I don’t think it’s true that white southerners have a sense of having a separate national identity.
It’s more than feeling distinct. Like, someone from northern England will note and even be proud of their cultural distinction from southern England or London but they would still absolutely see themselves as English.
Ask a Texan if they feel American and the overwhelming majority would say yes.
Ask a Texan if they feel American and the overwhelming majority would say yes.
3 months of Murdoch media telling them otherwise and suddenly there’ll be a real movement to secede. The Ukraine as it exists now is a product of western manipulation, this identity clearly separated from and against russians didn’t develop naturally.
Ukrainian nationalism was an issue for the tsars. It’s being harnessed and used by the west, radicalized for their purposes, but you are flatly incorrect to believe the sense of a Ukrainian national identity was invented by the west and you’re flatly incorrect to believe it’s recent.
You are allowing your current geopolitical alignment to write your account of history.
Ukrainian nationalism was an issue for the tsars. It’s being harnessed and used by the west, radicalized for their purposes, but you are flatly incorrect to believe the sense of a Ukrainian national identity was invented by the west and you’re flatly incorrect to believe it’s recent.
Was it a “Ukranian nationalism” featuring all ethnic Ukranians- or a “Ukranian nationalism” consisting of “Galicians,” “Ruthenians,” and the sort- west Ukranians, and particularly Catholics?
Everything certainly seems to point to it having been primarily the latter.
It was real enough for Lenin who emphasized the importance of self determination for the Ukrainians as distinct from the self determination of Russians when he argued in favor of creating a separate Ukrainian SSR so stop telling yourself this lie that it’s a purely Nazi or Polish creation.
The Ukrainian identity emerged alongside the Russian identity. It isn’t a “corruption” of a Russian identity. That’s a fucked belief to hold.
The Ukrainian identity emerged alongside the Russian identity. It isn’t a “corruption” of a Russian identity. That’s a fucked belief to hold.
Never said that, though FWIW my assumption was that the Belarussian and Ukranian identities splitting off from that of the general Rus, was due to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth’s influence. Not that their identities are invalid.
As for Lenin’s actions- if you ask me, the mistake seems to have been giving culturally more ambiguous regions to Ukraine (probably as some sort of appeasement to west Ukranians, if I were to guess). Not like he, nor anyone else, was perfect- and he certainly couldn’t have predicted events today.
Yeah OF COURSE the history of the region played a role in creating the distinction. How else could it happen?
Ethnic identities don’t emerge by being ordained by god. They emerge as a result of different shared histories.
OF COURSE the interaction between the Polish, Turkish, Mongol, and Russian empires played a role in creating the distinction. Over centuries.
How does that change the present reality that the distinction exists?
The reality is that a distinct Ukrainian national identity exists and isn’t new and that gives them a right to self determination.
Likewise the distinct national identity of the Donbas etc understanding themselves as Russian gives justice to their cause. I wouldn’t invalidate that by ranting about the Mongols changing the history of Russians.
How does that change the present reality that the distinction exists?
It changes the present reality in that the borders of modern Ukraine (and most borders, really) are a construct and not representative of the history prior nor the ethnic and cultural makeup of each district- they were drawn by Lenin.
And that seems to be at least half of the underlying issue in the conflict here (the other half being western instigation).
Actually it exactly gives the answer to where the current borders should lie by pointing to the way the people who live there understand themselves.
Donbas Crimea etc, clearly should go to Russia because that’s what the people who live there want.
And the western part who have long seen themselves as Ukrainian should be Ukraine.
Anyway we weren’t talking about the borders. It was about the language and I pointed out that a distinct identity saw itself as existing and said that was the end of discussion for me about the existence of the language (as opposed to a dialect) so this wasn’t about the borders it was about the existence of a distinct Ukrainian national identity.
The present borders don’t correspond to the mapping of where that ethnic identity actually predominates so yeah I support the right of self determination for the Donbas etc too, absolutely I do.
I don’t think it’s true that white southerners have a sense of having a separate national identity.
It’s more than feeling distinct. Like, someone from northern England will note and even be proud of their cultural distinction from southern England or London but they would still absolutely see themselves as English.
Ask a Texan if they feel American and the overwhelming majority would say yes.
3 months of Murdoch media telling them otherwise and suddenly there’ll be a real movement to secede. The Ukraine as it exists now is a product of western manipulation, this identity clearly separated from and against russians didn’t develop naturally.
Ukrainian nationalism was an issue for the tsars. It’s being harnessed and used by the west, radicalized for their purposes, but you are flatly incorrect to believe the sense of a Ukrainian national identity was invented by the west and you’re flatly incorrect to believe it’s recent.
You are allowing your current geopolitical alignment to write your account of history.
Was it a “Ukranian nationalism” featuring all ethnic Ukranians- or a “Ukranian nationalism” consisting of “Galicians,” “Ruthenians,” and the sort- west Ukranians, and particularly Catholics?
Everything certainly seems to point to it having been primarily the latter.
It was real enough for Lenin who emphasized the importance of self determination for the Ukrainians as distinct from the self determination of Russians when he argued in favor of creating a separate Ukrainian SSR so stop telling yourself this lie that it’s a purely Nazi or Polish creation.
The Ukrainian identity emerged alongside the Russian identity. It isn’t a “corruption” of a Russian identity. That’s a fucked belief to hold.
Never said that, though FWIW my assumption was that the Belarussian and Ukranian identities splitting off from that of the general Rus, was due to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth’s influence. Not that their identities are invalid.
As for Lenin’s actions- if you ask me, the mistake seems to have been giving culturally more ambiguous regions to Ukraine (probably as some sort of appeasement to west Ukranians, if I were to guess). Not like he, nor anyone else, was perfect- and he certainly couldn’t have predicted events today.
Yeah OF COURSE the history of the region played a role in creating the distinction. How else could it happen?
Ethnic identities don’t emerge by being ordained by god. They emerge as a result of different shared histories.
OF COURSE the interaction between the Polish, Turkish, Mongol, and Russian empires played a role in creating the distinction. Over centuries.
How does that change the present reality that the distinction exists?
The reality is that a distinct Ukrainian national identity exists and isn’t new and that gives them a right to self determination.
Likewise the distinct national identity of the Donbas etc understanding themselves as Russian gives justice to their cause. I wouldn’t invalidate that by ranting about the Mongols changing the history of Russians.
It changes the present reality in that the borders of modern Ukraine (and most borders, really) are a construct and not representative of the history prior nor the ethnic and cultural makeup of each district- they were drawn by Lenin.
And that seems to be at least half of the underlying issue in the conflict here (the other half being western instigation).
Actually it exactly gives the answer to where the current borders should lie by pointing to the way the people who live there understand themselves.
Donbas Crimea etc, clearly should go to Russia because that’s what the people who live there want.
And the western part who have long seen themselves as Ukrainian should be Ukraine.
Anyway we weren’t talking about the borders. It was about the language and I pointed out that a distinct identity saw itself as existing and said that was the end of discussion for me about the existence of the language (as opposed to a dialect) so this wasn’t about the borders it was about the existence of a distinct Ukrainian national identity.
The present borders don’t correspond to the mapping of where that ethnic identity actually predominates so yeah I support the right of self determination for the Donbas etc too, absolutely I do.