The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine • Hacker News Board

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#31

Post by RandomName2020 » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:01 AM UTC

kafkaesq wrote: post #28

RandomName2020 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not directed against Ukranians as ethnos, period. USSR was not a Russian supremacist country. Remember, Stalin, during whose reign Holodomor happened was a Georgian, Khruschev was Ukranian, Brezhnev - Ukranian, Andropov - Russian, Chernenko - Ukranian, Gorbachev - half Ukranian. So most of supreme leaders of USSR were at least partially Ukranians.

It was not directed against Ukranians as ethnos, period. The scholarly debate on this issue is to say the least, very complex. You can't just say "it wasn't directed against Ukrainians as a people, period." Khruschev was Ukrainian, Khrushchev was born to poor parents of Russian descent. Anyway, while hardly a saint, he doesn't appear to had much, if any, role in the Holomodor. Chernenko is generally regarded to be of…

You can try to spin it anyway you want. Stalin, as Georgian, had no, absolutely no feeling towards Ukranians, as for example Finnish people have zero feelings towards Portuguese. There was no desire to eradicate Ukranians as ethnicity, in a way Hitler tried to eradicate Jewish people. There was no desire to destroy Ukranian culture. In fact, Khruschev , no matter what official sources say, was widely considered to be Ukranian, has always been seen wearing Ukranian ethical closing, and was instrumental in moving Crimea to Ukraine from Russia. Ukranian writers, such as Gogol, Shevchenko were considered extremly important part of Soviet culture,and no matter what was the resublic you lived at it was taught in the schools.

Nothing close to the treatment of Native Americans, Asians and Blacks in the post-war United States.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#32

Post by kafkaesq » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:10 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #30

kafkaesq wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However they were purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) Given the number of, literally, whole peoples picked up, stuffed into boxcars and dumped somewhere halfway across the country (and I bet you can name at least one very famous example from May 1944), and ample evidence of forced Russification in various contexts during the Soviet era -- this is…

Have you ever been to the former USSR? I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification" - 15 republics of ex-USSR had two state languages one Russian, one local. Almost every product, produced for local consumption had bilingual package (much like in Canada), (industrial goods manuals however were purely in Russian). Parents could choose if they want their children to be taught in their native languages or…

Have you ever been to the former USSR?

I'd prefer not get too much into personal identity or travel itineraries, if you don't mind. Let's just say I have plenty of shared personal context with the former USSR (enough to have found about the topic first through personal contacts, rather than stuff I read in the press or online).

I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification"

It's kind of hard not to, these days:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification#Under_the_Soviet...

Of course forced Anglicization has existed in nearly all parts of the former British Empire, also, and of course the original inhabitants (and other non-Anglophones) of these areas have been treated in many horrible ways long after independence, in some places still are up until the present day, etc, etc. But these are different topics.

Have you seen Spanish-teaching universities in the USA? I have not.

You might want to look at Puerto Rico.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#33

Post by kafkaesq » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:18 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #31

kafkaesq wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was not directed against Ukranians as ethnos, period. The scholarly debate on this issue is to say the least, very complex. You can't just say "it wasn't directed against Ukrainians as a people, period." Khruschev was Ukrainian, Khrushchev was born to poor parents of Russian descent. Anyway, while hardly a saint, he doesn't appear to had much, if any, role in the Holomodor. Chernenko is generally regarded to be of…

You can try to spin it anyway you want. Stalin, as Georgian, had no, absolutely no feeling towards Ukranians, as for example Finnish people have zero feelings towards Portuguese. There was no desire to eradicate Ukranians as ethnicity, in a way Hitler tried to eradicate Jewish people. There was no desire to destroy Ukranian culture. In fact, Khruschev , no matter what official sources say, was widely considered to be…

There was no desire to eradicate Ukranians as ethnicity, in a way Hitler tried to eradicate Jewish people. There was no desire to destroy Ukranian culture.

Just because the Holomodor wasn't directly comparable to the Nazi genocides doesn't mean that (1) the Ukrainian people didn't suffer disproportionately during the 1932-1933 famine, and (2) the Soviet leadership (or the subset responsible for the Holomodor) wasn't aware of this fact, as it was happening.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#34

Post by RandomName2020 » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:25 AM UTC

kafkaesq wrote: post #32

RandomName2020 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever been to the former USSR? I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification" - 15 republics of ex-USSR had two state languages one Russian, one local. Almost every product, produced for local consumption had bilingual package (much like in Canada), (industrial goods manuals however were purely in Russian). Parents could choose if they want their children to be taught in their native languages or…

Have you ever been to the former USSR? I'd prefer not get too much into personal identity or travel itineraries, if you don't mind. Let's just say I have plenty of shared personal context with the former USSR (enough to have found about the topic first through personal contacts, rather than stuff I read in the press or online). I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification" It's kind of hard not to, thes…

> "forced russification"

If you follow the definition literally, then yes. Yet, Russia always was very careful with the culture of the colonies, way more careful than Britain, France and Westerners in General.

> But these are different topics.

No, actually not. Russia is always disproportionately blamed for being a cultural oppressor, however as an Empire, USSR needed a single unifying culture and language. In that respect, Russians were much less oppressing and arrogant than the British, Spaniards or French.

> You might want to look at Puerto Rico.

I want one in Texas.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#35

Post by type0 » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 1:58 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #26

rdtsc wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> did not kill the native population of the republics on massive scale, You're kidding right? They sent the local village priest to Siberia. Took away the land my great grand father owned. Sent tens of thousands of other people to Siberia to labor camp. Yeah if you consider shoving them like cattle into unheated train cars in the middle of the winter for a multi-week journey "not kill" then yes, they just happened to…

There was atrocities during Stalin times true. However they were purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) - Stalin himself was from a tiny minority nation of Georgians. USA, OTOH, eradicated native Americans on a large scale, brought slaves with destroying their culture. USSR after Stalin was far, far less racist than USA, up until its fall in 1990s.

> purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) - Stalin himself was from a tiny minority nation of Georgians.

It doesn't matter what the official stance was, what matters what happened. My own relatives were sent to Siberia for being ethnic minorities, despite that they fought for the reds with the russian troupes in the finnish civil war. You can make excuses as much as you like that it wasn't because of ethnicity but reality was that ideology didn't matter back then. People are hateful by nature, especially to foreign cultures, taking away the lands that feeds your children and sending all men in your family to Siberian death camp doesn't sound like preserving any minority culture to me.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#36

Post by rdtsc » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 2:08 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #30

kafkaesq wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However they were purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) Given the number of, literally, whole peoples picked up, stuffed into boxcars and dumped somewhere halfway across the country (and I bet you can name at least one very famous example from May 1944), and ample evidence of forced Russification in various contexts during the Soviet era -- this is…

Have you ever been to the former USSR? I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification" - 15 republics of ex-USSR had two state languages one Russian, one local. Almost every product, produced for local consumption had bilingual package (much like in Canada), (industrial goods manuals however were purely in Russian). Parents could choose if they want their children to be taught in their native languages or…

> Have you ever been to the former USSR? I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification"

I have. Yes they did forced Russification.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#37

Post by casualstroller » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 3:24 AM UTC

myth_drannon wrote: post #25

patrickg_zill wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Tatars, 300 years ago, were excellent warriors and horsemen. They would raid the nearby Ukrainian and Russian villages and sell the villagers into slavery. In one year, 1769, they captured 20,000 and sold them in slave markets in the Ottoman Empire. From 1500 to 1700 or so, between 1 and 2 million Slavs were captured and sold off into slavery. The end of the Crimean Khanate is about as distant in history as the R…

That's why when I see photos of the Syrian war, I see so many blond and blue eyed children. I assume they are the descendants of the Slavs(slaves) you are talking about

You have no clue what you're talking about. To begin with, Slavs != "slaves". Learn the etymology of the word and read up on some history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs Once you're done, use Wikipea or Google to look for Indo-Iranians, their physical characteristics and their movement from 4000-1000 BCE ((TL;DR blue-eyed people didn't originate in Europe). Good luck.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#38

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 3:57 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #34

kafkaesq wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever been to the former USSR? I'd prefer not get too much into personal identity or travel itineraries, if you don't mind. Let's just say I have plenty of shared personal context with the former USSR (enough to have found about the topic first through personal contacts, rather than stuff I read in the press or online). I am not sure about what you mean by "forced russification" It's kind of hard not to, thes…

> "forced russification" If you follow the definition literally, then yes. Yet, Russia always was very careful with the culture of the colonies, way more careful than Britain, France and Westerners in General. > But these are different topics. No, actually not. Russia is always disproportionately blamed for being a cultural oppressor, however as an Empire, USSR needed a single unifying culture and language. In that r…

[deleted]

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#39

Post by threesixandnine » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 8:13 AM UTC

type0 wrote: post #35

RandomName2020 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was atrocities during Stalin times true. However they were purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) - Stalin himself was from a tiny minority nation of Georgians. USA, OTOH, eradicated native Americans on a large scale, brought slaves with destroying their culture. USSR after Stalin was far, far less racist than USA, up until its fall in 1990s.

> purely ideological by nature; not against ethnicities, cultures etc (those were in fact actively preserved) - Stalin himself was from a tiny minority nation of Georgians. It doesn't matter what the official stance was, what matters what happened. My own relatives were sent to Siberia for being ethnic minorities, despite that they fought for the reds with the russian troupes in the finnish civil war. You can make ex…

Nothing you said is a proof that what happened has roots in state-wide hate against particular minority. It's personal and biased.

My grandparents were stripped of all land as well and I am 100% certain it was not because of ethnicity since they were of the same as the ruling ethnic majority.

What you are explaining is probably local authorities - humans hated your relatives because of their ethnicity and that was one of the reason they got sent to Siberia. Taking land though was widespread in USSR. It was taken from ethnic Russians as well.

The fact that minorities survived and thrived on the same scale as Russians and got sent and taken land from on the same scale as Russians and got sent to Siberia on the same scale as Russians is a proof that there was no policy to destroy particular minority on a state level. It was a policy to destroy enemies of the state.

Re: The Kingdom of the Dead: For post-Soviet people, Crimea was a gigantic madeleine

#40

Post by kbart » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 10:13 AM UTC

RandomName2020 wrote: post #18

pilsetnieks wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Soviets/Russians did not kill the native population of the republics on massive scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor > did not have "sits only for white" in the public transit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes > native languages had equal representation with Russian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification

If you are from a Baltic country there is no point to argue with you, because the sentiment against Russia and everything Russian, for whatever reason, is so strong, that people celebrate Nazis as heroes, just because they against Russia. Holodomor was not a genocide against Ukranians, it was ideologically charged event, so it is not comparable to genocide gainst Native Americans, or lynching. "And you lynching Negro…

Your upper comments are utter bullshit and outright lies. Flagged it.

"If you are from a Baltic country people celebrate Nazis as heroes, just because they against Russia."

No. Simply no.