war to use them in?

    Speaking as an American: I'd love to shift about $100 billion per year from Department of Defense to roads, bridges, and software development summer school classes for any high school student that wants to attend. I would love to ramp to spending on energy efficiency too. If it has to be DOD spending then I would spend on military sites with solar panels, insulation, ground sink heat pumps, and protecting military bases from extreme weather and other natural disasters (the US military bases have many huge future costs coming at them from the next hurricane that comes to shore at the right location).

    There are plenty of infrastructure projects with high positive ROI that governments ignore. Military infrastructure projects with high positive ROI even make a military stronger by cutting long term repair and utility costs.

    I certainly agree with you re: cutting US defence budgets. I also would need to hear argument in favour of increased spending on the Russian navy.
    However, the US & Russian military situations are entirely different.
    US defence spending is a grotesque sink-hole of corruption & negligence designed to engorge elites, the deep state & further dangerous imperial aims.
    Russia, by comparison has (for its size etc)a minimalist military. Also, Russia is beset with enemies, who must be constantly discouraged from interfering with Russia’s sovereignty.
    Therefore investment in Russia’s military is really just that: an investment.

  132. @AP

    Do you mean Russia invading Belarus or Lukashenko giving the order to fight back? I just want to clarify this part.
     
    The first. If the first happened (basically zero likelihood), Lukashenko fighting back to preserve his kingdom would be somewhat likely. His grip is tight enough that his orders would be followed by at least some of his forces.

    ANY kind of Russian military action against Belarus would need to be within the context of massive popular support (in Belarus and Russia) for such actions. Russia lacks the US luxury of wars & thuggishness generally based on ridiculous lies, propaganda & the slavish, dog-like support of most of the West.

  133. @Mr. XYZ
    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!

    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!

    Although there were peaks and throughs, it was only the efforts of European countries and America in the early nineteenth century that finally pacified the Barbary petty warlord governments and their Ottoman suzerains.

    What is most striking about Barbary slaving raids is their scale and reach. Pirates took most of their slaves from ships, but they also organized huge, amphibious assaults that practically depopulated parts of the Italian coast. Italy was the most popular target, partly because Sicily is only 125 miles from Tunis, but also because it did not have strong central rulers who could resist invasion. Large raiding parties might be essentially unopposed. When pirates sacked Vieste in southern Italy in 1554, for example, they took an astonishing 6,000 captives. Algerians took 7,000 slaves in the Bay of Naples in 1544, in a raid that drove the price of slaves so low it was said you could “swap a Christian for an onion.” Spain, too, suffered large-scale attacks. After a raid on Granada in 1566 netted 4,000 men, women, and children, it was said to be “raining Christians in Algiers.” For every large-scale raid of this kind there would have been dozens of smaller ones. The appearance of a large fleet could send the entire population inland, emptying coastal areas. In 1566, a party of 6,000 Turks and Corsairs sailed up the Adriatic and landed at Fracaville. The authorities could do nothing, and urged complete evacuation, leaving the Turks in control of over 500 square miles of abandoned villages all the way to Serracapriola.

    https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/barbary-barbarity/

  134. @Mr. XYZ
    Yeah, that makes sense. Also, if Russia didn't conquer all of Novorossiya in 2014 due to the fear of crippling Western sanctions, then it is unlikely to conquer Belarus for the same reason. After all, one would think that conquering Novorossiya in 2014 would have been more rewarding for Russia than conquering Belarus would have been due to Novorossiya's larger population (in comparison to Belarus, of course). Still, even this reward couldn't persuade Putin to conquer all of Novorossiya back in 2014.

    Yes, agreed. But Russia also wanted the political advantages of keeping Novorossiya within Ukraine: the Lugansk etc are a permanent albatross around the neck of the Ukrainian gangster government .

  135. @Hyperborean

    What would have been the point of weakening the Arabs, though?
     
    The Algerians for revenge. The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.

    The Moroccans because they wield a lot of influence in France.

    The Algerians are rather angry about this.

    https://www.echoroukonline.com/marianne-exposes-moroccan-influence-in-french-decisions/

  136. @Hyperborean

    What about Australia and New Zealand?
     
    Oceania is too far away. Rather Australia and New Zealand should be one state. If places like Western Australia and Newfoundland were eventually amalgated then New Zealand could be too.

    Maybe. But I suspect most NZ’ers & Australians would disagree with you. (NZ’ers have a lot of pride…& as for Australia, they still haven’t forgiven the “underarm bowling” incident from 40 years ago– some of the more cranky NZ’ers would probably like to go to war with Australia (joke))

  137. “While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation”

    I don’t quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).

    Russia also needs to avoid western style secularism and mass immigration in order to survive. It’s no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.

    • Replies: @melanf

    “While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation”

    I don’t quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).
     
    This will mean a civil war in these territories (with the flow of refugees to Russia), followed by the victory of radical jihadists and the transformation of the region into a base for Jihad against Russia
    , @neutral

    It’s no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.
     
    This is really the end goal of the (((neocons/neoliberals))), to turn Russia into what France, Germany, UK are now. Kamala Harris is the most likely to be the next president, and she has already openly linked Russia to supporting xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, etc in the USA. They really want Russia to take in hordes of Africans.
    , @AnonFromTN
    Russia is in no danger of being invaded by “refugees” from Africa and elsewhere. Those “refugees” seek freebies. Suicidal Europeans offer that, whereas Russia does not: you have to earn your keep there.
  138. @jbwilson24
    "While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation"

    I don't quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).

    Russia also needs to avoid western style secularism and mass immigration in order to survive. It's no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.

    “While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation”

    I don’t quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).

    This will mean a civil war in these territories (with the flow of refugees to Russia), followed by the victory of radical jihadists and the transformation of the region into a base for Jihad against Russia

  139. @jbwilson24
    "While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation"

    I don't quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).

    Russia also needs to avoid western style secularism and mass immigration in order to survive. It's no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.

    It’s no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.

    This is really the end goal of the (((neocons/neoliberals))), to turn Russia into what France, Germany, UK are now. Kamala Harris is the most likely to be the next president, and she has already openly linked Russia to supporting xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, etc in the USA. They really want Russia to take in hordes of Africans.

  140. @Mr. XYZ
    Revenge for what? I mean, the French were the ones who invaded Algeria and refused to leave for a whopping 132 years!

    History always started the exact moment the Europeans started winning the game everyone else was playing, too. The French invasion struck the peaceful pirates, slave hunters and slave traders out of the blue. They did nothing which might have provoked a European invasion or made it easy for colonization advocates to justify the invasion to the public. Not to mention their suzerain, the Ottoman emperor, who never engaged in the invasion of European countries.

  141. @AP
    There would probably be a thousand people ahead of me, My people left Belarus in the 1720s. But if there was justice some distant cousin would own the place.

    That is disappointing – I didn’t read carefully and thought it would be the house your grandfather was born, or something. I read Lukashenko’s criminal friend now has this manor and converted it to a restaurant.

    Your relatives should be like Zhirinovsky, who is always mad for restitution of his grandfather’s industrial properties in Ukraine.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @AP
    Much closer relatives from another branch owned an entire village in what is now Poland, but we aren't Polish citizens so we can't get it back.
  142. @AP

    Would you rather be king of your own house or oppressed and under the rule of someone else, though?
     
    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.

    Elimination of Austria-Hungary was bad for all of those peoples.

    I’m not so sure about that. I mean, the Serbs in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Serbia, the Romanians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Romania, the Italians in A-H were able to rejoin their brothers in Italy, the Czechs and Slovaks got their own independent state (and later, states), the Poles in A-H were able to join their brothers in newly recreated Poland, and the Germans in A-H would have been able to join their brothers in Germany had it not been for the victorious Allied powers blocking an Austro-German union in 1919.
     
    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture - it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language. Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn't really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.

    a lot might have depended on whether Polish nationalists or Ukrainian nationalists would have been in charge of introducing literacy en masse to the Ukrainian population in a scenario where Ukraine would have remained a part of Poland.
     
    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself.

    The “PLC” was Polish dominated ot the point that the Lithuanians were to sour on it. The ancestors of modern day Ukrainians had influential roles in the Russian Empire.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education.

    Maybe not. Austria benefited from the minorities it subjugated.

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.

    • Replies: @AP

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.
     
    Correct, but there were more opportunities in Austria. In contrast, would Tesla have been as educated in Serbia as in Austria?
  143. @Mr. XYZ

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself. The son of a Rus magnate and his Polish wife ascended the Polish throne:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Korybut_Wi%C5%9Bniowiecki

    During the Counter-reformation Orthodoxy was suppressed but these restrictions were mostly rolled back.

    At any rate, Ukraine was independent for only about 6 years before becoming a vassal of Russia. A very poor long-term result.
     
    Thanks for this information, AP!

    Anyway, this comment of mine was in reference to Third World peoples such as Algerians, Tunisians, Moroccans, and Senegalese.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education. I suspect literacy in Serbian was higher in Austria than in Serbia itself.
     
    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was. If you'll look at a map of the 1931 Yugoslav census, the formerly Austro-Hungarian areas (with the exception of Bosnia and Herzegovina) were the most literate areas in Yugoslavia during this time:

    https://i.redd.it/zdt5xc7glq001.jpg

    Still, one could argue that having a bunch of literate Serbs and Croats inside of Yugoslavia would be a boon for it. Plus, one could argue that, even after the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Austria and Hungary could have continued accepting students from Balkan countries into their universities--sort of how various Third Worlders come to the First World to study nowadays.

    Czechs and Slovaks stupidly got their own states, and were rewarded with a couple decades of uselessness followed by Nazism and Bolshevism. A-H had been good for Czech native culture – it nurtured their greatest composer Dvorak and writer Hasek. As part of A-H Prague became a large Czech-speaking city and Czech peasants achieved literacy in their own language.
     
    I'm not really sure that interwar Czechoslovakia was useless. I mean, as far as I can tell, it appears to have done a reasonably good job in regards to the economy, et cetera. Plus, it was able to remain democratic when all of the other Central and Eastern European countries became dictatorships in the interwar era.

    Also, Yes, I am certainly not disputing that A-H was great for Czech culture. However, even without A-H, Czech culture could have thrived. Heck, even if the Czechs would have been annexed to Germany, they could have done pretty well for themselves--especially if this Germany would have had a tolerant nationalities policy. In addition, I don't think that A-H was vital for establishing Czech literacy; rather, I suspect that even a small independent Czech state could have eventually been able to attain mass literacy.

    Romanians in Bukovyna were better off than ones n Romania. Northern Italians didn’t really need to be tied down to southern ones. Etc.
     
    One could argue, though, that like with the more educated Serbs and Croats from A-H which ended up in Yugoslavia after the end of WWI, having a lot of educated people from the former A-H might have really helped countries such as Romania. I don't know if Romania actually did this, but Transylvanians and Bukovinians would have been great candidates to fill the Romanian bureaucracy, et cetera in the interwar era due to their history of being under A-H rule.

    Same for Italy. Northern Italians (of whom there were plenty in Italy even in 1914) ensured that southern Italy will get a more competent, less corrupt government than it would have gotten had it been its own country.

    Mass literacy in most places was the work of local activists. The number of Ukrainians equaled that of Poles, whereas Russians outnumbered Ukrainians 3:1
     
    Was it the work of local activists in 19th and early 20th century France, though? I mean, the various French patois underwent a significant decline in popularity as a result of French schoolchildren being taught in standard French.

    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was.

    Serbia was subjugated by an entity for an extended period unlike the Austrians. In any event, Serbia was to play the lead role in the development of Yugoslavia.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Yes, all of this is correct. Of course, I also think that Serbia's likely low average IQ would hold it back relative to countries such as Austria-Hungary (which had some high-IQ peoples inside of it--Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, northern Italians, Slovenes, and Croats).

    In regards to Yugoslavia, weren't Serbs the largest ethnic group in Yugoslavia? Also, wasn't the Serbian royal family the one who was in charge of Yugoslavia until the 1941 Nazi invasion?
  144. @songbird
    They say the further back you go, the more rich ancestors you tend to have, since rich people used to have more surviving children than poor. Though all I can get to is one or two small, ruinous-looking Georgian-style houses. I have wondered about some ruinous-looking castles though.

    All, is citations to the great Plato:

    When he hears a tyrant or king eulogized, he fancies that he is listening to the praises of some keeper of cattle-a swineherd, or shepherd, or perhaps a cowherd, who is congratulated on the quantity of milk which he squeezes from them; and he remarks that the creature whom they tend, and out of whom they squeeze the wealth, is of a less traitable and more insidious nature.

    Then, again, he observes that the great leader is of necessity as ill-mannered and uneducated as any shepherd-for he has no leisure, and he is surrounded by a wall, which is his mountain-pen.

    Hearing of enormous landed proprietors of ten thousand acres and more, our philosopher deems this to be a trifle, because he has been accustomed to think of the whole earth; and when they sing the praises of family, and say that someone is a gentleman because he can show seven generations of wealthy ancestors, he thinks that their sentiments only betray a dull and narrow vision in those who utter them, and who are not educated enough to look at the whole, nor to consider that every man has had thousands and ten thousands of progenitors, and among them have been rich and poor, kings and slaves, Hellenes and barbarians, innumerable.

    And when people pride themselves on having a pedigree of twenty-five ancestors, which goes back to Heracles, the son of Amphitryon, he cannot understand their poverty of ideas. Why are they unable to calculate that Amphitryon had a twenty-fifth ancestor, who might have been anybody, and was such as fortune made him and he had a fiftieth, and so on?

    He amuses himself with the notion that they cannot count, and thinks that a little arithmetic would have got rid of their senseless vanity.

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Theaetetus

    • Agree: songbird
  145. @melanf

    A Russian serf was as oppressed as a serf in GDL. Restrictions on Orthodox did not occur until the 17th century.
     
    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals). Such order was established gradually, well so Jews in the third Reich were sent to gas chambers not instantly.

    Elite of Great Russia whom blah blah blah
     
    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite - Polish and Jewish parasites. Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL

    Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie
     
    But about "Ukrainian" painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard. Probably these (Ukrainian) icon painters are unknown in Ukraine itself (but Rublev and Dionysius are known)


    , St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    Italian architect.

    In Lviv, an Italian architect
     
    The criterion is simple - about what achievements in the field of art/science people know all over the world. St. Basil's Cathedral is known to people all over the world. Any buildings created on the territory of modern Ukraine in the 15-17 centuries are completely unknown. So the "great Russians" of 15-17 centuries far superior to"Ukrainians" in the achievements per capita. This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands

    Level of education ....Danish envoy Jul Just ... About Muscovy...“Prince Menshikov, a figure second to the tsar, could neither read nor write.
     
    It's just stuff (Prince Menshikov could read and write, that's for sure proven, etc.), but most importantly it is completely irrelevant. About the achievements of Peter's elite in the field of art / science you can read in any book on the history of Europe of the 18th century (construction of St. Petersburg, Bering expedition, etc.). But the achievements of the enslaved indigenous population in the GDL lands is nothing, zero. Cattle have no culture

    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals).

    Serfs were not oppressed as “Orthodox” at all. Where were anti-Orthodox pogroms, laws, etc for serfs? Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than that of Catholic serf in PLC, or of Orthodox serf in Russia. Actually Orthodox serf in PLC lived better than Catholic serfs did – restrictions were lighter due to frontier conditions. This is why a lot of Mazovian peasants moved to Ukrainian lands, where they mixed with Rus people and became Orthodox.

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals

    Total lies.

    Supreme commander of GDL forced in war against Moscow (prince Ostrogsky) – indigenous Orthodox.

    One hundred years later, co-commander of PLC forces against Turks (Sahaidachny) and partner against Moscow – indigenous Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_campaigns

    Member of Polish Senate and negotiatior with Khmelnytsky (Kysil) – indigenous Orthodox.

    “Animals”, indeed.

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite – Polish and Jewish parasites

    The greatest magnate in Ukraine was a native Rus prince. Converted to Catholicism, but spent lavishly on Orthodox monasteries and defended them from Tatar raids. Romanovs were Germans.

    I assume you are of serf descent? Is that why you are bitter, that your people served foreigners for centuries while your brethren of PLC did not?

    Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL

    Again, facts of Orthodox from PLC huge role in Moscow culture after incorporation of these lands contradicts lie of “absence of won culture” in PLC.

    “Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie”

    But about “Ukrainian” painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard.

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It’s about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.

    Here is a Ukrainian icon painter from PLC:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD

    St. Basil’s Cathedral

    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings. And probably St. Basil’s is only famous because Russia became a great power long after St. Basil’s was built, and St. Basils’ is on Rd Square that is shown on TV etc. Silly and desperate argument to use its fame now as evidence of high cultural level in 15th-17th century Muscovy relative to Rus of PLC.

    So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.

    Repeating nonsense doesn’t make it true.

    Meanwhile, the facts – classical music tradition in Russia came from an emigrant from PLC. Moscow kids were taught mostly by teachers who were Orthodox from Poland. Moscow Church for 80- years was led by people from PLC. This is what naturally happens when people from superior culture have access to career advancement in a place where the cultural level is lower. It’s why the Russian historian Vernadsky stated that the acquisition of Kiev was no less important than St. Petersburg for the modernization and Westernization of Russia.

    This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands

    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture. But a Muscovite tsar once hired an Italian to build a famous church 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail

    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture.
     
    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing - somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.

    Muscovy as such was founded much later than Kiev and the core part of Belarus. The former emerges as the strongest and most independent of Rus territory - something that eventually leads to that area of Rus developing a superior level of art, literacy and culture.

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative. A noticeable number of countries have a higher standard of living than the US, while having limited geopolitical clout, relative to that facet. Meantime, it's not like the US is comparatively so bad in terms of standard of living.

    , @melanf

    Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than ....Orthodox serf in Russia.
     
    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm. At the same time, Russian peasants fed their elite, but "Ukrainian" peasants - foreign parasites.


    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.
     
    Total truth

    In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

    S. M. Plokhy , “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus”

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It’s about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.
     
    Out of curiosity checked - Andrei Rublev in Google 1million results, Dionysius the iconographer is also a million results. Dionysius is not mentioned in Tarkovsky's film. You can specify the "Ukrainian" artist of 15-17 centuries who will have in Google the same result as Dionysius?


    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings.
     
    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries). So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.

    the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture
     
    A simple test-take the achievements of the world level and divide by population. For "Belarus" (which until the end of the 18th century was under the boot of Poland) the result is zero. For "Ukraine" the result is much lower than for "great Russia". All achievements of Ukraine are exclusively from that part of "Ukraine" which in the 17th century was liberated (by the Russian Tsar) from the Polish slavery.
    Polish yoke is worse than leprosy
  146. @Dmitry
    That is disappointing - I didn't read carefully and thought it would be the house your grandfather was born, or something. I read Lukashenko's criminal friend now has this manor and converted it to a restaurant.

    Your relatives should be like Zhirinovsky, who is always mad for restitution of his grandfather's industrial properties in Ukraine.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CkBk6_5qg

    Much closer relatives from another branch owned an entire village in what is now Poland, but we aren’t Polish citizens so we can’t get it back.

  147. @Mikhail

    Within PLC, Ukrainians/Ruthenians were partners of Poles and Lithuanians. Ostrogsky commanded the joint forces against Moscow, Sahaidachny was joint commander against Turks. Rus magnates were some of the richest people in the entire Commonwealth. In the Sejm, one of them had a grander throne than the Polish king himself.
     
    The “PLC” was Polish dominated ot the point that the Lithuanians were to sour on it. The ancestors of modern day Ukrainians had influential roles in the Russian Empire.

    The greatest Serb ever, Tesla, achieved what he did because he was in Austria with an Austrian education.
     
    Maybe not. Austria benefited from the minorities it subjugated.

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.

    Correct, but there were more opportunities in Austria. In contrast, would Tesla have been as educated in Serbia as in Austria?

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Prior to the Bolshe coup and terror, The Kiev born Igor Sikorsky did quite well in the Russian Empire. I'm sure Tesla's brilliance would've shown there, once again noting Serbia's unfortunate predicament of having been subjugated for an extended period.
    , @Epigon
    Yes, he would. Miloš of Serbian principality might have been illiterate, but Serbs in Austrian Empire were invited to Serbia and formed the first educational institutions. Serbia also subsidised cultural and scientific work in Austrian lands, including students abroad, sending them to Graz, Vienna, Prague, Paris etc. Upon finishing their studies, they would return and join the national elite.
    If anything, Tesla would have avoided the money troubles had he been born in either Serbia or Woiwodschaft Serbien, and not in Grenze.
  148. @Mr. Hack

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.
     
    I don't see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians? Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the 'middle' and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement? Besides, the Polish element within the PLC sealed Ukraine's fate of not becoming a valued and equal third member of the Commonwealth by quickly abrogating the Treaty of Hadiach (1658) that would have created a third Duchy of Ruthenia.


    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Coat_of_arms_of_the_January_Uprising.svg/150px-Coat_of_arms_of_the_January_Uprising.svg.png

    Alas, this proposed coat of arms, was not to be.

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I don’t see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians?

    Kept them out of Moscow’s embrace. Kept them within the West at a time when the West was ascendant. Prevented the mass devastation that the civil war ushered in. Khmelytsky’s Tatar allies went on a rampage across Ukraine, and then there was the Ruin, followed by about 50 years of bright history under the Hetmanate, followed by centuries of disasters. Overall, on balance, it was very bad.

    Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the ‘middle’ and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement?

    The plight of peasants was bad everywhere and would remain bad long afterwards. Admittedly the civil war resulted in a reprieve for the peasants. Maybe this reprieve (temporary, because when the Russians came things got back to normal) was even worth the mass Tatar devastation the rebellion brought to the peasants. The lower gentry were upset that the Rus magnates were getting more power at their expense. But after the rebellion they just imitated them and faced their own rebellion so this did not really change.

    Long-term, the rebellion meant exit from the Polish world and entrance into the Russian world, which meant expansion and worsening of serfdom in accordance with Russian norms, then Bolshevism misadventure along with the rest of the Russian world (so loss of millions) and now post-Soviet relative poverty. On balance, a disaster for Ukraine.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Trying to predict the outcome of realities that never came to fruition can be a fun exercise but should never replace the template of things as they actually transpired. Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground. Why are you so seemingly loathe to mention the Polish betrayal of what you put forth as a viable plan? The marriage invitations were sent out, near and wide, and yet the groom failed to show up to the wedding...time to find another suitor, or better yet stay single? :-)
  149. @Belarusian Anon
    Ukraine conflict temporarily increased Russophilia seeing just how shit the country is now for its Western choice. However I don't think this will last as zoomers and people born shortly before them associate Luka with Russia, while romanticizing PLC/GDL, with EU membership their hope.

    Do people in Belarus not read/hear about the rapid Islamization of EU countries and the hourly violence and intimidation against the white Europeans there? Why would they possibly want to join the EU? I pray that they think it over and stay away from the EU.

    • Replies: @AP
    Poles know much more about Islam in western Europe than you or I do, like it as little as you or I do, and don't mind the EU.
  150. @AP

    Khmelnytsky’s uprising, in the long term, was a dumb move for Ukrainians.

    I don’t see how remaining within Poland would have been a better move for Ukrainians?
     
    Kept them out of Moscow's embrace. Kept them within the West at a time when the West was ascendant. Prevented the mass devastation that the civil war ushered in. Khmelytsky's Tatar allies went on a rampage across Ukraine, and then there was the Ruin, followed by about 50 years of bright history under the Hetmanate, followed by centuries of disasters. Overall, on balance, it was very bad.

    Sure, certain individuals, all of the highest rank of Ukrainian society, did well for themselves as you have pointed out many times, but what of the ‘middle’ and lower classes, that were the main protagonists of the revolutionary movement?
     
    The plight of peasants was bad everywhere and would remain bad long afterwards. Admittedly the civil war resulted in a reprieve for the peasants. Maybe this reprieve (temporary, because when the Russians came things got back to normal) was even worth the mass Tatar devastation the rebellion brought to the peasants. The lower gentry were upset that the Rus magnates were getting more power at their expense. But after the rebellion they just imitated them and faced their own rebellion so this did not really change.

    Long-term, the rebellion meant exit from the Polish world and entrance into the Russian world, which meant expansion and worsening of serfdom in accordance with Russian norms, then Bolshevism misadventure along with the rest of the Russian world (so loss of millions) and now post-Soviet relative poverty. On balance, a disaster for Ukraine.

    Trying to predict the outcome of realities that never came to fruition can be a fun exercise but should never replace the template of things as they actually transpired. Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground. Why are you so seemingly loathe to mention the Polish betrayal of what you put forth as a viable plan? The marriage invitations were sent out, near and wide, and yet the groom failed to show up to the wedding…time to find another suitor, or better yet stay single? 🙂

    • Replies: @AP

    Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground.
     
    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.). The ratified version looked like the deal that the Hetmanate ended up having with Russia after Poltava. With similar deals, union with Poland (similar population as Ukraine) was less dangerous than with Russia (three times greater population) as later historical events proved.
  151. @AP

    It was a Polish colony where the indigenous (Western Russian) population was reduced to the level of livestock completely deprived of rights,
     
    Serfs on agricultural lands had same rights in GDL as in Russia. Nobles were mostly locals so it was not a colony. Local nobles had more rights in GDL than in Muscovy, where they were subject to arbitrary actions of the Tsar.

    feed the alien foreign elite
     
    I suspect origins of nobles in what is now Ukraine and Belarus were more local than those in Russia, whom Russian serfs were feeding.

    GDL completely deprived Western Russian of their own culture.
     
    First Orthodox bible was printed in PLC. First Orthodox higher learning institute was in PLC.

    All minimally significant intellectual achievements of “Ukrainians” (Gogol, Ostrogradsky…) occur exclusively in Eastern Ukraine (liberated by the Moscow Tsar in the 17th century from the Polish yoke)
     
    Eastern Ukraine - Hetmanate, that maintained PLC institutions (Polish language, western educational norms, etc.). Per travelers, much more civilized and highly educated than Muscovy.

    Gogol - part Polish, product of Hetmanate and thus of PLC. Russia has a flood of educated Ukrainians in the 17th-18th century. This speaks to higher cultural level of PLC relative to Moscow. Under Moscow, Ukraine was eventually reduced to a provincial backwater.

    At the same time, the” Ukrainian “(if we count their achievements per capita) is much inferior to the” great Russian ”
     
    In 15th-17th centuries? Hardly.

    Russians, Belorussians, Poles, Hungarians, Ukrainians, Ruthenians, whatever, they need to stop arguing who was or is smarter or more civilized or less corrupt, etc.

    START HAVING CHILDREN AGAIN, GET TOGETHER, AND GET READY TO FIGHT THE MUSLIM AND AFRICAN INVADERS WHO ARE COMING YOUR WAY. TOGETHER. Here in the USA, there are many millions of us real Americans, without political power and against our regime, rooting for you and praying for you all.

  152. @AP

    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals).
     
    Serfs were not oppressed as "Orthodox" at all. Where were anti-Orthodox pogroms, laws, etc for serfs? Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than that of Catholic serf in PLC, or of Orthodox serf in Russia. Actually Orthodox serf in PLC lived better than Catholic serfs did - restrictions were lighter due to frontier conditions. This is why a lot of Mazovian peasants moved to Ukrainian lands, where they mixed with Rus people and became Orthodox.

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.

    Supreme commander of GDL forced in war against Moscow (prince Ostrogsky) - indigenous Orthodox.

    One hundred years later, co-commander of PLC forces against Turks (Sahaidachny) and partner against Moscow - indigenous Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_campaigns

    Member of Polish Senate and negotiatior with Khmelnytsky (Kysil) - indigenous Orthodox.

    "Animals", indeed.

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite – Polish and Jewish parasites
     
    The greatest magnate in Ukraine was a native Rus prince. Converted to Catholicism, but spent lavishly on Orthodox monasteries and defended them from Tatar raids. Romanovs were Germans.

    I assume you are of serf descent? Is that why you are bitter, that your people served foreigners for centuries while your brethren of PLC did not?

    Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL
     
    Again, facts of Orthodox from PLC huge role in Moscow culture after incorporation of these lands contradicts lie of "absence of won culture" in PLC.

    "Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie"

    But about “Ukrainian” painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard.

     

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It's about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.

    Here is a Ukrainian icon painter from PLC:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD

    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil's Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings. And probably St. Basil's is only famous because Russia became a great power long after St. Basil's was built, and St. Basils' is on Rd Square that is shown on TV etc. Silly and desperate argument to use its fame now as evidence of high cultural level in 15th-17th century Muscovy relative to Rus of PLC.

    So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.
     
    Repeating nonsense doesn't make it true.

    Meanwhile, the facts - classical music tradition in Russia came from an emigrant from PLC. Moscow kids were taught mostly by teachers who were Orthodox from Poland. Moscow Church for 80- years was led by people from PLC. This is what naturally happens when people from superior culture have access to career advancement in a place where the cultural level is lower. It's why the Russian historian Vernadsky stated that the acquisition of Kiev was no less important than St. Petersburg for the modernization and Westernization of Russia.

    This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands
     
    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture. But a Muscovite tsar once hired an Italian to build a famous church :-)

    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture.

    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing – somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.

    Muscovy as such was founded much later than Kiev and the core part of Belarus. The former emerges as the strongest and most independent of Rus territory – something that eventually leads to that area of Rus developing a superior level of art, literacy and culture.

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative. A noticeable number of countries have a higher standard of living than the US, while having limited geopolitical clout, relative to that facet. Meantime, it’s not like the US is comparatively so bad in terms of standard of living.

    • Replies: @AP

    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing – somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.
     
    Or Russians saying this about themselves relative to Rus from PLC lands.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677.

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    :::::::

    I don't recall Native Americans playing a similar role in European culture. So your analogy is false.
    , @melanf

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative
     
    In the West Russian territories under the rule of Poland, the standard of living of the indigenous population was clearly lower than the standard of living in the Russian lands (peasants massively fled to the Russian lands, raised bloody revolts in order to come under the power of the Russian Tsar)
  153. @AP

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.
     
    Correct, but there were more opportunities in Austria. In contrast, would Tesla have been as educated in Serbia as in Austria?

    Prior to the Bolshe coup and terror, The Kiev born Igor Sikorsky did quite well in the Russian Empire. I’m sure Tesla’s brilliance would’ve shown there, once again noting Serbia’s unfortunate predicament of having been subjugated for an extended period.

    • Replies: @Cyrano
    The "funny" part about Tesla is that he wasn't born on Serbia's proper. He was born in Croatia -which was then part of Austro-Hungary. In the ethnic-cleansing wars of fmr Yugoslavia - the Serbs were expelled from the area where Tesla was born. Actually, I think they were decimated by the Croat Nazis in WW2 in that area. So basically, Croatia did to the Serbs, what Austro-Hungary couldn't - or didn't want to do. If Gavrilo Princip knew what was going to happen, I bet he would have rethought his plan to assassinate Ferdinand, and would have found a more appropriate target among the Croats.
  154. @Mikhail

    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture.
     
    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing - somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.

    Muscovy as such was founded much later than Kiev and the core part of Belarus. The former emerges as the strongest and most independent of Rus territory - something that eventually leads to that area of Rus developing a superior level of art, literacy and culture.

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative. A noticeable number of countries have a higher standard of living than the US, while having limited geopolitical clout, relative to that facet. Meantime, it's not like the US is comparatively so bad in terms of standard of living.

    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing – somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.

    Or Russians saying this about themselves relative to Rus from PLC lands.

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

    One of Russia’s earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky’s fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677.

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    :::::::

    I don’t recall Native Americans playing a similar role in European culture. So your analogy is false.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    A key aspect of that analogy isn't false, as evidenced by your constant attempts to belittle Russia/Russians, under a guise of being factual. You cherry pick with mis-representations. BTW, The North American Indians and some others would dispute what you said about the Indian influence in Europe - something that I'm not so keen on debating either way. Indians definitely had an influence on the Euros who came to the Western Hemisphere

    Extreme ethno-nationalists downplay that a given nation's greatness can be attributed to not having such a hostile outlook on others - as shown by the willingness to bring in and accept others on a merit basis. Overall, Russia definitely qualifies as such.

    , @Anatoly Karlin
    While I can't really adjudicate on the disputes over how repressed Ukrainians were on either side of the Russia/PLC border, not having read enough about that myself, I think your point about PLC's cultural superiority over contemporary Russia is obviously true. One needs to just look at the respective histories of the printing press in both polities.
  155. @RadicalCenter
    Do people in Belarus not read/hear about the rapid Islamization of EU countries and the hourly violence and intimidation against the white Europeans there? Why would they possibly want to join the EU? I pray that they think it over and stay away from the EU.

    Poles know much more about Islam in western Europe than you or I do, like it as little as you or I do, and don’t mind the EU.

  156. @AP

    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing – somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.
     
    Or Russians saying this about themselves relative to Rus from PLC lands.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677.

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    :::::::

    I don't recall Native Americans playing a similar role in European culture. So your analogy is false.

    A key aspect of that analogy isn’t false, as evidenced by your constant attempts to belittle Russia/Russians, under a guise of being factual. You cherry pick with mis-representations. BTW, The North American Indians and some others would dispute what you said about the Indian influence in Europe – something that I’m not so keen on debating either way. Indians definitely had an influence on the Euros who came to the Western Hemisphere

    Extreme ethno-nationalists downplay that a given nation’s greatness can be attributed to not having such a hostile outlook on others – as shown by the willingness to bring in and accept others on a merit basis. Overall, Russia definitely qualifies as such.

  157. @Mr. XYZ

    Algeria is by no means a bad country by the standards of the region. It has a higher GDP PPP per capita than Ukraine and a slightly higher HDI as well. I wouldn’t want to cast my lot with modern France anyway. No doubt they’d be imposing feminism and sub-saharan immigration on the Algerians.
     
    Yeah, Algeria doesn't appear to be faring exceptionally bad by the standards of the region that it is located in. True, Tunisia and Morocco didn't have a brutal bloody civil war like Algeria had, but at the same time, Libya does appear to have had a long period of warfare and chaos in the 2010s similar to what Algeria had in the 1990s.

    Anyway, in my honest opinion, one needs to understand why exactly one's colonial subjects (or de facto colonial subjects, in the case of the Algerians) would want independence. Personally, I suspect that when one's colonial subjects are given citizenship en masse and treated as legal equals, the odds of one's colonial subjects demanding independence would go way down. As examples I would cite Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, and Central Asia up to 1991. All of these areas didn't have large-scale movements (until 1991 in the case of Central Asia), and what all of these areas have in common is that the population there was treated relatively well (in comparison to their other countrymen) by the governing authorities of the country that they lived in. For instance, AFAIK, the Soviet Union brought education, infrastructure, women's rights, et cetera to Central Asia (and the famines that Central Asia endured in the 1930s, while extremely tragic, were not unique to this region; after all, Ukraine and perhaps southern Russia also suffered from these famines). One would think that all of these things resulted in the Russian/Soviet brand being strengthened in Central Asia and in Central Asians being nostalgic for the USSR after it collapsed. Had Algerians and other colonial subjects been given citizenship, treated as legal equals, and experienced a large improvement in their lives under colonialism, it is entirely possible that support for independence in these territories would have been much smaller than it was in real life.

    Anyway, if the Germans (not genocidal Nazis, something like the German Empire) decided to conquer and rule Eastern Europe, the populace would likely be ‘better off’ in terms of living standards and quality of institutions. Doesn’t mean they should just role over and take it. Independence matters.
     
    Actually, in terms of average IQ, Poles, Estonians, Finns, and Russians aren't much lower than Germans are. Latvia and Lithuania are a bit lower, but not too much. The part of Europe that is a true backwater is Moldova, Romania, and the Balkans. Personally, I don't think that AP would have objected much if Austria-Hungary would have conquered the Balkans--at least as long as the Balkan peoples would have been given citizenship and legal equality within Austria-Hungary afterwards.

    In the grand scheme of things, though, I completely agree with you that forcibly ruling over other peoples because one believes that one could do a better job governing their territories is a terrible idea. For instance, while Cambodians were probably very happy with the Vietnamese for overthrowing the Khmer Rouge, they were not particularly interested in having the Vietnamese remain in Cambodia for the long-haul. Thus, various Cambodians--and not only the remnants of the Khmer Rouge--fought against the Vietnamese in the hopes of getting the Vietnamese to leave Cambodia (something which ultimately happened in 1989-1991). Anyway, my point here is that while Vietnam could very possibly do a better job of governing Laos and Cambodia than the Laotians and Cambodians themselves (due to the Vietnamese likely having a higher average IQ), it would nevertheless be perfectly legitimate for both the Laotians and the Cambodians to resist any Vietnamese invasion of their countries.

    Yeah, Algeria doesn’t appear to be faring exceptionally bad by the standards of the region that it is located in.

    In that neighborhood Algeria is doing fairly well. Just wait until some busybody brings democracy to it, like NATO did in Libya. Then all hell is going to break loose.

  158. @Mr. Hack
    Trying to predict the outcome of realities that never came to fruition can be a fun exercise but should never replace the template of things as they actually transpired. Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground. Why are you so seemingly loathe to mention the Polish betrayal of what you put forth as a viable plan? The marriage invitations were sent out, near and wide, and yet the groom failed to show up to the wedding...time to find another suitor, or better yet stay single? :-)

    Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground.

    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.). The ratified version looked like the deal that the Hetmanate ended up having with Russia after Poltava. With similar deals, union with Poland (similar population as Ukraine) was less dangerous than with Russia (three times greater population) as later historical events proved.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.).
     
    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who's untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so? Also, Russia's population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine. You seem to be projecting population trends from the 21st century backward to the 17th. Now, I'm not supporting the idea that a union with Russia would be a better one for Ukraine than with Poland. I like to embrace the ideas of the great Ukrainian bard Shevchenko who clearly could see the historic injustices of too close a relationship with either Poland or Russia, who instinctively gave us this wise instruction to lean upon:

    в свої хаті своя правда і сила і воля

     

  159. @AnonFromTN
    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

    So you never heard of Chopin?

    • Replies: @Swarthy Greek
    Chopin was for all intents and purposes a product of french XIXth century culture.
    , @AnonFromTN
    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater. Actually, Serbs have a very apt term for “European backwater” – "Evropska zadnitsa” (for English speakers: this sounds for most Slavs as “European ass”).
    , @AquariusAnon
    First of all, he's a deranged Dixiephobe who really, *really* hates Southern culture while living in Nashville, one of the most southern, in an upscale way, major metro areas (over 1 million) left in the US.

    He likely lives in a bubble in the Hillsboro Village or East Nashville areas. He's not even aware of the massive Nissan factories just down the road in Rutherford County (or the VW factories in Chattanooga for that matter). On top of that, he "despises" the single largest reason why Nashville punches above its weight in national recognition given its population.

    Poland is one of the less "sophisticated" cultures of Europe, which is why he has heavy disdain towards it. In terms of overall accomplishment, Poland is middle of the road in Europe, ranking directly behind Spain and perhaps on par with the Netherlands. Its definitely *not* gay or fake whatsoever.
  160. @jbwilson24
    "While I am skeptical about the long-term utility of keeping DICh within the Russian Federation"

    I don't quite understand why Russia keeps those areas. Cut them loose along with part of Adygea (or however you spell it).

    Russia also needs to avoid western style secularism and mass immigration in order to survive. It's no good locking down all these oblasts if you face a wave of Africans being waved into Russia courtesy of the Jewish and Masonic elite.

    Russia is in no danger of being invaded by “refugees” from Africa and elsewhere. Those “refugees” seek freebies. Suicidal Europeans offer that, whereas Russia does not: you have to earn your keep there.

  161. @AP

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

     

    So you never heard of Chopin?

    Chopin was for all intents and purposes a product of french XIXth century culture.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Polish contribution to human culture would still be puny even if we count more French than Polish Chopin and Marie Curie in.
  162. @AP

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

     

    So you never heard of Chopin?

    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater. Actually, Serbs have a very apt term for “European backwater” – “Evropska zadnitsa” (for English speakers: this sounds for most Slavs as “European ass”).

    • Replies: @Adam
    Are Serbs in a position to call anything a backwater?
    , @AP

    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater.
     
    To a large extent this reflects Western parochialism. For example the works in the Tretyakov gallery compare favorably to those in any Western museum, but most people outside Russia have never heard of any of the artists featured in Tretyakov.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.
  163. @Swarthy Greek
    Chopin was for all intents and purposes a product of french XIXth century culture.

    Polish contribution to human culture would still be puny even if we count more French than Polish Chopin and Marie Curie in.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I discovered a recently (in 2010) deceased Polish composer called Henryk Górecki. Unlike Penderecki, he’s actually very good. I like his quartets, symphonies (at least I heard #2-4, I haven’t heard the first one), and a few choral works like Miserere or Szeroka woda.
  164. @Mikhail
    Prior to the Bolshe coup and terror, The Kiev born Igor Sikorsky did quite well in the Russian Empire. I'm sure Tesla's brilliance would've shown there, once again noting Serbia's unfortunate predicament of having been subjugated for an extended period.

    The “funny” part about Tesla is that he wasn’t born on Serbia’s proper. He was born in Croatia -which was then part of Austro-Hungary. In the ethnic-cleansing wars of fmr Yugoslavia – the Serbs were expelled from the area where Tesla was born. Actually, I think they were decimated by the Croat Nazis in WW2 in that area. So basically, Croatia did to the Serbs, what Austro-Hungary couldn’t – or didn’t want to do. If Gavrilo Princip knew what was going to happen, I bet he would have rethought his plan to assassinate Ferdinand, and would have found a more appropriate target among the Croats.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    He was born in Grenze, a militarised territory under direct control of Vienna.
    It became part of Croatia years after his birth.
    Princip was a delusional pawn who killed a nobody and inflicted 0 practical damage on Austrians and Habsburgs.
    He was part of a multinational, multiconfessional group that advocated Yugoslavism. King, PM and Chief of Serbian Staff had nothing to do with Black Hand, which was implicated with French and Russian secret service, and Freemasonry component (1903 coup). Serbia had little to no control over Black Hand, and only curbed it in 1917, after arranging a trial and execution of Apis and ring-leaders for an attempted murder of King and heir.
    Most interestingly, Italian connection with Sarajevo assassination is rarely brought up.
  165. @AnonFromTN
    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater. Actually, Serbs have a very apt term for “European backwater” – "Evropska zadnitsa” (for English speakers: this sounds for most Slavs as “European ass”).

    Are Serbs in a position to call anything a backwater?

    • Replies: @Epigon
    He is not a Serb, but an American of Russian descent.

    You will very rarely hear Serbs insulting Poles and other West Slavs, despite Poles being Catholics and anti-Russian. I believe this is due to similarities in national history, being caught between two empires of different religion, in addition to PLC mirroring both Dušan’s Empire and Yugoslavia of 20th century.
    , @AnonFromTN
    Unlike some people, they are honest with themselves – they call Serbia “Evropska zadnitsa”.
  166. @AP

    A rhetorical though imperfect comparison, Shevchenko achieved stature in the Russian Empire. His literary accomplishments were nurtured growing up in the Russian aristocratic family which granted his release from serfdom.
     
    Correct, but there were more opportunities in Austria. In contrast, would Tesla have been as educated in Serbia as in Austria?

    Yes, he would. Miloš of Serbian principality might have been illiterate, but Serbs in Austrian Empire were invited to Serbia and formed the first educational institutions. Serbia also subsidised cultural and scientific work in Austrian lands, including students abroad, sending them to Graz, Vienna, Prague, Paris etc. Upon finishing their studies, they would return and join the national elite.
    If anything, Tesla would have avoided the money troubles had he been born in either Serbia or Woiwodschaft Serbien, and not in Grenze.

    • Replies: @AP

    Serbia also subsidised cultural and scientific work in Austrian lands, including students abroad, sending them to Graz, Vienna, Prague, Paris etc. Upon finishing their studies, they would return and join the national elite.
     
    Sure, but if Tesla had been born in a village in Serbia and received all of his education in Serbia, would he have achieved what he did because he lived in Austria?
  167. @Adam
    Are Serbs in a position to call anything a backwater?

    He is not a Serb, but an American of Russian descent.

    You will very rarely hear Serbs insulting Poles and other West Slavs, despite Poles being Catholics and anti-Russian. I believe this is due to similarities in national history, being caught between two empires of different religion, in addition to PLC mirroring both Dušan’s Empire and Yugoslavia of 20th century.

  168. I remember reading that by late 1600s, there was not a single Orthodox Church operating on territory of PLC: everyone was nominally Catholic and Uniatic, Orthodox Churches and Monasteries were either confiscated and handed over to Roman Catholic and Greek Catholic clergy, closed or outright destroyed.

    AP, you shouldn’t call them Orthodox. They were at least Rus’ Orthodox, it was unique and used specific lithurgy and language.

    Btw, the funniest thing about Greek Catholics, they are neither Greek, nor Catholic. Something like Christian Right.
    The meaning of word Catholic directly disqualifies them.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean

    Btw, the funnies thing about Greek Catholics, they are neither Greek, nor Catholic. Something like Christian Right.
     
    In Danish, saying 'I am Greek-Catholic' means 'I don't care either way (about the outcome)'.
  169. @Epigon
    I remember reading that by late 1600s, there was not a single Orthodox Church operating on territory of PLC: everyone was nominally Catholic and Uniatic, Orthodox Churches and Monasteries were either confiscated and handed over to Roman Catholic and Greek Catholic clergy, closed or outright destroyed.

    AP, you shouldn’t call them Orthodox. They were at least Rus’ Orthodox, it was unique and used specific lithurgy and language.

    Btw, the funniest thing about Greek Catholics, they are neither Greek, nor Catholic. Something like Christian Right.
    The meaning of word Catholic directly disqualifies them.

    Btw, the funnies thing about Greek Catholics, they are neither Greek, nor Catholic. Something like Christian Right.

    In Danish, saying ‘I am Greek-Catholic’ means ‘I don’t care either way (about the outcome)’.

    • Replies: @Epigon
    Very interesting.
  170. @Cyrano
    The "funny" part about Tesla is that he wasn't born on Serbia's proper. He was born in Croatia -which was then part of Austro-Hungary. In the ethnic-cleansing wars of fmr Yugoslavia - the Serbs were expelled from the area where Tesla was born. Actually, I think they were decimated by the Croat Nazis in WW2 in that area. So basically, Croatia did to the Serbs, what Austro-Hungary couldn't - or didn't want to do. If Gavrilo Princip knew what was going to happen, I bet he would have rethought his plan to assassinate Ferdinand, and would have found a more appropriate target among the Croats.

    He was born in Grenze, a militarised territory under direct control of Vienna.
    It became part of Croatia years after his birth.
    Princip was a delusional pawn who killed a nobody and inflicted 0 practical damage on Austrians and Habsburgs.
    He was part of a multinational, multiconfessional group that advocated Yugoslavism. King, PM and Chief of Serbian Staff had nothing to do with Black Hand, which was implicated with French and Russian secret service, and Freemasonry component (1903 coup). Serbia had little to no control over Black Hand, and only curbed it in 1917, after arranging a trial and execution of Apis and ring-leaders for an attempted murder of King and heir.
    Most interestingly, Italian connection with Sarajevo assassination is rarely brought up.

  171. @Hyperborean

    Btw, the funnies thing about Greek Catholics, they are neither Greek, nor Catholic. Something like Christian Right.
     
    In Danish, saying 'I am Greek-Catholic' means 'I don't care either way (about the outcome)'.

    Very interesting.

  172. @Adam
    Are Serbs in a position to call anything a backwater?

    Unlike some people, they are honest with themselves – they call Serbia “Evropska zadnitsa”.

  173. FromTN

    Next time you meet anyone saying that, kindly remind them to fuck off and renounce nationality. Serbia would stop being European backside if all the feces and physiological waste emigrated.

  174. @AnonFromTN
    Polish contribution to human culture would still be puny even if we count more French than Polish Chopin and Marie Curie in.

    I discovered a recently (in 2010) deceased Polish composer called Henryk Górecki. Unlike Penderecki, he’s actually very good. I like his quartets, symphonies (at least I heard #2-4, I haven’t heard the first one), and a few choral works like Miserere or Szeroka woda.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Thanks for the info! I’ll check Henryk Górecki out. BTW, I did not mean to say that there is no Polish culture. There certainly is. It just fades in comparison with the leading ones. But there are few of those leaders, so Polish culture is certainly above that of Bulgaria, Romania, and many other European countries.

    BTW, “Szeroka woda” means “wide water”. I was born in Lvov, so I know about a hundred Polish words, some very polite, some extremely impolite. These two are neutral.
  175. @reiner Tor
    I discovered a recently (in 2010) deceased Polish composer called Henryk Górecki. Unlike Penderecki, he’s actually very good. I like his quartets, symphonies (at least I heard #2-4, I haven’t heard the first one), and a few choral works like Miserere or Szeroka woda.

    Thanks for the info! I’ll check Henryk Górecki out. BTW, I did not mean to say that there is no Polish culture. There certainly is. It just fades in comparison with the leading ones. But there are few of those leaders, so Polish culture is certainly above that of Bulgaria, Romania, and many other European countries.

    BTW, “Szeroka woda” means “wide water”. I was born in Lvov, so I know about a hundred Polish words, some very polite, some extremely impolite. These two are neutral.

  176. @AP

    serf in GDL opressed much worse, because serfs oppressed as a serf and as Orthodox (and indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals).
     
    Serfs were not oppressed as "Orthodox" at all. Where were anti-Orthodox pogroms, laws, etc for serfs? Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than that of Catholic serf in PLC, or of Orthodox serf in Russia. Actually Orthodox serf in PLC lived better than Catholic serfs did - restrictions were lighter due to frontier conditions. This is why a lot of Mazovian peasants moved to Ukrainian lands, where they mixed with Rus people and became Orthodox.

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.

    Supreme commander of GDL forced in war against Moscow (prince Ostrogsky) - indigenous Orthodox.

    One hundred years later, co-commander of PLC forces against Turks (Sahaidachny) and partner against Moscow - indigenous Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_Konashevych-Sahaidachny#Major_campaigns

    Member of Polish Senate and negotiatior with Khmelnytsky (Kysil) - indigenous Orthodox.

    "Animals", indeed.

    The facts are simple – in the”great Russia” people fed their own elite, but in the lands of the GDL People fed the hostile foreign elite – Polish and Jewish parasites
     
    The greatest magnate in Ukraine was a native Rus prince. Converted to Catholicism, but spent lavishly on Orthodox monasteries and defended them from Tatar raids. Romanovs were Germans.

    I assume you are of serf descent? Is that why you are bitter, that your people served foreigners for centuries while your brethren of PLC did not?

    Hence the complete absence of their own culture in the enslaved indigenous population of GDL
     
    Again, facts of Orthodox from PLC huge role in Moscow culture after incorporation of these lands contradicts lie of "absence of won culture" in PLC.

    "Nobody in the West heard of any of these people other than Rublev, because of Tarkovsky’s movie"

    But about “Ukrainian” painters 15-17 centuries just no one heard.

     

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It's about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.

    Here is a Ukrainian icon painter from PLC:

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87,_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD

    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil's Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings. And probably St. Basil's is only famous because Russia became a great power long after St. Basil's was built, and St. Basils' is on Rd Square that is shown on TV etc. Silly and desperate argument to use its fame now as evidence of high cultural level in 15th-17th century Muscovy relative to Rus of PLC.

    So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.
     
    Repeating nonsense doesn't make it true.

    Meanwhile, the facts - classical music tradition in Russia came from an emigrant from PLC. Moscow kids were taught mostly by teachers who were Orthodox from Poland. Moscow Church for 80- years was led by people from PLC. This is what naturally happens when people from superior culture have access to career advancement in a place where the cultural level is lower. It's why the Russian historian Vernadsky stated that the acquisition of Kiev was no less important than St. Petersburg for the modernization and Westernization of Russia.

    This is the result of the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands
     
    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture. But a Muscovite tsar once hired an Italian to build a famous church :-)

    Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than ….Orthodox serf in Russia.

    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm. At the same time, Russian peasants fed their elite, but “Ukrainian” peasants – foreign parasites.

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals

    Total lies.

    Total truth

    In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

    S. M. Plokhy , “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus”

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It’s about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.

    Out of curiosity checked – Andrei Rublev in Google 1million results, Dionysius the iconographer is also a million results. Dionysius is not mentioned in Tarkovsky’s film. You can specify the “Ukrainian” artist of 15-17 centuries who will have in Google the same result as Dionysius?

    St. Basil’s Cathedral

    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings.

    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries). So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.

    the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture

    A simple test-take the achievements of the world level and divide by population. For “Belarus” (which until the end of the 18th century was under the boot of Poland) the result is zero. For “Ukraine” the result is much lower than for “great Russia”. All achievements of Ukraine are exclusively from that part of “Ukraine” which in the 17th century was liberated (by the Russian Tsar) from the Polish slavery.
    Polish yoke is worse than leprosy

    • Replies: @Adam

    Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov).
     
    Yakovlev's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great Grandfather was from Italy. More proof that Russians have never achieved anything.
    , @AP

    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm.
     
    We discussed this previously. Corvee in Ukrainian lands was lighter than elsewhere, in order to attract settlement:

    "In the 16th and 17th centuries there were three distinct serfdom belts in Ukrainian territories. In Western Ukraine, where the filvarky were most developed, the peasants were exploited intensely and had the smallest allotments. In the middle belt, encompassing eastern Podilia and the northwestern Kyiv region, mixed (alodial and conditional) land tenure lasted longer, and the transition to filvarok farming was slower. The large landowners there were usually content to receive payment in kind, and the peasants were not completely or uniformly deprived of the right to own land. In the third belt, covering the lands along the Dnieper River and the Boh River in southwestern Ukraine, serfdom was difficult to impose: because of the proximity of the steppes and the constant danger of Tatar attack, the population was too mobile. North of the defensive line of castles many estates in the second and third belts offered 15-, 20-, or 30-year waivers from corvée or other obligations in order to attract and hold settlers."

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals

    Total lies.

    Total truth

    “In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.
     
    A clever trick. We were discussing conditions in 15-17th centuries, prior to the civil war that resulted in half the Orthodox lands leaving PLC and conflict between Russia and PLC. When Orthodoxy became a tool of Russian expansionism the PLC responded. Why not mention burning of Orthodox churches in 1930s Volynia by the Polish state? But you are still wrong:

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews
     
    By then the indigenous population were mostly Greek Catholics or Roman Catholics so these restrictions did not apply to them. They applied to dissenters and not the general population.

    Ironically when the Russians came back they persecuted the Greek Catholics and forced them to become Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_Che%C5%82m_Eparchy#Conversion

    Then in the 1930s the Poles persecuted the Orthodox and forced them to become Catholics again.

    But of course, after most of the Orthodox left and the civil war between Rus people assumed the form of Orthodox vs. Greek Catholic and Roman Catholic, the Orthodox remaining on the PLC side of the border were persecuted. Just like the Greek and Roman Catholics indigenous people on the Orthodox side of the border were also persecuted. Many of them were indeed slaughtered.

    But these are not the times we are discussing. We are discussing the ultimate stupidity of rebellion and civil war in the first place.

    An excellent article on the topic, others may be interested in:

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

    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries).
     
    You are half-right. It was not Italian architect but used Italian plans and Italian and perhaps German builders.

    People only heard about Kremlin outside Russia because long after Kremlin was built Russia became a global superpower. Kremlin's fame has nothing to do with its high architectural achievement.
  177. @Mikhail

    Indeed. There was no yoke, but the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture.
     
    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing - somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.

    Muscovy as such was founded much later than Kiev and the core part of Belarus. The former emerges as the strongest and most independent of Rus territory - something that eventually leads to that area of Rus developing a superior level of art, literacy and culture.

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative. A noticeable number of countries have a higher standard of living than the US, while having limited geopolitical clout, relative to that facet. Meantime, it's not like the US is comparatively so bad in terms of standard of living.

    Will add that relying too much on standard of living can be mis-informative

    In the West Russian territories under the rule of Poland, the standard of living of the indigenous population was clearly lower than the standard of living in the Russian lands (peasants massively fled to the Russian lands, raised bloody revolts in order to come under the power of the Russian Tsar)

  178. @melanf

    Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than ....Orthodox serf in Russia.
     
    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm. At the same time, Russian peasants fed their elite, but "Ukrainian" peasants - foreign parasites.


    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.
     
    Total truth

    In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

    S. M. Plokhy , “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus”

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It’s about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.
     
    Out of curiosity checked - Andrei Rublev in Google 1million results, Dionysius the iconographer is also a million results. Dionysius is not mentioned in Tarkovsky's film. You can specify the "Ukrainian" artist of 15-17 centuries who will have in Google the same result as Dionysius?


    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings.
     
    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries). So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.

    the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture
     
    A simple test-take the achievements of the world level and divide by population. For "Belarus" (which until the end of the 18th century was under the boot of Poland) the result is zero. For "Ukraine" the result is much lower than for "great Russia". All achievements of Ukraine are exclusively from that part of "Ukraine" which in the 17th century was liberated (by the Russian Tsar) from the Polish slavery.
    Polish yoke is worse than leprosy

    Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov).

    Yakovlev’s great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great Grandfather was from Italy. More proof that Russians have never achieved anything.

    • Agree: melanf
  179. I always find it funny how Vatican and Pope go around and preach bullshit about ecumenism while litteral inquisitors and persecutors of Orthodoxy in Balkans and Russian lands like Jesuits are venerated, or beatified (Stepinac and his gang) or sanctified! Josaphat Kuntsevych is a martyr and Saint of Roman Catholic Church, and he met his untimely end as an Inquisitor at the hands of Rus’ Orthodox people, after persecuting them, closing their churches and ordering their graveyards be desecrated.

    Regarding Dr. Preobrazhensky’s comments on higher quality of life in PLC, I guess the modern Ukrainians inherited the ungrateful attitude of their Ruthenian ancestors who rebelled incessantly against cultured and just PLC rule.

  180. @AnonFromTN
    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater. Actually, Serbs have a very apt term for “European backwater” – "Evropska zadnitsa” (for English speakers: this sounds for most Slavs as “European ass”).

    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater.

    To a large extent this reflects Western parochialism. For example the works in the Tretyakov gallery compare favorably to those in any Western museum, but most people outside Russia have never heard of any of the artists featured in Tretyakov.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    That’s true, too. Most Old Holland painters aren’t as good, but they are well known in Europe. In that sense the US is harmonious: no culture and no appreciation of culture. When I came to the States, a post-doc in the lab where I worked (born and bred in the US) told me an interesting thing: on the money it says “in God we trust”; that’s the only God we trust in.
  181. @Epigon
    Yes, he would. Miloš of Serbian principality might have been illiterate, but Serbs in Austrian Empire were invited to Serbia and formed the first educational institutions. Serbia also subsidised cultural and scientific work in Austrian lands, including students abroad, sending them to Graz, Vienna, Prague, Paris etc. Upon finishing their studies, they would return and join the national elite.
    If anything, Tesla would have avoided the money troubles had he been born in either Serbia or Woiwodschaft Serbien, and not in Grenze.

    Serbia also subsidised cultural and scientific work in Austrian lands, including students abroad, sending them to Graz, Vienna, Prague, Paris etc. Upon finishing their studies, they would return and join the national elite.

    Sure, but if Tesla had been born in a village in Serbia and received all of his education in Serbia, would he have achieved what he did because he lived in Austria?

  182. @melanf

    Lifestyle of Orthodox serf in PLC was no worse than ....Orthodox serf in Russia.
     
    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm. At the same time, Russian peasants fed their elite, but "Ukrainian" peasants - foreign parasites.


    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals
     
    Total lies.
     
    Total truth

    In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

    S. M. Plokhy , “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus”

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews

    Because no famous director made a movie about them that was popular among intelligent Westerners. It’s about Tarkovsky and the 20th century, not Rublev.
     
    Out of curiosity checked - Andrei Rublev in Google 1million results, Dionysius the iconographer is also a million results. Dionysius is not mentioned in Tarkovsky's film. You can specify the "Ukrainian" artist of 15-17 centuries who will have in Google the same result as Dionysius?


    St. Basil’s Cathedral
     
    A barbarian hired an Italian architect.

    Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, built buy an Italian, no one outside of Russia has heard of any Russian buildings.
     
    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries). So the “great Russians” of 15-17 centuries far superior to”Ukrainians” in the achievements per capita.

    the result of being part of PLC meant that the Rus of what is now Ukraine and Belarus had a much higher cultural level than did the Rus of Muscovy, as evidenced by their achievements in the arts, literacy, and culture
     
    A simple test-take the achievements of the world level and divide by population. For "Belarus" (which until the end of the 18th century was under the boot of Poland) the result is zero. For "Ukraine" the result is much lower than for "great Russia". All achievements of Ukraine are exclusively from that part of "Ukraine" which in the 17th century was liberated (by the Russian Tsar) from the Polish slavery.
    Polish yoke is worse than leprosy

    Much worse. In Russia, the three-day corvee was considered very heavy (corvee more than three days a week was prohibited), in GDL six-day corvee was the norm.

    We discussed this previously. Corvee in Ukrainian lands was lighter than elsewhere, in order to attract settlement:

    “In the 16th and 17th centuries there were three distinct serfdom belts in Ukrainian territories. In Western Ukraine, where the filvarky were most developed, the peasants were exploited intensely and had the smallest allotments. In the middle belt, encompassing eastern Podilia and the northwestern Kyiv region, mixed (alodial and conditional) land tenure lasted longer, and the transition to filvarok farming was slower. The large landowners there were usually content to receive payment in kind, and the peasants were not completely or uniformly deprived of the right to own land. In the third belt, covering the lands along the Dnieper River and the Boh River in southwestern Ukraine, serfdom was difficult to impose: because of the proximity of the steppes and the constant danger of Tatar attack, the population was too mobile. North of the defensive line of castles many estates in the second and third belts offered 15-, 20-, or 30-year waivers from corvée or other obligations in order to attract and hold settlers.”

    indigenous Orthodox population in GDL was equated to animals

    Total lies.

    Total truth

    “In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

    A clever trick. We were discussing conditions in 15-17th centuries, prior to the civil war that resulted in half the Orthodox lands leaving PLC and conflict between Russia and PLC. When Orthodoxy became a tool of Russian expansionism the PLC responded. Why not mention burning of Orthodox churches in 1930s Volynia by the Polish state? But you are still wrong:

    That is, the indigenous population was deprived of rights and equalized with animals, to clear the way for Рoles and Jews

    By then the indigenous population were mostly Greek Catholics or Roman Catholics so these restrictions did not apply to them. They applied to dissenters and not the general population.

    Ironically when the Russians came back they persecuted the Greek Catholics and forced them to become Orthodox:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_Che%C5%82m_Eparchy#Conversion

    Then in the 1930s the Poles persecuted the Orthodox and forced them to become Catholics again.

    But of course, after most of the Orthodox left and the civil war between Rus people assumed the form of Orthodox vs. Greek Catholic and Roman Catholic, the Orthodox remaining on the PLC side of the border were persecuted. Just like the Greek and Roman Catholics indigenous people on the Orthodox side of the border were also persecuted. Many of them were indeed slaughtered.

    But these are not the times we are discussing. We are discussing the ultimate stupidity of rebellion and civil war in the first place.

    An excellent article on the topic, others may be interested in:

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

    Definitely not Italian architects. Google Postnik Yakovlev (from Pskov). Other than St. Basil’s Cathedral, everyone outside of Russia has heard of Kremlin (built in 15-17 centuries).

    You are half-right. It was not Italian architect but used Italian plans and Italian and perhaps German builders.

    People only heard about Kremlin outside Russia because long after Kremlin was built Russia became a global superpower. Kremlin’s fame has nothing to do with its high architectural achievement.

  183. @AP

    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater.
     
    To a large extent this reflects Western parochialism. For example the works in the Tretyakov gallery compare favorably to those in any Western museum, but most people outside Russia have never heard of any of the artists featured in Tretyakov.

    That’s true, too. Most Old Holland painters aren’t as good, but they are well known in Europe. In that sense the US is harmonious: no culture and no appreciation of culture. When I came to the States, a post-doc in the lab where I worked (born and bred in the US) told me an interesting thing: on the money it says “in God we trust”; that’s the only God we trust in.

  184. @AP

    Your ideas of a Ukraine working in tandem with Poland was actually an attractive alternative that was given the opportunity to go forward, but was solidly rebuked by the ascending Polish magnates. The Treaty of Hadiach would have squarely put your plan into play, but was squarely shot down before it even got off the ground.
     
    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.). The ratified version looked like the deal that the Hetmanate ended up having with Russia after Poltava. With similar deals, union with Poland (similar population as Ukraine) was less dangerous than with Russia (three times greater population) as later historical events proved.

    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.).

    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who’s untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so? Also, Russia’s population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine. You seem to be projecting population trends from the 21st century backward to the 17th. Now, I’m not supporting the idea that a union with Russia would be a better one for Ukraine than with Poland. I like to embrace the ideas of the great Ukrainian bard Shevchenko who clearly could see the historic injustices of too close a relationship with either Poland or Russia, who instinctively gave us this wise instruction to lean upon:

    в свої хаті своя правда і сила і воля

    • Replies: @AP

    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who’s untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so?
     
    I'm not sure if this can be characterized as changing the rules of the game. Ukrainians sent a version to Poland, Poland modified it. I suppose it is like when the president sends something to congress and a modified version is passed.

    To be sure, the initial deal that Ukraine got with Russia was better and provided for more autonomy. Modified Hadiach looked a little like Ukraine after 1709. But long-term the consequences were clearly negative.

    Also, Russia’s population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine.
     
    This source claims 12 million in Russia in 1600, so probably 12.5 million or so by 1650:

    https://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/nsx.htm

    In 1650 the "left bank" Hetmanate had about 2 million people according to Ukrainian wiki. If one includes the Right Bank also it was 4 million people. There were about 4-5 million ethnic Poles within the PLC. Ukrainians plus Belarussians actually outnumbered Poles. So long-term, given eventual social mobilization etc. prospects for Rus in Poland would have been pretty good. Those Rus may have become Polonized to a degree (was this worse than becoming Russified, to a degree?) but they would have eventually become rather strong.
  185. @Mr. XYZ

    Belorussian attitudes to joining Russia are similar to the ones prevailing in Donetsk/Lugansk in 2014.
     
    Do you have a source for this, please?

    Also, I think that there was a very real possibility of Belarus joining Russia in the late 1990s when Lukashenko believed that he would eventually have the opportunity to be the leader of a joint Russian-Belarusian state in the event of a union. However, Lukashenko appears to have cooled on this idea after Putin came to power in Russia and consolidated his power there.

    In turn, this raises an interesting question--would Belarusian elites actually want to be governors, provincial administrators, and provincial bureaucrats in a joint Russian-Belarusian state or would they prefer to maintain an independent Belarus in order to be kings in their own house? In the case of the Donbass, after the Maidan Revolution, it was clear that they were going to be provincial bureaucrats in either Ukraine or Russia in any case; in Belarus, on the other hand, the elites actually have the choice between being kings in their own house and being Russian provincial bureaucrats.

    Do you have a source for this, please?

    Yes, but I want to leave that for the Belorussia thread. They are quite precisely similar to Donetsk/Lugansk, as opposed to Kharkov/Odessa or Crimea.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Interesting. Anyway, I look forward to your thread on this topic.
  186. @Mr. XYZ

    An independent Belorussia is more of an affront even that the Ukraine, a standing monument to Russian division and Russian failure to to beat a bald potato dictator.
     
    Out of curiosity--do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand? I mean, all of those countries--like the US--were former British colonies and were historically settled by large numbers of Britons.

    To the contrary, I am skeptical even of keeping some existing parts of Russia within Russia (namely, DICh). So far as I’m concerned, a Russia without DICh will be 10x more logical than the current retarded limbo state in which it has DICh but doesn’t have Belorussia or Novorossiya. If Russia is to be an exclusively Great Russian state then I don’t want to subsidize Caucasian layabouts.
     
    Won't you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors' traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?

    (BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry. AFAIK, you need an IQ of 130 or above to pass a Mensa test and considering that the average Lak IQ would probably be something like 85-90, you would probably be smarter than 99.9% of all Laks--a true wunderkind!)

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?

    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada’s, at any rate).

    Won’t you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors’ traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?

    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.

    BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry.

    Well, first, a quarter Lak. The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables – they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that’s quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada’s, at any rate).
     
    Makes sense.

    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.
     
    Interesting analysis of this situation. Of course, the only real way that I think that Russia is going to be a threat to Dagestani culture is if Russia engages in a long and aggressive policy of Russification in Dagestan--something which Putin appears to loathe to do.

    Anyway, if the Dagestanis (and Chechens, and Ingushes, et cetera) genuinely want to leave Russia, then they should be allowed to do so. Of course, I would also hope that their gay people are going to find safe refuge in more gay-friendly countries afterwards--specifically countries such as the US, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and even Mexico and Brazil.


    Well, first, a quarter Lak.
     
    Yeah, I said a quarter Lak.

    The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.
     
    Yep, I've believed that you mentioned that.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables – they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that’s quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.
     
    Interesting points. Also, Yes, I am well-aware that your Lak ancestors were at the top of the cognitive pack in Dagestan. It's still interesting, though, that even if Laks have an average IQ of 95 (and I don't think that it's going to be higher than that given the fact that 95 also appears to be the average IQ of southern Russians), your IQ is still going to be three or almost three standard deviations above the Lak average (135 - 95 = 40 / 15 = 2.67 standard deviations). That's somewhat less impressive considering that you are only a quarter Lak, but it's still pretty impressive. After all, I don't think that even many quarter-Black people are going to have an IQ three or almost three standard deviations above the Black average (125-130).

    BTW, did they give you an exact IQ after you took your Mensa test or were you simply told that you passed it?

    , @AquariusAnon
    Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all branch states of the former British Empire. So no, they are not gay, nor fake. They might not be independent civilizations, belonging to the Greater Anglo Civilization. But they are indeed legit independent states with their own histories, forms of government, and own national heroes and martyrs. All of which are actually distinct from the US or UK, but like all branch states, the founder is always a citizen of the main state it branched from (in this case the UK).

    I don't see why Americans would get angered at the presence of Australia. They don't even share the same founding fathers!

    And you also think that Taiwan is gay and fake: Any territory with a distinctive history and achieved nationhood is a nation, period. Taiwan and Hong Kong are a part of the Chinese civilization, but again, they have their own histories, own form of governments, and own "national" heroes and martyrs. So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.

    One civilization can have multiple states (Russian civilization consists of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine for example), but what is unacceptable is for states within a civilization to be estranged from each other (Ukraine and Russia, the 2 Koreans, or China/Taiwan up until 2008). Different states within a civilization shall be independent in terms of internal policies, sovereignty, and can even have internal squabbles from time to time, but when it comes to foreign conflicts, civilization shall take precedence over statehood.

    Different states of the same civilization should be in a union of some sort.

    , @Dmitry
    Lol how many different nationalities you are descended from.

    You are probably eligible for both Israeli and Italian passports as well. For Israeli (if only any mother of a grandfather was a Jew, or mother of the mother of any grandfather, then you can get the citizenship). For Italian, you need only any Italian ancestor to (the beginning?) of the 19th century and you can get automatic Italian citizenship. A lot of North and Latin Americans get Italian citizenship if they can prove they had any Italian ancestor in the 19th century.

  187. @Mr. XYZ
    What do you think that the total population of Kievan Rus was back then?

    Also, for what it's worth, Anne of Kiev married a French King in the 11th century and was literate while her husband appears to have been illiterate:

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

    Consensus estimates range around 6 million, where it would remain until the Mongol invasion (4 million in 1000).

    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    Interesting.

    It's pretty cool that these six million people reproduced so much that now their descendants number something like 200 million people.

    It's amazing just how few people were the ancestors of the present-day East Slavic populations. At the same time, though, I shouldn't be that surprised. I mean, the US Black population increased from something like 500,000 in 1790 to something like 40 million today--an increase even greater than that of Eastern Slavs over the last 900 years.
  188. @Mikhail

    Yeah, Austria-Hungary was certainly more developed than Serbia was.
     
    Serbia was subjugated by an entity for an extended period unlike the Austrians. In any event, Serbia was to play the lead role in the development of Yugoslavia.

    Yes, all of this is correct. Of course, I also think that Serbia’s likely low average IQ would hold it back relative to countries such as Austria-Hungary (which had some high-IQ peoples inside of it–Germans, Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, northern Italians, Slovenes, and Croats).

    In regards to Yugoslavia, weren’t Serbs the largest ethnic group in Yugoslavia? Also, wasn’t the Serbian royal family the one who was in charge of Yugoslavia until the 1941 Nazi invasion?

  189. @Anatoly Karlin

    Do you have a source for this, please?
     
    Yes, but I want to leave that for the Belorussia thread. They are quite precisely similar to Donetsk/Lugansk, as opposed to Kharkov/Odessa or Crimea.

    Interesting. Anyway, I look forward to your thread on this topic.

  190. @Anatoly Karlin

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
     
    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada's, at any rate).

    Won’t you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors’ traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?
     
    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.

    BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry.
     
    Well, first, a quarter Lak. The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables - they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that's quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.

    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada’s, at any rate).

    Makes sense.

    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.

    Interesting analysis of this situation. Of course, the only real way that I think that Russia is going to be a threat to Dagestani culture is if Russia engages in a long and aggressive policy of Russification in Dagestan–something which Putin appears to loathe to do.

    Anyway, if the Dagestanis (and Chechens, and Ingushes, et cetera) genuinely want to leave Russia, then they should be allowed to do so. Of course, I would also hope that their gay people are going to find safe refuge in more gay-friendly countries afterwards–specifically countries such as the US, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and even Mexico and Brazil.

    Well, first, a quarter Lak.

    Yeah, I said a quarter Lak.

    The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.

    Yep, I’ve believed that you mentioned that.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables – they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that’s quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.

    Interesting points. Also, Yes, I am well-aware that your Lak ancestors were at the top of the cognitive pack in Dagestan. It’s still interesting, though, that even if Laks have an average IQ of 95 (and I don’t think that it’s going to be higher than that given the fact that 95 also appears to be the average IQ of southern Russians), your IQ is still going to be three or almost three standard deviations above the Lak average (135 – 95 = 40 / 15 = 2.67 standard deviations). That’s somewhat less impressive considering that you are only a quarter Lak, but it’s still pretty impressive. After all, I don’t think that even many quarter-Black people are going to have an IQ three or almost three standard deviations above the Black average (125-130).

    BTW, did they give you an exact IQ after you took your Mensa test or were you simply told that you passed it?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Yep, I’ve believed that you mentioned that.
     
    Well, it seems relevant to how I got my reasonably high (though not stratospheric) IQ... That’s somewhat less impressive considering that you are only a quarter Lak, but it’s still pretty impressive.

    BTW, did they give you an exact IQ after you took your Mensa test or were you simply told that you passed it?
     
    I got 140 on a Cattell verbal test and 100 on the Raven's test. They only count the higher one, which doesn't seem all that appropriate. OTOH, the Raven's had really tough time limits and it wasn't just me who felt that way, everyone was complaining about that.

    I took a Raven's test on the Internet (a properly calibrated one, not one of those where everyone gets 160) and finished it half the allotted time, getting 120.
  191. @Anatoly Karlin
    Consensus estimates range around 6 million, where it would remain until the Mongol invasion (4 million in 1000).

    Interesting.

    It’s pretty cool that these six million people reproduced so much that now their descendants number something like 200 million people.

    It’s amazing just how few people were the ancestors of the present-day East Slavic populations. At the same time, though, I shouldn’t be that surprised. I mean, the US Black population increased from something like 500,000 in 1790 to something like 40 million today–an increase even greater than that of Eastern Slavs over the last 900 years.

    • Replies: @AP
    The 3 million French people in Quebec are descended from, IIRC, about 20,000 settlers. Spectacular growth. Then came secularization in the 1960s and suddenly - population decline.
  192. @AnonFromTN
    I know Chopin, as well as Adam Mizkewich, Vaida, and Stanislaw Lem. However, the sum total of Polish cultural achievements, while comparing favorably with Bantu or Swahili, is nowhere near top cultures, English, German, Russian, or even French and Spanish. Poland is European backwater. Actually, Serbs have a very apt term for “European backwater” – "Evropska zadnitsa” (for English speakers: this sounds for most Slavs as “European ass”).

    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens. Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile. Not to mention music, theater, opera, ballet, etc. Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank. Yet there are a lot of Poles, more than 40 million today.
    , @Gerard2

    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.
     
    What an utterly moronically stupid comment. Literally the stupidest I have ever read on the internet ( and that is some statement)

    Are you so beholden to smoking the penis of Badneratard f**kwits because the more comments then the better rated the blog?

    There is just no way you could think such an idiotic thing
  193. @Mr. Hack

    Hadiach was ratified but the Polish side changed it (no more separate Rus principality with it own money and embassies, size of Rus army was reduced, number of Cossacks being legally ennobled reduced to 1,000 per year, etc.).
     
    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who's untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so? Also, Russia's population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine. You seem to be projecting population trends from the 21st century backward to the 17th. Now, I'm not supporting the idea that a union with Russia would be a better one for Ukraine than with Poland. I like to embrace the ideas of the great Ukrainian bard Shevchenko who clearly could see the historic injustices of too close a relationship with either Poland or Russia, who instinctively gave us this wise instruction to lean upon:

    в свої хаті своя правда і сила і воля

     

    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who’s untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so?

    I’m not sure if this can be characterized as changing the rules of the game. Ukrainians sent a version to Poland, Poland modified it. I suppose it is like when the president sends something to congress and a modified version is passed.

    To be sure, the initial deal that Ukraine got with Russia was better and provided for more autonomy. Modified Hadiach looked a little like Ukraine after 1709. But long-term the consequences were clearly negative.

    Also, Russia’s population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine.

    This source claims 12 million in Russia in 1600, so probably 12.5 million or so by 1650:

    https://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/nsx.htm

    In 1650 the “left bank” Hetmanate had about 2 million people according to Ukrainian wiki. If one includes the Right Bank also it was 4 million people. There were about 4-5 million ethnic Poles within the PLC. Ukrainians plus Belarussians actually outnumbered Poles. So long-term, given eventual social mobilization etc. prospects for Rus in Poland would have been pretty good. Those Rus may have become Polonized to a degree (was this worse than becoming Russified, to a degree?) but they would have eventually become rather strong.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I'd say that it was a 'modified version'

    In spite of considerable Roman Catholic Clergy opposition, the Treaty of Hadiach was approved by Polish king and parliament (Sejm) on 22 May 1659, but with an amended text.[1] The idea of a Ruthenian Duchy within the Commonwealth was completely abandoned.[2]
     
    The principle idea of a tri-national state had been completely abandoned, as depicted in the coat of arms depicted above, and even any signs of autonomy were being whittled down. Sounds like a good old fashioned zrada to me. Most of the Cossacks weren't drawn towards such an uneven proposition and ultimately abondoned the idea. Poland blew it, AP, it could have been something great and stimulating.
  194. @AP

    Only a Pole could find something in Polish culture to be proud of. Too bad the rest of humanity (I mean, the tiny minority that knows that Poland actually exists) does not agree.

     

    So you never heard of Chopin?

    First of all, he’s a deranged Dixiephobe who really, *really* hates Southern culture while living in Nashville, one of the most southern, in an upscale way, major metro areas (over 1 million) left in the US.

    He likely lives in a bubble in the Hillsboro Village or East Nashville areas. He’s not even aware of the massive Nissan factories just down the road in Rutherford County (or the VW factories in Chattanooga for that matter). On top of that, he “despises” the single largest reason why Nashville punches above its weight in national recognition given its population.

    Poland is one of the less “sophisticated” cultures of Europe, which is why he has heavy disdain towards it. In terms of overall accomplishment, Poland is middle of the road in Europe, ranking directly behind Spain and perhaps on par with the Netherlands. Its definitely *not* gay or fake whatsoever.

    • Replies: @Hyperborean
    Poles are fine, but the orthography makes me wince.
  195. @AP

    Kind of reminds of some North American Indian activists saying how their culture was at one time advanced, teaching the White man this, that and the other thing – somewhat similar to some Afrocentric types.
     
    Or Russians saying this about themselves relative to Rus from PLC lands.

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

    One of Russia's earliest music theorists was the Ukrainian Nikolay Diletsky (c. 1630, Kiev – after 1680, Moscow). Although several of his compositions survive, Diletsky's fame rests chiefly on his composition treatise, Grammatika musikiyskago peniya (A Grammar of Music[al Singing]), which was the first of its kind in Russia; there are three surviving versions of this work, of which the earliest dates from 1677.

    In the 18th century, Peter I brought in reforms introducing western music fashions to Russia. During the subsequent reign of Empresses Elisabeth and Catherine, the Russian imperial court attracted many prominent musicians, many from Italy.[3] They brought with them Italian traditions of opera and classical music in general, to inspire future generations of Russian composers. A number of composers received training in Italy or from these recent Italian emigres and composed vocal and instrumental works in the Italian Classical tradition popular in the day. These include ethnic Ukrainian composers Dmitri Bortniansky, Maksim Berezovsky and Artem Vedel who not only composed masterpieces of choral music but also included operas, chambers works and symphonic works.

    :::::::

    I don't recall Native Americans playing a similar role in European culture. So your analogy is false.

    While I can’t really adjudicate on the disputes over how repressed Ukrainians were on either side of the Russia/PLC border, not having read enough about that myself, I think your point about PLC’s cultural superiority over contemporary Russia is obviously true. One needs to just look at the respective histories of the printing press in both polities.

    • Replies: @AP
    And as part of PLC the Rus there enjoyed this advantage.

    I don't know much about history of printing presses in Moscow. Here is all about printing presses in Rus lands by Rus people in the 16th - 17th centuries:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CP%5CR%5CPrinting.htm

    The first printing press on Ukrainian ethnic territory was founded by Ivan Fedorovych (Fedorov) in Lviv (1573–4). Its equipment and assets were used to found the Lviv Dormition Brotherhood Press (1591–1788), which played a key role in the history of early Ukrainian printing.

    Other early Cyrillic presses in Galicia were Bishop Hedeon Balaban's Striatyn Press (1602–6), his press in Krylos (1605–6), Y. Sheliha's press in Dobromyl (1611–17), Pavlo Liutkovych-Telytsia's press in Uhortsi (1617–21), and the Univ Monastery press (1648–1770), founded by Bishop Zhelyborsky.

    Printing in Volhynia began after Ivan Fedorovych (Fedorov) entered the service of Prince Kostiantyn Vasyl Ostrozky and founded what became the important Ostrih Press (1577–1612). Other Cyrillic presses were founded by Prince Ostrozky at the Derman Monastery (1602–5); by Kyrylo Stavrovetsky-Tranquillon in Rokhmaniv (1618–19); by Pavlo Liutkovych-Telytsia in Chetvertnia (1624–5), Lutsk (1625–8), and Chorna (1629); and at the Epiphany Monastery in Kremenets (1637–8).

    In Kyiv, printing began with the founding of the Kyivan Cave Monastery Press (1615–1918). It remained the largest printing press in Ukraine until the mid-19th century. Other presses in Kyiv were founded by Tymofii Verbytsky (1624–8) and S. Sobol (1628–31).

    In Left-Bank Ukraine the first printing presses were those of Kyrylo Stavrovetsky-Tranquillon in Chernihiv(1646) and Archbishop Lazar Baranovych in Novhorod-Siverskyi (1674–9)

    I suspect much more advanced than in Russia.
    , @AP
    Here is a Rus from 15th century Galicia:

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

    No Russian analogue of that time, not even close.
  196. @Mr. XYZ
    Interesting.

    It's pretty cool that these six million people reproduced so much that now their descendants number something like 200 million people.

    It's amazing just how few people were the ancestors of the present-day East Slavic populations. At the same time, though, I shouldn't be that surprised. I mean, the US Black population increased from something like 500,000 in 1790 to something like 40 million today--an increase even greater than that of Eastern Slavs over the last 900 years.

    The 3 million French people in Quebec are descended from, IIRC, about 20,000 settlers. Spectacular growth. Then came secularization in the 1960s and suddenly – population decline.

  197. @Anatoly Karlin

    Out of curiosity–do you think that Americans should be offended by the existence of an independent Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?
     
    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada's, at any rate).

    Won’t you be upset by the secession of some of your ancestors’ traditional homeland, though? Or is there no Lak pride left within you, Anatoly?
     
    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.

    BTW, I find it interesting that you passed a Mensa test and have a quarter Lak ancestry.
     
    Well, first, a quarter Lak. The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables - they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that's quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.

    Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all branch states of the former British Empire. So no, they are not gay, nor fake. They might not be independent civilizations, belonging to the Greater Anglo Civilization. But they are indeed legit independent states with their own histories, forms of government, and own national heroes and martyrs. All of which are actually distinct from the US or UK, but like all branch states, the founder is always a citizen of the main state it branched from (in this case the UK).

    I don’t see why Americans would get angered at the presence of Australia. They don’t even share the same founding fathers!

    And you also think that Taiwan is gay and fake: Any territory with a distinctive history and achieved nationhood is a nation, period. Taiwan and Hong Kong are a part of the Chinese civilization, but again, they have their own histories, own form of governments, and own “national” heroes and martyrs. So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.

    One civilization can have multiple states (Russian civilization consists of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine for example), but what is unacceptable is for states within a civilization to be estranged from each other (Ukraine and Russia, the 2 Koreans, or China/Taiwan up until 2008). Different states within a civilization shall be independent in terms of internal policies, sovereignty, and can even have internal squabbles from time to time, but when it comes to foreign conflicts, civilization shall take precedence over statehood.

    Different states of the same civilization should be in a union of some sort.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.
     
    You're beginning to cuck. Get a hold of yourself!
  198. @Mr. XYZ

    I do indeed believe that all red-blooded Americans should be offended by their existence (or Canada’s, at any rate).
     
    Makes sense.

    Why would I be? Secession would seem to offer more prospects for the successful preservation of Dagestani culture, not that I care one way or the other.
     
    Interesting analysis of this situation. Of course, the only real way that I think that Russia is going to be a threat to Dagestani culture is if Russia engages in a long and aggressive policy of Russification in Dagestan--something which Putin appears to loathe to do.

    Anyway, if the Dagestanis (and Chechens, and Ingushes, et cetera) genuinely want to leave Russia, then they should be allowed to do so. Of course, I would also hope that their gay people are going to find safe refuge in more gay-friendly countries afterwards--specifically countries such as the US, Britain, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and even Mexico and Brazil.


    Well, first, a quarter Lak.
     
    Yeah, I said a quarter Lak.

    The other half being pure Slavic (mostly peasant but with a lot of priests popping up); the other quarter being half Slavic (half of which was of aristocratic heritage; distant relatives still have the signed ennobling writ from Alexander III), half Christianized Jewish-Italian-Slavic hodgepodge from Odessa.
     
    Yep, I've believed that you mentioned that.

    Second, as I think I noted before, my Lak ancestors were local notables – they were some of the biggest fish in what was an admittedly very small pond. The elders in that branch of the family recalled playing with gold spoons as children before the Bolsheviks confiscated them and shot a bunch of them. (It is ironic that they were my only ancestors who were actually liquidated as class enemies, instead of just being dispossessed). Meanwhile, the Laks themselves were something of a market-dominant minority in Dagestan since the late 19th century, with higher literacy rates than any other Dagestani ethnic group (as fixed by early Soviet censuses). Considering their low numbers, and remote, interior homeland, that’s quite impressive and suggests a higher IQ than ordinary Dagestanis.
     
    Interesting points. Also, Yes, I am well-aware that your Lak ancestors were at the top of the cognitive pack in Dagestan. It's still interesting, though, that even if Laks have an average IQ of 95 (and I don't think that it's going to be higher than that given the fact that 95 also appears to be the average IQ of southern Russians), your IQ is still going to be three or almost three standard deviations above the Lak average (135 - 95 = 40 / 15 = 2.67 standard deviations). That's somewhat less impressive considering that you are only a quarter Lak, but it's still pretty impressive. After all, I don't think that even many quarter-Black people are going to have an IQ three or almost three standard deviations above the Black average (125-130).

    BTW, did they give you an exact IQ after you took your Mensa test or were you simply told that you passed it?

    Yep, I’ve believed that you mentioned that.

    Well, it seems relevant to how I got my reasonably high (though not stratospheric) IQ… That’s somewhat less impressive considering that you are only a quarter Lak, but it’s still pretty impressive.

    BTW, did they give you an exact IQ after you took your Mensa test or were you simply told that you passed it?

    I got 140 on a Cattell verbal test and 100 on the Raven’s test. They only count the higher one, which doesn’t seem all that appropriate. OTOH, the Raven’s had really tough time limits and it wasn’t just me who felt that way, everyone was complaining about that.

    I took a Raven’s test on the Internet (a properly calibrated one, not one of those where everyone gets 160) and finished it half the allotted time, getting 120.

  199. @AquariusAnon
    Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are all branch states of the former British Empire. So no, they are not gay, nor fake. They might not be independent civilizations, belonging to the Greater Anglo Civilization. But they are indeed legit independent states with their own histories, forms of government, and own national heroes and martyrs. All of which are actually distinct from the US or UK, but like all branch states, the founder is always a citizen of the main state it branched from (in this case the UK).

    I don't see why Americans would get angered at the presence of Australia. They don't even share the same founding fathers!

    And you also think that Taiwan is gay and fake: Any territory with a distinctive history and achieved nationhood is a nation, period. Taiwan and Hong Kong are a part of the Chinese civilization, but again, they have their own histories, own form of governments, and own "national" heroes and martyrs. So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.

    One civilization can have multiple states (Russian civilization consists of Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine for example), but what is unacceptable is for states within a civilization to be estranged from each other (Ukraine and Russia, the 2 Koreans, or China/Taiwan up until 2008). Different states within a civilization shall be independent in terms of internal policies, sovereignty, and can even have internal squabbles from time to time, but when it comes to foreign conflicts, civilization shall take precedence over statehood.

    Different states of the same civilization should be in a union of some sort.

    So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.

    You’re beginning to cuck. Get a hold of yourself!

    • Replies: @AquariusAnon
    I don't want Taiwan or Hong Kong getting subjected to Uncle Chang's social credit system, since Taiwan and Hong Kong had a history of being anti-Communist, and was never under the direct jurisdiction of the CCP.

    They should definitely thoroughly clean out neoliberalism.txt with right wing dictatorships minus the social credit though, which was what they were supposed to be founded as. And should form special and close trade and economic links with the CCP. Essentially the KMT platform for Taiwan, and also applied to Hong Kong.

    On top of retaining autonomy of internal affairs while being plugged in to the Sinosphere (but not direct rule by Beijingers), Hong Kong should actively promote and strengthen its Anglo cultural influence. This is the last city outside of the UK that still retains a Queen's Road Central, or a Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

    The Mainland Chinese would eventually need to use (and in my opinion also the Taiwanese would want) Hong Kong to deal with the Eternal Anglo again if relations break down further.

    , @AquariusAnon
    And keep in mind from a businessman's perspective, Hong Kong merging into a core Mainland Chinese city would be a complete disaster economically for Hong Kong.

    On the other hand, estrangement from Mainland China would be an even bigger disaster.

    Which is why acknowledging Hong Kong's distinctiveness while as an integral part of Chinese civilization is the way to go.

  200. @Anatoly Karlin
    While I can't really adjudicate on the disputes over how repressed Ukrainians were on either side of the Russia/PLC border, not having read enough about that myself, I think your point about PLC's cultural superiority over contemporary Russia is obviously true. One needs to just look at the respective histories of the printing press in both polities.

    And as part of PLC the Rus there enjoyed this advantage.

    I don’t know much about history of printing presses in Moscow. Here is all about printing presses in Rus lands by Rus people in the 16th – 17th centuries:

    http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CP%5CR%5CPrinting.htm

    The first printing press on Ukrainian ethnic territory was founded by Ivan Fedorovych (Fedorov) in Lviv (1573–4). Its equipment and assets were used to found the Lviv Dormition Brotherhood Press (1591–1788), which played a key role in the history of early Ukrainian printing.

    Other early Cyrillic presses in Galicia were Bishop Hedeon Balaban’s Striatyn Press (1602–6), his press in Krylos (1605–6), Y. Sheliha’s press in Dobromyl (1611–17), Pavlo Liutkovych-Telytsia’s press in Uhortsi (1617–21), and the Univ Monastery press (1648–1770), founded by Bishop Zhelyborsky.

    Printing in Volhynia began after Ivan Fedorovych (Fedorov) entered the service of Prince Kostiantyn Vasyl Ostrozky and founded what became the important Ostrih Press (1577–1612). Other Cyrillic presses were founded by Prince Ostrozky at the Derman Monastery (1602–5); by Kyrylo Stavrovetsky-Tranquillon in Rokhmaniv (1618–19); by Pavlo Liutkovych-Telytsia in Chetvertnia (1624–5), Lutsk (1625–8), and Chorna (1629); and at the Epiphany Monastery in Kremenets (1637–8).

    In Kyiv, printing began with the founding of the Kyivan Cave Monastery Press (1615–1918). It remained the largest printing press in Ukraine until the mid-19th century. Other presses in Kyiv were founded by Tymofii Verbytsky (1624–8) and S. Sobol (1628–31).

    In Left-Bank Ukraine the first printing presses were those of Kyrylo Stavrovetsky-Tranquillon in Chernihiv(1646) and Archbishop Lazar Baranovych in Novhorod-Siverskyi (1674–9)

    I suspect much more advanced than in Russia.

  201. @Anatoly Karlin
    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.

    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens. Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile. Not to mention music, theater, opera, ballet, etc. Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank. Yet there are a lot of Poles, more than 40 million today.

    • Replies: @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.
    , @melanf

    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens.
     
    Why? Boleslav Prus "Pharaoh", Henry Senkevich " Qwo vadis?". These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote. Stanisla Lem is also one of the greatest writers of Europe.

    Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile.
     
    Out of curiosity-what do you consider a special Russian style (different from the styles of European painting)?

    Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank.
     
    At least Copernicus
  202. @Anatoly Karlin

    So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.
     
    You're beginning to cuck. Get a hold of yourself!

    I don’t want Taiwan or Hong Kong getting subjected to Uncle Chang’s social credit system, since Taiwan and Hong Kong had a history of being anti-Communist, and was never under the direct jurisdiction of the CCP.

    They should definitely thoroughly clean out neoliberalism.txt with right wing dictatorships minus the social credit though, which was what they were supposed to be founded as. And should form special and close trade and economic links with the CCP. Essentially the KMT platform for Taiwan, and also applied to Hong Kong.

    On top of retaining autonomy of internal affairs while being plugged in to the Sinosphere (but not direct rule by Beijingers), Hong Kong should actively promote and strengthen its Anglo cultural influence. This is the last city outside of the UK that still retains a Queen’s Road Central, or a Queen Elizabeth Hospital.

    The Mainland Chinese would eventually need to use (and in my opinion also the Taiwanese would want) Hong Kong to deal with the Eternal Anglo again if relations break down further.

  203. @AquariusAnon
    First of all, he's a deranged Dixiephobe who really, *really* hates Southern culture while living in Nashville, one of the most southern, in an upscale way, major metro areas (over 1 million) left in the US.

    He likely lives in a bubble in the Hillsboro Village or East Nashville areas. He's not even aware of the massive Nissan factories just down the road in Rutherford County (or the VW factories in Chattanooga for that matter). On top of that, he "despises" the single largest reason why Nashville punches above its weight in national recognition given its population.

    Poland is one of the less "sophisticated" cultures of Europe, which is why he has heavy disdain towards it. In terms of overall accomplishment, Poland is middle of the road in Europe, ranking directly behind Spain and perhaps on par with the Netherlands. Its definitely *not* gay or fake whatsoever.

    Poles are fine, but the orthography makes me wince.

  204. @Anatoly Karlin

    So yes, they are legit states, neither gay nor fake.
     
    You're beginning to cuck. Get a hold of yourself!

    And keep in mind from a businessman’s perspective, Hong Kong merging into a core Mainland Chinese city would be a complete disaster economically for Hong Kong.

    On the other hand, estrangement from Mainland China would be an even bigger disaster.

    Which is why acknowledging Hong Kong’s distinctiveness while as an integral part of Chinese civilization is the way to go.

  205. @Anatoly Karlin
    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.

    [MORE]

    I suspect that Poles would be comparable to Russians in per capita achievement.

    What an utterly moronically stupid comment. Literally the stupidest I have ever read on the internet ( and that is some statement)

    Are you so beholden to smoking the penis of Badneratard f**kwits because the more comments then the better rated the blog?

    There is just no way you could think such an idiotic thing

  206. @AP

    So, how can you go forward and work with somebody who’s untrustworthy, who is bound to change the rules of the game as soon as it becomes expedient to do so?
     
    I'm not sure if this can be characterized as changing the rules of the game. Ukrainians sent a version to Poland, Poland modified it. I suppose it is like when the president sends something to congress and a modified version is passed.

    To be sure, the initial deal that Ukraine got with Russia was better and provided for more autonomy. Modified Hadiach looked a little like Ukraine after 1709. But long-term the consequences were clearly negative.

    Also, Russia’s population at the time of the treaty of Hadiach was roughly equal to that of the PLC (9-12 million) and nowhere represented one being three times larger than the one in Ukraine.
     
    This source claims 12 million in Russia in 1600, so probably 12.5 million or so by 1650:

    https://pages.uoregon.edu/kimball/nsx.htm

    In 1650 the "left bank" Hetmanate had about 2 million people according to Ukrainian wiki. If one includes the Right Bank also it was 4 million people. There were about 4-5 million ethnic Poles within the PLC. Ukrainians plus Belarussians actually outnumbered Poles. So long-term, given eventual social mobilization etc. prospects for Rus in Poland would have been pretty good. Those Rus may have become Polonized to a degree (was this worse than becoming Russified, to a degree?) but they would have eventually become rather strong.

    I’d say that it was a ‘modified version’

    In spite of considerable Roman Catholic Clergy opposition, the Treaty of Hadiach was approved by Polish king and parliament (Sejm) on 22 May 1659, but with an amended text.[1] The idea of a Ruthenian Duchy within the Commonwealth was completely abandoned.[2]

    The principle idea of a tri-national state had been completely abandoned, as depicted in the coat of arms depicted above, and even any signs of autonomy were being whittled down. Sounds like a good old fashioned zrada to me. Most of the Cossacks weren’t drawn towards such an uneven proposition and ultimately abondoned the idea. Poland blew it, AP, it could have been something great and stimulating.

    • Replies: @Gerard2

    The principle idea of a tri-national state had been completely abandoned, as depicted in the coat of arms depicted above, and even any signs of autonomy were being whittled down. Sounds like a good old fashioned zrada to me. Most of the Cossacks weren’t drawn towards such an uneven proposition and ultimately abondoned the idea. Poland blew it, AP, it could have been something great and stimulating.
     
    To date the only thing a Pole or Poland has created of value/effect/intrigue or whatever in the last 500 years has been.....Al Qaeda
  207. and it will be the judges and prosecutors who imprisoned people on 282 who will themselves be sitting in Arctic penal colonies.

    A reminder that this law was totally just….and that Russia’s prison population has decreased by about 25% in the last 4 years….numerous laws are being softened…and about 2 hamsters have been imprisoned because of 282…or in most of the prosecutions, the person accused has normally done something else, much worse, with 282 only being placed in addition

  208. @AnonFromTN
    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens. Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile. Not to mention music, theater, opera, ballet, etc. Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank. Yet there are a lot of Poles, more than 40 million today.

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Well, Murray's Human Accomplishment data is open access no at the OSF. Has been for a few years. Anyone sufficiently interested can do some quick calculations himself and tell us precisely.
    , @Gerard2

    it’s probably pretty similar per capita.
     
    You idiot. Poland is 3 to 3.5 times smaller in population than Russia.

    3 or 3.5 multiplied by 0 = 0

    Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires.
     
    WTF you twat? The best of influence from France, Russia, Germany, Jews, Sweden......and next to nothing in 500 years for Poland to show for it. How would you explain away the many successes of Hungary you idiot?....or plenty of other lands
    , @AnonFromTN
    I wish there were objective measures in culture, but I am afraid there aren’t any. Same with history, it’s as subjective as it gets. One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian, and is now immune to the rot that is destroying Europe. It’s all in the eye of the beholder. Not to mention that history has no subjunctive mood: “ifs” are pointless, whatever happened has happened and cannot be changed.
    , @melanf
    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.
     
    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian
     
    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).


    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. "Great Russia" (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),"Ukraine" was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world - class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence
    , @melanf
    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.
     
    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian
     
    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).


    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. "Great Russia" (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),"Ukraine" was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world - class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence
  209. However, things are looking up. Researcher salaries were almost doubled in 2018. For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, academia is again a financially viable profession.

    • Replies: @AquariusAnon
    In my opinion Putin's main focus should be diversifying Russia's economy away from energy.

    International logistics (especially Europe to East Asia transit hub for both cargo and passenger planes), automotive (make Lada Hyundai or at least Skoda quality), IT, entertainment (develop Rpop like how Kpop got developed), and agricultural export should be Russia's main focuses.
  210. @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    Well, Murray’s Human Accomplishment data is open access no at the OSF. Has been for a few years. Anyone sufficiently interested can do some quick calculations himself and tell us precisely.

  211. @Mitleser

    However, things are looking up. Researcher salaries were almost doubled in 2018. For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, academia is again a financially viable profession.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOBoBJQbazA

    In my opinion Putin’s main focus should be diversifying Russia’s economy away from energy.

    International logistics (especially Europe to East Asia transit hub for both cargo and passenger planes), automotive (make Lada Hyundai or at least Skoda quality), IT, entertainment (develop Rpop like how Kpop got developed), and agricultural export should be Russia’s main focuses.

  212. @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    [MORE]

    it’s probably pretty similar per capita.

    You idiot. Poland is 3 to 3.5 times smaller in population than Russia.

    3 or 3.5 multiplied by 0 = 0

    Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires.

    WTF you twat? The best of influence from France, Russia, Germany, Jews, Sweden……and next to nothing in 500 years for Poland to show for it. How would you explain away the many successes of Hungary you idiot?….or plenty of other lands

  213. Anonymous[182] • Disclaimer says:

    These takes are a bit weak.

    Pension age has been raised,but the system still does not operate under a fully funded scheme, meaning it remains unsustainable (as working age/pensioner ratio will keep decreasing). Moreover, the russian population is still duped out of their personal pension savings, which the state has kept frozen for 5 years and they are basically gone now.

    Doing business measures Moscow and St. Petersburg, it is limited in scope and not very representative.

    Supposed doubling of salaries in research exists on paper, but does it have a basis in reality? Or did it go the way of Putin’s “May laws”? Probably the latter.

    And the list goes on.

    In any case, all of this is meaningless. It’s like putting make up on a terminally ill patient. Russia is in economic terms falling behind developed countries, it has been falling behind for 10 years by now. Real wages are falling for 5 years straight. The economy is still based on resource extraction — after 19 years of empty promises.

    But lo and behold Putin renamed some airports! What a joy and a pride to be a Russian now! Let’s unite around the great leader!

    • Replies: @Gerard2

    Or did it go the way of Putin’s “May laws”? Probably the latter.
     
    Perfectly on track on number of SME's and people employed by them ( doubled from 10-20 million in a few years and is increasing to the point it should easily reach 40 million)

    On track on life expectancy

    Digitilisation in business and in life in general is ahead of schedule

    Doing business measures Moscow and St. Petersburg, it is limited in scope and not very representative.
     
    Nonsense - it is 30 cities, going from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok

    Russia is in economic terms falling behind developed countries, it has been falling behind for 10 years by now.

     

    You have stupidly confused the world financial crisis 10 years ago....and superimposed it onto Russia . Russian growth is ahead of the UK, Italy and France....those are developed countries.
    Over 10 years then growth is superior to nearly all developed countries you clown
  214. @Mr. Hack
    I'd say that it was a 'modified version'

    In spite of considerable Roman Catholic Clergy opposition, the Treaty of Hadiach was approved by Polish king and parliament (Sejm) on 22 May 1659, but with an amended text.[1] The idea of a Ruthenian Duchy within the Commonwealth was completely abandoned.[2]
     
    The principle idea of a tri-national state had been completely abandoned, as depicted in the coat of arms depicted above, and even any signs of autonomy were being whittled down. Sounds like a good old fashioned zrada to me. Most of the Cossacks weren't drawn towards such an uneven proposition and ultimately abondoned the idea. Poland blew it, AP, it could have been something great and stimulating.

    [MORE]

    The principle idea of a tri-national state had been completely abandoned, as depicted in the coat of arms depicted above, and even any signs of autonomy were being whittled down. Sounds like a good old fashioned zrada to me. Most of the Cossacks weren’t drawn towards such an uneven proposition and ultimately abondoned the idea. Poland blew it, AP, it could have been something great and stimulating.

    To date the only thing a Pole or Poland has created of value/effect/intrigue or whatever in the last 500 years has been…..Al Qaeda

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
  215. @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    I wish there were objective measures in culture, but I am afraid there aren’t any. Same with history, it’s as subjective as it gets. One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian, and is now immune to the rot that is destroying Europe. It’s all in the eye of the beholder. Not to mention that history has no subjunctive mood: “ifs” are pointless, whatever happened has happened and cannot be changed.

  216. @AnonFromTN
    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens. Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile. Not to mention music, theater, opera, ballet, etc. Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank. Yet there are a lot of Poles, more than 40 million today.

    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens.

    Why? Boleslav Prus “Pharaoh”, Henry Senkevich ” Qwo vadis?”. These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote. Stanisla Lem is also one of the greatest writers of Europe.

    Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile.

    Out of curiosity-what do you consider a special Russian style (different from the styles of European painting)?

    Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank.

    At least Copernicus

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Literature: These guys are OK, but they are not at the same level as really top writers, be it in Russian, English, or German.

    Painting: You need to see it to know what its is. If the artists could have expressed what they wanted to in words, they would have been writers or poets, not painters. So, if you are really curious, visit Tretyakov gallery (both old and new building on the bank of Moskva river) in Moscow or Russian museum in St Petersburg. It is almost as different from European in style and perception as Asian art, but it is even more different from Asian painting.

    Copernicus is the sole star on Polish scientific horizon. One has to remember, though, that Aristarchus of Samos formulated a similar model of the Solar system about eighteen centuries earlier.
    , @Gerard2

    At least Copernicus
     
    So to make a (non-point) you have to start with somebody from half a millenium ago? Does that make any sense at all

    Why? Boleslav Prus “Pharaoh”, Henry Senkevich ” Qwo vadis?”. These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote
     
    Is this a sick joke?

    Then move onto classical music. Whilst Russia has so many incredible, awe-inspiring classical music composers known throughout all the continents and even incorporated into much of popular culture....Poland has NOTHING....except a french guy who only slept with French women, and performed and wrote most of his best work in France ( Chopin).......who himself did nothing involving orchestras , all on the piano only....and thus doesn't deserve to be recognised well at all.

    Let's not start on Polish "engineering"
  217. @melanf

    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens.
     
    Why? Boleslav Prus "Pharaoh", Henry Senkevich " Qwo vadis?". These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote. Stanisla Lem is also one of the greatest writers of Europe.

    Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile.
     
    Out of curiosity-what do you consider a special Russian style (different from the styles of European painting)?

    Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank.
     
    At least Copernicus

    Literature: These guys are OK, but they are not at the same level as really top writers, be it in Russian, English, or German.

    Painting: You need to see it to know what its is. If the artists could have expressed what they wanted to in words, they would have been writers or poets, not painters. So, if you are really curious, visit Tretyakov gallery (both old and new building on the bank of Moskva river) in Moscow or Russian museum in St Petersburg. It is almost as different from European in style and perception as Asian art, but it is even more different from Asian painting.

    Copernicus is the sole star on Polish scientific horizon. One has to remember, though, that Aristarchus of Samos formulated a similar model of the Solar system about eighteen centuries earlier.

    • Replies: @melanf

    Painting: You need to see it to know what its is. If the artists could have expressed what they wanted to in words, they would have been writers or poets, not painters. So, if you are really curious, visit Tretyakov gallery (both old and new building on the bank of Moskva river) in Moscow or Russian museum in St Petersburg. It is almost as different from European in style and perception as Asian art, but it is even more different from Asian painting.
     
    Thank you for the advice, but I live in St. Petersburg and know Russian painting well.

    Explain why this painting different from European in style and perception as Asian art?
    https://images14.fotki.com/v699/photos/7/1454087/7339419/_1822__81x64_-vi.jpg

    Or are these: you can determine without Google where is the Russian painting?
    http://artcyclopedia.ru/img/big/006740015.jpg

    http://i.art-talk.ru/attach/old/28028.jpg


    These guys are OK, but they are not at the same level as really top writers, be it in Russian, English, or German.
     
    And how is determined really top writers?
  218. @melanf

    Not really. Polish literature does not have a single writer of the caliber of Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Bulgakov, Faulkner, Joyce, or even Dickens.
     
    Why? Boleslav Prus "Pharaoh", Henry Senkevich " Qwo vadis?". These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote. Stanisla Lem is also one of the greatest writers of Europe.

    Polish painting is clearly secondary European, whereas Russia started with copycatting Europe but then developed its own stile.
     
    Out of curiosity-what do you consider a special Russian style (different from the styles of European painting)?

    Not to mention science: Lomonosov, Mendeleyev, Butlerov, a bunch of physicists and mathematicians. Lvov-Warsaw school of mathematics is nowhere near, while in other areas Polish science is a blank.
     
    At least Copernicus

    At least Copernicus

    So to make a (non-point) you have to start with somebody from half a millenium ago? Does that make any sense at all

    Why? Boleslav Prus “Pharaoh”, Henry Senkevich ” Qwo vadis?”. These works are not worse than the best works of Gogol and Bulgakov, and of course far surpass everything that Leo Tolstoy wrote

    Is this a sick joke?

    Then move onto classical music. Whilst Russia has so many incredible, awe-inspiring classical music composers known throughout all the continents and even incorporated into much of popular culture….Poland has NOTHING….except a french guy who only slept with French women, and performed and wrote most of his best work in France ( Chopin)…….who himself did nothing involving orchestras , all on the piano only….and thus doesn’t deserve to be recognised well at all.

    Let’s not start on Polish “engineering”

  219. @Anonymous
    These takes are a bit weak.

    Pension age has been raised,but the system still does not operate under a fully funded scheme, meaning it remains unsustainable (as working age/pensioner ratio will keep decreasing). Moreover, the russian population is still duped out of their personal pension savings, which the state has kept frozen for 5 years and they are basically gone now.

    Doing business measures Moscow and St. Petersburg, it is limited in scope and not very representative.

    Supposed doubling of salaries in research exists on paper, but does it have a basis in reality? Or did it go the way of Putin's "May laws"? Probably the latter.

    And the list goes on.

    In any case, all of this is meaningless. It's like putting make up on a terminally ill patient. Russia is in economic terms falling behind developed countries, it has been falling behind for 10 years by now. Real wages are falling for 5 years straight. The economy is still based on resource extraction — after 19 years of empty promises.

    But lo and behold Putin renamed some airports! What a joy and a pride to be a Russian now! Let's unite around the great leader!

    Or did it go the way of Putin’s “May laws”? Probably the latter.

    Perfectly on track on number of SME’s and people employed by them ( doubled from 10-20 million in a few years and is increasing to the point it should easily reach 40 million)

    On track on life expectancy

    Digitilisation in business and in life in general is ahead of schedule

    Doing business measures Moscow and St. Petersburg, it is limited in scope and not very representative.

    Nonsense – it is 30 cities, going from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok

    Russia is in economic terms falling behind developed countries, it has been falling behind for 10 years by now.

    You have stupidly confused the world financial crisis 10 years ago….and superimposed it onto Russia . Russian growth is ahead of the UK, Italy and France….those are developed countries.
    Over 10 years then growth is superior to nearly all developed countries you clown

  220. @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian

    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).

    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. “Great Russia” (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),”Ukraine” was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world – class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence

  221. @Adam
    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it's probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that's understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It'd be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.

    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian

    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).

    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. “Great Russia” (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),”Ukraine” was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world – class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence

    • Replies: @Adam
    Probably fair, after all the Tatars never ruled directly and were indifferent to cultural and religious matters in Russia. Still, I find it hard to believe that the destruction and looting the Tatars inflicted on the Russian lands had no effect on its development. For one the division of Rus into eastern and western branches was a consequence of the Mongol invasion.

    Of course, Russia's backwardness is a consequence of geography more so than anything else. A non-Bolshevik Russia would have reached parity with the west in development, as will Russia on its current path in the next few decades.
    , @AP

    the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).
     
    Nonsense, given that prior to end of 17th century, Rus lands in Muscovy were backward compared to those in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    Russia began catching up due to:

    1. Incorporation of PLC Rus lands such as Kiev.
    2. Petrine reforms.

    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible.
     
    Indeed. Moscow was quite backward.

    For example, in the 17th century there were 18 printing presses in Rus lands used by Rus people in the PLC and only one in Russia. In the 17th century no school in Russia compared to the Kiev Academy.

    First East Slavic printing was in Belarus:

    https://blogs.bl.uk/european/2017/08/belarus-celebrates-500-years-of-printing.html

    A nice description of Ivan Fedorov, showing the contrast between higher culture among Rus lands of PLC vs. those of Moscow, from RT of all sources:

    https://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/history-and-mythology/ivan-fyodorov/

    The border was quite visible in the sense that Moscow gymnasium was staffed by educators described as "Orthodox from Poland." It was also visible because for 80 years the heads of the Russian Church were from this side of the old border. As were the originators of the Russian classical music tradition.

    "Russian" philosophy of 15-17th centuries - mostly in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth:

    Link is here

    Access to and integration with the West meant simply a higher level of culture for Rus in PLC.
  222. @melanf
    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.
     
    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian
     
    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).


    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. "Great Russia" (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),"Ukraine" was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world - class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence

    Probably fair, after all the Tatars never ruled directly and were indifferent to cultural and religious matters in Russia. Still, I find it hard to believe that the destruction and looting the Tatars inflicted on the Russian lands had no effect on its development. For one the division of Rus into eastern and western branches was a consequence of the Mongol invasion.

    Of course, Russia’s backwardness is a consequence of geography more so than anything else. A non-Bolshevik Russia would have reached parity with the west in development, as will Russia on its current path in the next few decades.

    • Replies: @AP
    You are correct. Being part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth gave access for the Rus of those lands to culture and science that were unnown in Russia.

    For example, this Rus scientist from 15th century PLC (born in Galicia) had no analogue to anyone in Moscow:

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

    " philosopher, astrologist, writer, medical doctor, rector of the University of Bologna, professor of Kraków Academy, first publisher of a Church Slavonic printed text. "
  223. @melanf
    Adam

    Russia punches far above its weight in literature. I think for the other fields though, it’s probably pretty similar per capita. Poland is probably a bit lower, but that’s understandable considering their repression by the German and Russian Empires. On the other hand, Tatar yoke and geographic isolation suppressed Russian achievement for centuries. It’d be interesting to see an objective measure of this rather than just listing famous people.
     
    AnonFromTN

    One view, like yours, is that isolation and Tatar influence suppressed Russian achievements. The opposite view is that due to these factors Russia developed its own civilization, neither European nor Asian
     
    It is possible to assess the impact of the Tatars on the cultural achievements of Russia. The old Russian principalities on the territory of modern Central Russia as well as on the territory of modern Ukraine were conquered and came under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus completely avoided the power of the Horde, Novgorod and Pskov avoided conquest, recognized the power of the Horde, but symbolically.

    If we compare these territories, we can see that the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).


    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible. "Great Russia" (completely free from Lithuanian-Polish rule) achieved the most brilliant results (per capita),"Ukraine" was divided between Poland and Russia, and all world - class cultural/scientific figures come exclusively from the Russian part of Ukraine (from the Polish part of Ukraine-no one). Belarus was under the power of Poland is completely deprived of any achievements of the world level.

    Conclusion-unlike the rule of Tatars, the power of the poles had a super-negative and super-oppressive influence

    the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).

    Nonsense, given that prior to end of 17th century, Rus lands in Muscovy were backward compared to those in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    Russia began catching up due to:

    1. Incorporation of PLC Rus lands such as Kiev.
    2. Petrine reforms.

    The situation with the Polish-Lithuanian yoke in the Western Russian lands is quite different. Here the border is clearly visible.

    Indeed. Moscow was quite backward.

    For example, in the 17th century there were 18 printing presses in Rus lands used by Rus people in the PLC and only one in Russia. In the 17th century no school in Russia compared to the Kiev Academy.

    First East Slavic printing was in Belarus:

    https://blogs.bl.uk/european/2017/08/belarus-celebrates-500-years-of-printing.html

    A nice description of Ivan Fedorov, showing the contrast between higher culture among Rus lands of PLC vs. those of Moscow, from RT of all sources:

    https://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/history-and-mythology/ivan-fyodorov/

    The border was quite visible in the sense that Moscow gymnasium was staffed by educators described as “Orthodox from Poland.” It was also visible because for 80 years the heads of the Russian Church were from this side of the old border. As were the originators of the Russian classical music tradition.

    “Russian” philosophy of 15-17th centuries – mostly in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth:

    Link is here

    Access to and integration with the West meant simply a higher level of culture for Rus in PLC.

    • Replies: @melanf


    the negative impact of the Tatars on the achievements in the field of art/technology/science is completely absent (since the territories that escaped the rule of the Tatars do not demonstrate advantages).
     
    Nonsense, given that prior blah blah blah
     
    Principality on the territory of Ukraine was completely under the power of the Horde. Principalities on the territory of Belarus-completely avoided Horde power. In both cases there was (until the 18th century at least) an equally low level of culture. That is, the influence of the Tatars is completely absent (otherwise there would be a difference).

    Moscow was quite backward (compared to Ukraine)

    For example, in the 17th century blah blah blah
     
    A simple test - take the achievements of the world level and divide by population. What will be the result, you know
    It is clear that you will copy here the stupid texts from Wikipedia, talk about the amazing Ukrainian art of making painted boomerangs (which became the basis of the European Renaissance), etc., etc.. But at the same time you will not give a sane answer, because you have nothing to answer.
    , @Gerard2

    A nice description of Ivan Fedorov, showing the contrast between higher culture among Rus lands of PLC vs. those of Moscow, from RT of all sources:

    https://russiapedia.rt.com/prominent-russians/history-and-mythology/ivan-fyodorov/

    The border was quite visible in the sense that Moscow gymnasium was staffed by educators described as “Orthodox from Poland.” It was also visible because for 80 years the heads of the Russian Church were from this side of the old border. As were the originators of the Russian classical music tradition.

    “Russian” philosophy of 15-17th centuries – mostly in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth:

    Link is here

    Access to and integration with the West meant simply a higher level of culture for Rus in PLC.
     

    HAHAHAHAHAHA...ROFL laughing and this dumb bilge

    so basically like the retarded loser you are...you have spent the last 2 months crying and on your period because of my comments in a previous thread about the complete absence of culture and success in Poland in it's history
    To counter this, you have laughably just copy-and pasted random dogshit from Wikipedia, that you have spent the last 2 months getting eyestrain from ( or editing) - to come up with this nonsense, promoting people you have blatantly never heard of before ,into making an illogical and cretinous argument.


    LOL....with absolutely nothing to mention in mathematics, engineering, science, art, music in the failed Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth,you are reduced to promoting as 'success" the.....PRINTING PRESS!
    this stems solely from the germans you braindead POS, brought it there, taught it to them...about 100 years later.
    What you would seek to claim as "success" something that is as dumb as claiming the US putting Missile Defence infrastructure and technology in Poland as "Polish technology" or one of the Pacific Islands where the atomic bombs were tested getting credited as "inventing" the atomic bomb you thick moron.


    Printed money /banknotes starts in Russia 50-100 years before this failed Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, I think coin money also
    So as soon as Russia had wide use of printing press - the most world renowned authors, poets and playwrights starting appearing left, right and centre throughout it. The PLC ...nothing , even with this head-start. And you want to promote