Anti-Maidan

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Cheezy,



Eye-witness reports and victim testimonies are not "anecdotes".

Actually that's exactly what an anecdote is. That word doesn't mean the same thing in Slavic languages as it does in English. (In Russian an "anecdote" is more like a humorous story-joke, I'm assuming it's the same in Polish).

Besides, I gave an explanation for that testimony. The mistake you make is assuming that it was only Ukrainians who had grain confiscated from them, or who received that treatment. It was in fact all peasants.

1926 population census in Soviet Ukraine fully disagrees with you

Oh? And how do you starve a Ukrainian and not the Russian next door?

You realize that these would be Ukrainian officials purposefully starving their own fellow Ukrainians, right? Supposedly in order to destroy Ukrainian nationalism, as if such thing is even possible by starving some peasants?

The scholarship is conclusive: there was no purposeful famine in Ukrainian SSR, and no purposeful targeting or victimization of Ukrainians. The only objectors are the Ukrainian nationalists themselves, who hold such an extremely stupid position on the issue that even the anti-Soviet historians disagree with them extensively. The debate now is on whether or not the famine was physically avoidable and/or exacerbated by Soviet policies. If you want my opinion, I think it was, technically, avoidable, or mostly avoidable, and certainly exacerbated by intransigence of officials due to general suspicion of the peasantry. But targeting Ukrainians it was not.

 

[Farm Boy]

Be warned, the following will harm some Russophobic butts for sure!

What's with the fascination with butts, hurting, and harming them?

I don't know why anyone here would have problems with an argument that advocates self-determinism though? Aside from some scattered "ultranationalist" leanings from Spain and Argentina regarding Gibraltar and the Falklands respectively that get some play, does this board really tend to swing in favor of empire? Even with Scotland and Quebec it seems the general consensus tends to be, "you sure breaking off would be a good idea? Well, I don't see it but if you insist." Then again, I could be wrong at parsing that mood.

 

[Domen]

In Russian an "anecdote" is more like a humorous story-joke, I'm assuming it's the same in Polish

Yes, this is the meaning of "anecdote" in Polish too.

The mistake you make is assuming that it was only Ukrainians who had grain confiscated from them, or who received that treatment. It was in fact all peasants.

OK, so instead of a crime against one ethnic group, there was in fact a crime against several ethnic groups.

Simply great...

Does killing (through starvation) also some non-Ukrainians, justify the killing of Ukrainians ???

But you still admit, that victims were mostly peasants. And, as we know, most of peasants were not enthusiastic about Communism.

That was also true during the Russian Civil War, during which many peasant movements fought against the Reds.

The debate now is on whether or not the famine was physically avoidable and/or exacerbated by Soviet policies. If you want my opinion, I think it was, technically, avoidable, or mostly avoidable, and certainly exacerbated by intransigence of officials due to general suspicion of the peasantry.

So we agree that the Holodomor was an anti-peasant crime.

Regarding ethnicities - of course that most of Soviet crimes were not strictly ethnically motivated crimes.

For example during the Katyn Murder, not only ethnic Poles died, but also ethnic Jews (ca. 900 of them), Germans, Ukrainians, etc.

But those murdered at Katyn, were all members of Polish Armed Forces. So the targeted group were citizens of Poland.

And during the Holodomor the targeted group were "suspicious peasants" - citizens of Soviet Ukraine.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

1926 population census in Soviet Ukraine fully disagrees with you:

Not this sh copy-paste again...

Ukrainian identity of the Soviet period is different from the post-Soviet times.

Ukrainian identity is diverse: on one side of its spectrum, there are people who identify or associate themselves with Russians (and/or dozens other recognized and unrecognized ethnicities) and call themselves "Ukrainian" because they live in Ukraine; on the opposite side of its spectrum, there are people who identify with Bandera and pro-Nazi partisanship of WWII Western Ukraine.

Plus to that there are people who call and identify themselves strictly "Russian". There are about 12 millions of them.

And there are many ethnicities forced to be called "Ukrainian" because of being unrecognized.

 

[Domen]

Ah, so according to you, there are only two types of Ukrainians: Russian Ukrainians and Nazi Ukrainians ???

Such claims are offensive for people who identify as Ukrainians. It is like claiming that having a Russian identity = being a Communist.

And there are many ethnicities forced to be called "Ukrainian" because of being unrecognized.

Which ones ???

It seems to me, that you in Russia are not recognizing Belarussian and Ukrainian ethnicities. You would like them to be Russians.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

According to me you've just intentionally distorted my words.

It seems to me, that you in Russia are not recognizing Belarussian and Ukrainian ethnicities. You would like them to be Russians.

Most Belarussians and Ukrainians associate themselves with Russians and see themselves to be of one big common identity. You will never understand it because of being a chauvinist of a small country.

 

[Domen]

According to me you've just intentionally distorted my words.

No, I didn't. You wrote about diversity but then you only mentioned 2 groups: Russians and Nazis.

Probably you didn't mean to write this, but this is what you wrote. Freudian slip ???

Most Belarussians and Ukrainians associate themselves with Russians and see themselves to be of one big common identity.

Any statistics to back up this claim ??? Actually, this seems to be a chauvinistic Russian claim, not reality.

You will never understand it because of being a chauvinist of a small country.

I am not a chauvinist, but yes - my country is small compared to Russia. Almost all countries are small compared to Russia.

As for chauvinists - your claims about "Greater Russia" are chauvinistic, and denying the right of Ukrainians to be Ukrainians rather than Russians.

So in fact you are a chauvinist of the largest country on this planet.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

Stop trolling me. I've told of a "spectrum". Get yourself a dictionary.

 

[Domen]

"Spectrum" can consist of only two major groups as well.

And I am not sure why you claim that Ukrainian Nazis are on the opposite side of that spectrum to Russians.

After all, Russian Nazis have a very similar Slavic Supremacy ideology to Ukrainian ones.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

Troll.

spec·trum
...
: a complete range of different opinions, people, etc.
...
a : a continuous sequence or range <a wide spectrum of interests> <opposite ends of the political spectrum>

 

[Domen]

A complete range of 2, 3, 4, 57, 108, or 204 different opinions - for example...

BTW - you are calling everyone who does not identify as Russian "neo-Nazis", "fascists", "nationalists" or "chauvinists".

And you know what - this is precisely what chauvinists do. Calling everyone else with their own name.

That some Ukrainians are not Russian nationalists and ardent Putin-lovers, doesn't mean they are Ukrainian "chauvinists".

 

[Goodfella]

The Holodomor (Ukrainian: &#1043;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1076;&#1086;&#1084;&#1086;&#1088;, "Extermination by hunger" or "Hunger-extermination";[2] derived from '&#1052;&#1086;&#1088;&#1080;&#1090;&#1080; &#1075;&#1086;&#1083;&#1086;&#1076;&#1086;&#1084;', "Killing by Starvation" [3][4][5]) was a man-made famine in the Ukrainian SSR in 1932 and 1933.

I didn't even realize this was something people argued about. I'm at a loss as to why a communist would waste his time trying to defend this failure of a country. Isn't it easier to do what Traitorfish does and just reject the USSR as a communist country that way you don't have to defend all of this?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I can see I'm wasting my time. All you see is my political identity, which is not even asserting itself on this issue. I discussed the scholarship, because, you know, I'm a scholar on this stuff, but nope, what you know is the truth, because it's a commie that said otherwise! I mean, hell, I even talked about what a crappy job the Soviets did of dealing with the problem, but nope, it's all communism apology if it contradicts the worst possibly imaginable scenario...

No one else gets shat on when discussing their topics of specialization like I do. Not the doctors, not the theologian, not the economists, not the mathematicians, not the scientists. No, people yield to their expertise. There's something about communism, and the Soviet Union in particular that makes everyone think they're the indisputable expert on it, because they read a wikipedia article, watched a History Channel special, or heard a blurb about it on the evening news.

 

[red_elk]

Who cares about your scholarship, Cheezy. When Wikipedia says that you are wrong!

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

It is off-topic regardless of the excuses you make.

It is heterophobia. People have right to defend themselves and their values. If Westerners want to build a homosexual society they should build it in their homeland countries, starting with USA, every state province of it. If homosexuals want to love each other the way they want they must not intervene to traditional culture of the majority, they should build their own. Marriage and family are heterosexual institutes. It is natural that way. Homosexuals must not intervene to these.

Heterosexuals will always be the majority. Homosexuals will always be insignificant minority. Making an insignificant thing significant, forcing urges of a minority onto majority is a way to divide people, to divide the majority. It is a technology of public control.

Try swapping homosexuality with [insert non-Christian religion] and see what you'd get.

TBH, I don't pay attention to all that gay stuff, but my impression is that these movements do not force unwilling parties to join their practices and that's the key thing.

Obviously, if they start trying to forcefully convert the rest (like Muslims trying to impose Sharia Law in non-Muslim countries) then yes, it's a big problem. But again, they key is these movements are not doing that. If your Russia media is telling you that, then you better do some research on your own and see if they are right.

Don't be a sheep and listen to everything that corporate and state media tell you without careful consideration.

A complete range of 2, 3, 4, 57, 108, or 204 different opinions - for example...

BTW - you are calling everyone who does not identify as Russian "neo-Nazis", "fascists", "nationalists" or "chauvinists".

And you know what - this is precisely what chauvinists do. Calling everyone else with their own name.

That some Ukrainians are not Russian nationalists and ardent Putin-lovers, doesn't mean they are Ukrainian "chauvinists".

This sort of attitude is worrisome although not at all uncommon. People like these, unfortunately, also tend to be woefully devoid of critical thinking and susceptible to propaganda.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

This attitude is imagined by Domen.

If you can't stand the facts delivered, focusing on the personality of the deliverer won't help you overcome those facts.

Or will. If you deliberately and diligently do everything to distract from those facts.

 

[Kozmos]

I can see I'm wasting my time. All you see is my political identity, which is not even asserting itself on this issue. I discussed the scholarship, because, you know, I'm a scholar on this stuff, but nope, what you know is the truth, because it's a commie that said otherwise! I mean, hell, I even talked about what a crappy job the Soviets did of dealing with the problem, but nope, it's all communism apology if it contradicts the worst possibly imaginable scenario...

No one else gets shat on when discussing their topics of specialization like I do. Not the doctors, not the theologian, not the economists, not the mathematicians, not the scientists. No, people yield to their expertise. There's something about communism, and the Soviet Union in particular that makes everyone think they're the indisputable expert on it, because they read a wikipedia article, watched a History Channel special, or heard a blurb about it on the evening news.

Because history although possessing an objective reality is always penned down from a subjective viewpoint and later read and used as such.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

ODESSA OBLAST

Locals have stopped a convoy which reinforced Maidanist ultranationalists:


Link to video.

The crowd speaks Ukrainian and Surjik (for those who might think those are evil Russians beating innocent kids)

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

This attitude is imagined by Domen.

If you can't stand the facts delivered, focusing on the personality of the deliverer won't help you overcome those facts.

Or will. If you deliberately and diligently do everything to distract from those facts.

AFAIK, a large chunk of my post was about facts and not personality.

I wonder who's trying to distract.

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

AFAIK, a large chunk of my post was about facts and not personality.

I wonder who's trying to distract.

Domen is trying. By "you" I meant a generalized undefined person, not you. Sorry.

***

ZHITOMIR

29 January. The sign reads: "Authorities and opposition, find a consensus!" Other placards: "Resignation of Yanukovich", "No to extremism", "We support constitution-based authority", "Violence is illegal", there are also names of different parts of the oblast.

Among the people there are also those who originally were supporters of Maidan, but were not aware about extrimism and forceful capture of administrative buildings.

People support the governor who is giving his speech. A few Maidanists stay aside and call the crowd "mindless meat". People of the crowd reply to them, "extremists go home".


Link to video.