Friday, November 07, 2008

A conversation with a Russian realist about наш президент


He wants no part of our stupid blog, so I will copy our email conversation into the comments.
New racial crackdown coming in Russia and EU wetting their pants about The One. Good luck, "allies".
Posted by at
Labels:

5 comments:

Mr roT said...

From: JJ
Subject: betting pool!
To: "RR"
Date: Wednesday, November 5, 2008, 3:25 PM


How long before Putin (oop, I mean Medvedev) takes Ukraine back?

I think he'll be a gentleman and let Obama practice accusations of racism for a week in office before sending the tanks.

11/07/2008 12:23 PM
Mr roT said...

From:"RR"
Subject:Re: betting pool!
To: JJ

who needs Western Ukraine? they have traditionally been nationalistic, traditionally poor, and presently living on tax transfers from the eastern Ukraine which they despise as not being Ukrainian enough. if the government in Kiev (mostly stuffed with these westerners) keeps doing what it is doing, no one will need to take anything: the eastern part will split on its own. these westerners are openly discussing in the press that if this happens it is important to make sure there are small but fierce guerrilla groups left and that they get as much coverage as possible in the media in the West so that the opinion of national struggle against dark aggressors is formed. it's bad beyond being a joke though: these idiots will cook smth up.

11/07/2008 12:24 PM
Mr roT said...

From: JJ
Subject:Re: betting pool!
To:"RR"

You have reminded me of a conversation from a long time back. In it, you opined that Bossi and the Northern League would get their independence/autonomy in Italy, again, because of this tax transfer fetish of yours.

It never came to pass, won't, and it was obvious to me then when you said that.

Why? People feel nationalism and motives are mixed up too much to vote according to their strict financial interests. Same is true in Quebec and other places ripe for separatism.

It hardly ever works like that because of money. It's usually about religion and nationality. Think Mohammed; that wasn't about money and it still isn't.

You certainly know your gogols better than I knew my Italians back then, but even if you're right, I bet the motives of an East-West Ukraine split will not be economic.

Much more likely it would be due to Stalin moving a bunch of ethnic Russians into the East. Good move.

Quebec separatism when the time was ripest when I was in Canada and failed largely because the Quebec identity was diluted by immigrants. The referenda failed because immigrants to Quebec wanted to be Canadians, not some fruity iced French. The Quebecers also produce a lot of electricity for the rest of Canada (Quebec Hydro) and so the separatists were pushing an analogue of your tax transfer stuff. It was BS though, as it was the Anglos that built everything in the stinking province, and didn't work anyway. It never would.

11/07/2008 12:27 PM
Mr roT said...

From: "RR"

jj, fast-forwarding beyond mongolian guests, eastern ukraine historically was called "malorossia" or "small russia". historically, people there called themselves "russkie iz malorossiiskih" or "russians from the small russia stalk" and no Stalin moved them there. In fact, it was during Stalin time that anyone identifying himself as "russkii iz malorossiiskih" would have his nationality officially recorded as "ukrainian". eastern ukraine became part of russia proper under peter the great: their nobility decided they are better off pledging allegiance to tsars then being overrun by poles or turks. at the very least russians considered them their own people and equals: no such luck with turks or hyper-civilized poles. and this pledge also seemed to have no opposition on the level below nobility. the pledge itself happened earlier than peter's reign started, but things were not finalized until after the defeat of sweden by peter. in that war, part of
ukrainian nobility together with the ruler, hetman mazepa, sided with swedes hoping to establish their own state as they believed swedes would rout russians for good. technically, that siding was a breach of hetman's pledge to the tsar: hetmans were to retain considerable autonomy, but they were under tsars. most of hetman's army and nobility though did not join him and the war itself ended with swedes forewer losing the status of a major european power. that was the eatern grabbing (from whom?).

western ukraine for centuries remained partitioned between poland and austria and was later grabbed in the wrong belief it can be absorbed as they are ethnically essentially the same. in the end they got a explosive mixture that gave birth to Oleinik, Kruschev, Brezhnev, and half-Gorbachev (he claims to be half-ukrainian). that land is rich in gifts and talents. of that cohort brezhnev though was the right man in the right place.

the eastern and the western parts are indeed very different culturally, religiously and tax transfer-wise: the east is forced to support economically the west that is actively trying to remake the east to be more "indeginous" because in thier mind that solidifies their independence: turn all the wrong people into the right people so that the wrong people don't go in the wrong direction that are too stupid to see as wrong: democracy in the works. the eastern part has reacted to that initially by proposing to turn ukraine into a federal state: separate finances and russian alongside with ukrainian as an official language in the east. they have been lobbying for this for a few years now, but of course to no avail: if it were to pass, what would khohols live on? today, they have succeeded in making a large number of people to openly say that they specifically do not identify themselves as ukrainians: they feel raped enough with "western cultural revolution". this was not the case at all 17 years ago: they were all for "free ukraine", including my sebaritic aunt (free from what?). they had a widespread believe that getting themselves rid of "moscow's yoke" will within a few years bring them to the center of european stage ecoomically and politically: it was a rather developed country already and one of the slogans of "ruh" (nationalistic movement) was "we almost like France: we will be better once we are free". nothing would have satisfied my aunt more. well, now they are seriously worse off than russia, which was never the case during the "occupation" (was kruschev era an occupation? whom by whom?). my aunt can no longer afford to be sebaritic and while she still can afford to look as a very youthfull 40 year-old at 51, she is frustrated with the nationalist movement that did not bring her to france and beyond. it did, however bring a lot of young ukrainian girls to france and beyond for a
sort of occupation no one could imagine would become mainstream for them.

11/07/2008 12:31 PM
Mr roT said...

RR,

Thank you for your run-down on the recent history of Ukraine. As I admitted before,
I am in a state of near-complete ignorance on the topic (beyond my knowing that
for a long time, Ukraine has wanted out from under Russia).

I am sorry I can't answer as thoroughly as you have written, out of my ignorance, yes,
but also for want of time. Let me put down a few ideas, though, that you may not have
considered.

I like your analysis "above nobles", but I don't think that's important now that there
aren't any. I thought we were talking about how Putin (OK, a noble of sorts) will have
free hand to do as he pleases out there over the objections of the locals and with the
tacit assent of policy 'realists' (read 'pussies') in DC.

These current Ukrainian locals are sadly no longer nice, clean nobles, but are instead
poisoned (at least Yushchenko), weak, dirty khohols that do want out like their ancestors
have for a long time. I remember reading that the poor little khohols cheered the Germans'
coming in in WWII. Perhaps there were a few too many Litvenenkos around then as well?

You talk about ethnic Russians being indigenous to E Ukraine from long back, but I am
talking about bigger and more recent numbers:
____________________________

[Stalin's] plan was to rid the Party of these obstacles by destroying
the source of the obstruction, the Ukrainian village. By starving the
villages, Stalin would break the will of the Ukrainian nation and fill the
demographic hole by populating Ukraine 's rich soil with Russians and other
ethnic groups from other parts of the Soviet Union . To a large extent,
Stalin succeeded. In the 1920's ethnic Russians made up only 7% of Ukraine 's
population. By 1957, they made up over 20%.

Ref.
____________________________________

Sorry I couldn't find a more authoritative source. I am sure there are some
in agreement with these familiar (to me) figures.

Also, though Ukraine has produced, uh, great "statesmen", it is no richer for
natural resources or strategic strength or technological talent or culture of trade
and honesty than other countries nearby that have been overrun
repeatedly throughout history, by all sorts of even poorer, more corrupt barbarians.

They aren't China. They aren't the Arabs. They aren't the Brits. They aren't the
Spaniards or Germans,... Need I go on?

I am sorry to hear of your Aunt and sorry I didn't marry one of the lovely lasses
before her entry into the sad but lucrative businesses offered to them in the
civilized West. This is truly a tragedy. But this tragedy is not unique to Ukraine.
The same websites that will set you up with a Ukrainian woman will happily set
you up with a Russian (or a Thai for that matter). I have dealt with a fair share of
Russian (and more to the point, Ukrainian) women. I think many come over not
from poverty and naive hope but also because they are loose in morality as well.[] This is a function of general moral decline and poverty, not Russian independence dupes.

But enough talk of pussy. The point is that the 'right' and 'wrong' choices you allude to
are pretty clear now, and it seems to me clearly not what you say. Putin is still in power.
Soon he will be so also formally. And he will likely not be kind to his subjects. If there
are old Russians in the East that want him in charge, they are probably choosing that
way for ethnic reasons (as I believe usually trumps economic ones) and not in their
interest, which would be the relative freedom of supporting a bunch of worthless
Westerners as compared to, say, working in Putin's new camps.

N'est pas?

Best,
JJ

11/07/2008 12:41 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)