How Ukrainians appeared

Ukrainianized school

Big politics

Attempts to create an "independent" Ukraine after the collapse of the Russian Empire and during the Civil War naturally ended in failure. Ukrainian nationalists, Petliurists did not have broad support among the people, remaining a marginal layer of Ukrainian intelligentsia, politicians and bandits who fished in troubled waters.

Their domestic policy predictably led to the complete collapse of the economy, transport, and rampant banditry. In foreign policy, Kyiv first tried to rely on the German bloc (Hetmanate), then on the Entente and Poland (Central Rada, Petliura's regime), which also ended in complete collapse.

The Red Army, having received the support of the broad masses of the people, defeated the White Guards, Petliurites and Poles, and liberated the greater part of the Russian borderland (outskirts). The greater part historical Little Rus' returned to Soviet Russia, and part of the Western Russian lands were captured by the Poles, Czechs and Romanians.

However, despite the complete political collapse of the "Ukraine" project, the Ukrainization of Little Russia continued. The decisive role in this was now played by the Bolsheviks. Revolutionary internationalists who had their own motives.

The fight against Great Russian chauvinism

It is necessary to remember that during this period the internationalist revolutionaries, the Trotskyists, had a powerful influence. They were counting on the world revolution, for the sake of which they were ready to burn Russia and the Russian people. Moreover, many revolutionaries pathologically hated the Russians, whom they considered an imperial people, chauvinists.

Therefore, they began to artificially create large national republics - Ukrainian, Kazakh, etc. Artificially cutting off the original Russian lands. In particular, half of Kazakhstan - the former Russian Southern Urals and Siberia, where the Kazakhs never lived. Lands developed by Russians. They did the same with the Ukrainian SSR, cutting off the Left Bank, Novorossiya, Donbass.

The stake was placed on local nationalists who had firmly established themselves in the leadership of the national republics. With their help, they suppressed the "Great Russian chauvinism" that had "oppressed" national minorities for many centuries.

Lenin, who at first logically thought about the "merger" of the RSFSR and Ukraine into a tight federation, gradually moved to a policy of Ukrainization. The Soviet leader decided that the rebellious Little Russian peasantry could be pacified by giving them their "native language" and Ukrainian culture.

In fact, the Little Russian peasantry simply needed a strong government. Plus development. In Kyiv, from 1917 to the end of 1920, the government changed 14 times. The peasants stopped respecting any government, fighting with the Germans, the landowners' and the hetman's troops, the White Guards, the Reds, the bandits, the Poles, etc.

Already on December 2, 1919, the Central Committee of the RCP(b) issued a resolution on Soviet power in Ukraine. The Ukrainian language was to be turned "into an instrument of communist education of the working masses." To this end, it was proposed to provide Soviet institutions with employees who spoke Ukrainian.

On February 21, 1921, the All-Ukrainian Central Executive Committee decided: "On the entire territory of the Ukrainian SSR, in all civil and military institutions, the Ukrainian language must be used equally with the Great Russian language. No advantage for the Great Russian language is allowed." Those found guilty of refusal and evasion were punished "with all the severity of military revolutionary laws".

Thus, for the Ukrainization of Russians in Little Russia, the state and repressive apparatus was again used. Ukrainization was carried out from above and by force.

Policy of Ukrainization

On September 21, 1920, the government of the Ukrainian SSR adopted a resolution on the introduction of the Ukrainian language in schools and Soviet institutions. Particular emphasis was placed on the study of the Ukrainian language in all institutions for the training of educational workers. Educational manuals, popular and propaganda literature, and fiction were published in the Ukrainian language. Ukrainian newspapers began to be published in all provincial cities, and evening schools for employees were created in provincial and district cities.

That is, the system of governance and education, enlightenment, and the press were Ukrainized first. This was supposed to lead to the Ukrainization of Russians-Little Russians.

At the same time, the society in Malorossiya itself did not want to accept the artificial Ukrainian language and culture. Even during the times of the Rada, in June 1918, the All-Ukrainian Congress of Parental Organizations was held in Kyiv. It was noted that Russian culture is ours, and that its weakening leads to a general decline in culture, which “will have a disastrous effect on all aspects of life in Ukraine.” Simply prophetic words about Ukraine in the 1990s–2020s.

Such a hostile attitude of the parents' committees greatly outraged the Ukrainianizers. They declared that the state had its own interests and should pursue its own policy. Then the opponents of Ukrainianization proposed holding a national referendum on the language issue. The Ukrainianizers refused, saying that the people were "unconscious", "amorphous", and there was no point in asking them.

The thing was that Ukraine-Little Russia at that time was 90% Russian (plus Polish and Jewish communities). With a Russian population, Russian language (including a number of southern and western Russian, Little Russian dialects) and Russian culture.

D. I. Doroshenko, who held the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs under Hetman Skoropadsky, wrote:

“Almost all educated people in Ukraine, with a few exceptions, used the Russian language… And among the people, the pure Ukrainian language has already disappeared… It has to be revived mainly with the help of schools.”

Actually There was no “pure Ukrainian language” in nature, and it was never used by the people. But the Ukrainian "independence activist" could not admit this. But he let it slip that even with the help of the school it was difficult to revive the "native language" - not only the students, but also the teachers did not know it. The policy of Ukrainization was difficult, the Ukrainizers themselves admitted that it had to be imposed from above, preferably with the help of "foreign bayonets" that "will dig a deep ditch between us and Muscovy."

Certificate (Posvidka) about the accountant passing the exams on knowledge of the Ukrainian language, without which they were not hired. Kiev region, 1928.

One and indivisible or the Right of nations to self-determination

Even at the 1922th Party Congress in XNUMX, many delegates, most of whom came from various Ukrainian outskirts, proposed creating a single and indivisible Soviet Republic, repeating the slogan of the White Guards (one of the main slogans of the White movement was "Russia is one, great and indivisible"). Soviet Russia was to consist only of provinces and regions. Another group of communists, which included Stalin, proposed creating only autonomous republics and regions within a single Russia.

On September 24, 1922, Stalin wrote to Lenin:

“Either real independence and then non-interference from the center... or real unification into one economic entity with the formal extension of power by the Council of People's Commissars, the Central Executive Committee and the economic councils of the independent republics, i.e. replacing fictitious independence with real internal autonomy of the republics, in the sense of language, culture, justice, internal affairs, etc.”

Stalin noted that “The young generation of communists on the outskirts refuses to accept the game of independence as a game, stubbornly accepting the words about independence at face value and also demanding that we implement the letter of the constitution of the independent republics…”.

Lenin angrily attacked the supporters of "autonomization". He believed that equality between the republics was not enough, and that greater care was needed for the small nations that were in the Russian "prison of nations". It is worth noting that Ulyanov-Lenin had a very poor understanding of the national question, playing into the hands of the internationalist Trotskyists. He did not understand that in Ukraine, Georgia, Kazakhstan and other republics, people spoke dozens of languages ​​and dialects. And now everyone was forced to learn Ukrainian, Georgian, Kazakh and other titular languages, which created even greater discrimination than under the "damned tsarism" and "Russian colonialism".

In particular, the Russification of the Ukrainian outskirts only raised the spiritual, cultural and material level of the local population. But indigenization in the national republics only contributed to the general decline in the level of culture.

This did not stop the Bolsheviks. In April 1923, at the XNUMXth Congress of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks), they proclaimed a policy of indigenization aimed at replacing the Russian language and culture in the union republics with the languages ​​and cultures of representatives of national minorities. This was presented under the slogan of fighting “Great Russian chauvinism,” which was associated with the “damned tsarist past.”

The main denouncers of Great Russian chauvinism and supporters of Ukrainization were Grigory Zinoviev (Radomyslsky), Nikolai Skripnik (Skrypnik) and Nikolai Bukharin (before the revolution he lived under the name Moisha Dolgolevsky). The participants of the congress quite consciously and persistently supported Ukrainian culture as opposed to Russian culture.

Zinoviev said:

"I cannot agree with those comrades who said at the Ukrainian Conference: two cultures are fighting in Ukraine; which one wins is all the same to us. That, comrades, is not the way to reason. The school of Comrade Lenin teaches us in the national question that we must actively help those nations that have been oppressed and driven down until now."

In March 1924, one of the leaders of the Ukrainian national movement, the chairman of the Ukrainian Central Rada, the "father of Ukrainian history" Mykhailo Hrushevsky, arrived in Soviet Russia from exile, followed by other Ukrainian nationalists. Hrushevsky was elected a full member of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He republished the "History of Ukraine-Rus", where Kievan Rus was viewed as a form of Ukrainian statehood and the ethnogenetic and cultural differences between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples were proclaimed.

The first secretaries of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, Emmanuel Kviring (1923-1925) and Lazar Kaganovich (1925-1928), pursued an active policy of Ukrainization. The emphasis was on school. The number of schools with instruction in Ukrainian grew rapidly, while the number of Russian schools rapidly decreased.

The weakness and artificiality of the Ukrainian chimera, and the fact that the Russian language and culture were at the core of Little Russia-Ukraine, are demonstrated by the following fact. Thus, the report of the Kyiv Provincial Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine stated that after a year and a half of Ukrainization, the level of knowledge of the Ukrainian language by employees of various institutions in the province was as follows: 25% of those checked did not know the Ukrainian language at all, 30% knew almost nothing, 30,5% knew it poorly, and only 14,5% knew the Ukrainian language more or less.

At the same time, a significant percentage of those who absolutely do not know, almost do not know, and have a weak knowledge of the Ukrainian language were formally “Ukrainians.” That is, Russians-Little Russians who were directly registered as “Ukrainians.”

The “Ukrainians” (Russians who were registered as Ukrainians) stubbornly refused to learn their “native language.”

To be continued ...

Comments

[Medvedev_Dmitry]

Ukrainianism arose in the 19th century, under the tsarist regime, there is no need to blame everything on the Bolsheviks...

[LTCNL]

This is not denied here; the Bolsheviks simply gave it a go.

[Medvedev_Dmitry]

Apparently he didn't notice... We should have started about Ukrainianism at least with Dragomanov and his comrades, or even earlier...

[Julian_B]

Quote from LTCN

This is not denied here.

There is no mention of this here.

The Bolsheviks simply gave it a go.

the Germans of Austria-Hungary did not give it a go. Everything fell apart after the 1st World War, like the USSR, when the "elite" ceased to be Bolshevik, but nationalistic, which led to constant wars on the territory of the former USSR, which are still going on. Nationalists raised their heads before the Bolsheviks came to power. The Rada existed before the Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks postponed the death of Great Russia, while increasing its power (industrialization, literacy) and territories (Sakhalin, Kuril Islands, Nikolai lost, Tuva, Lvov, the USSR's sphere of influence was larger than that of the Russian Empire).

[Alexey Lantukh]

Almost all villages in Ukraine in the 20s spoke Ukrainian. In the cities, the main language was Russian. You can look at the demographics. 80% of the people in the 20s lived in villages. The question arises: what language should rural schools teach local children who did not know Russian? I would like them not to write nonsense about the artificiality of the Ukrainian (Little Russian) language. It naturally formed from the language of local Slavic tribes and later developed under the influence of the Polish (West Slavic) language. Just like the Belarusian language.
In the tsarist and Soviet times, everything was the same, although the Soviet quirks about Ukrainization were in the 20s, and then gradually weakened. In reality, rural residents moved to cities and began to speak Russian. And since there were much fewer rural residents than city dwellers, the Ukrainian language began to lose its base, although the government of the Ukrainian SSR paid due attention to it.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Alexey Lantukh

The question arises: in what language should rural schools teach local children who did not know Russian?

The question arises: why did Russian cities have to learn rural trills?
Let me remind you that both in Little Russia and Russia they used to study using the unified grammar of Meletius Smotritsky.

[Foul skeptic]

Why did Russian cities have to learn rural trills?

Well, probably because the rural population made up the majority of the population. And urbanization is a historical inevitability of industrial societies.
The funniest thing is that on the periphery of the empire they never spoke Russian and knew Russian culture as well as they did under the USSR. Despite all the "Russifications" in the empire and despite all the horror stories of "indigenization".

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Well, probably because the rural population made up the majority of the population.

so what? a stupid argument, and the trills still had to be formalized into language..

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The funniest thing is that on the periphery of the empire they never spoke Russian and knew Russian culture as well as they did under the USSR. Despite all the "Russifications" in the empire and despite all the horror stories of "indigenization".

You laugh at the very beginning. If the Empire had survived, Russians would have known the culture better and there would have been tens of millions more Russians there.

[Foul skeptic]

so what? stupid argument

And how is he "stupid"?

and the trills still had to be formalized into language.

The creation of a written language when a related spoken language exists is not a big problem.

If the Russian Empire had survived, they would have known Russian culture better than the Russians.

Uh, the empire had 50 years in Turkestan. And they didn't know the language there in 1867, and they still didn't know it in 1917.
The Baltic provinces could have been "Russified" for 2 centuries. But they preferred to open underground schools there, just to avoid studying in Russian.
And so on.
But you are deceiving yourself. It is easier to ignore the fact that on the periphery of the empire they never knew Russian and did not know Russian culture as well as they did under the USSR. Despite all the "Russifications" in the empire and despite all the horror stories of "indigenization".

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The creation of a written language with an existing related spoken language is not a big problem.

i.e. there was nothing to learn

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

But you are deceiving yourself with illusions.

You are deceiving yourself with illusions: only in Russia Russian people massively populated Asia, Chechnya, etc., making them Russian and today they would be Russian, and after the USSR anyone goes to Russia, because Russians after you are in short supply in Russia, and the millions you drove into the republics became hostages of the MCT nationalists.

[Alexey Lantukh]

The question arises: why did Russian cities have to learn rural trills?

Well, even during the period of the Ukrainian SSR, there were no Russian cities in Ukraine. All cities were Ukrainian and lived according to the constitution of the Ukrainian SSR. For this reason, there were no problems with what to teach and in what language. Everything was regulated by the legislation of the Ukrainian SSR. Schools with Russian as the language of instruction were required to teach Ukrainian language and literature. Similarly, it was the same in other union republics.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Alexey Lantukh

Well, even during the period of the existence of the Ukrainian SSR there were no Russian cities in Ukraine

They were only Russian, except for Galicia, of course: to hear a nightingale in Odessa or the Dnieper was basically impossible.

[BAI]

According to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Ukrainians appeared in the 13th-14th centuries (AD, by the way)

[Alexey Lantukh]

According to the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Ukrainians appeared in the 13th-14th centuries (AD, by the way)

In fact, in Ancient (Kievan) Rus there lived different East Slavic tribes (Polans, Drevlyans, Severtsy, etc.) and it is unlikely that they disappeared during the Mongol "yoke". With the collapse of the Mongol conquests (14-15th centuries), the tribes came under the control of Poland, Lithuania and Moscow. Here the tribal system of life disintegrated completely and the current Ukrainians, Belarusians and Russians began to form according to language. It is stupid to say that Ukrainians and Russians are one people according to language. Close - yes. But, they were formed from different tribes related by language and united by different states. In particular, Ukraine owes the Ukrainian language mainly to Poland.

[Vladimir_2U]

The article is an example of when to a quarter of the truth you add three quarters of lies and your own fabrications.

[Foul skeptic]

It is very sad that in the 21st century there are more and more people with the level of thinking of uneducated peasants of the 19th century. When I read such opuses, I immediately recall an excerpt from the memoirs of Pavel Rovinsky about his trip to Serbia:

I see a villager walking ahead (a resident of the village), I catch up with him: “God help me!” - I tell him first. - God help you! - “What’s it like?” (how are you?) - Fala to God! (thank God) - “Iosh kakoste?” (yet) - Let’s fill it up (thank you). Avoboch huh? (where are you going?) - At Petkovitsa - I answer and start asking about the road. He explained the way to me and I was about to go, saying “with God,” when he stopped me with the question: “What is it?” - what you? those. who are you? I declare that I am Russian. What faith? - Orthodox. - “Do you know Our Father?” - I know. - “Talk.” — I read “Our Father,” and he stared at the ground and listened, weighing every word I said. “Ama good, brother, you read; pa ti si srbin.” I begin to explain that I am not a Serb, but a Russian, but that Russians and Serbs are Slavs, people related in language and of the same Orthodox confession.
— No, you are Serbin, you don’t know this yourself; but you want to see our monasteries, so when you get to the Studenitsa Lavra, there There are learned monks and they have old books, they will show you that Russians are all Serbs.

It’s the same obscurantism and now, 2 centuries later, illiterate people talk about things that go beyond their competence.

[kor1vet1974]

Illiterate people talk about things that are beyond their competence.

And the same illiterate people believe in the true Middle Ages.

[Frettaskyrandi]

It is very sad that in the 21st century more and more people have the level of thinking of uneducated peasants of the 19th century.

Thoughtlessness is a disease of modern times, the basis of the modern anthropological crisis - an escape from thinking, the degradation of understanding, the inability of man to directly meet reality.

Today's man saves himself by fleeing from thinking. This flight from thinking is the basis of thoughtlessness.

Humanity has simply not yet realized the extent of this danger. Moreover, it is being vigorously exploited by all sorts of propagandists of the baseboard level.
To be convinced of this, it is enough to read the publications and comments in the "News" section.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The article is an example of when to a quarter of the truth you add three quarters of lies and your own fabrications

comment, as an example of when the commentator piles on with a proud look: "And I am DATranyan!"

Examples of "lies" with documents are already below his "dignity".

that's why the pile smells bad

[Vladimir_2U]

Oh, the Russophobe has shown up... Samsonov is a long way from Olgovich in terms of lies and torn quotes.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Oh, the Russophobe has shown up... Samsonov is a long way from Olgovich in terms of lies and torn quotes.

so where is the evidence of lies in the article from the Russophobe-Zasov?

The article is not without flaws, but overall, everything is so.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Olgovich

so where is the evidence of lies in the article from the Russophobe-Zasov?

The article presents that the Bolsheviks as such played the main role in the "formation" of the Ukrainian "nation" - this is obviously not the case, then this was facilitated by Ukrainian nationalists who attached themselves to the Bolsheviks. The article is clearly a lie.
The stupidest lie about Lenin deciding to pacify some rebels by "giving them their native language". Just nonsense...
The Bolsheviks did not even create, but proclaimed national republics not out of hatred for the Russian people, but with the goal of somehow relying on local socialists and the local poor. And this especially concerned the Ukrainian socialists. The article is clearly a lie...
A blatant lie about punishing those who evade "with the full severity of military-revolutionary laws."

And you, Olgovich, are such a defender of Russians, only when it comes to the Soviet past, as soon as the conversation turns to the current blatant facts of oppression of Russians and the Russian people, you don’t say a word...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The article presents that the Bolsheviks as such played the main role in the "formation" of the Ukrainian "nation" - obviously this is not so, at that time it was Ukrainian nationalists who attached themselves to the Bolsheviks who contributed to this.

On the contrary, it was the Bolsheviks of the Leninist persuasion who used Ukrainian nationalists for their own purposes: the fight against Great Russian chauvinism and the creation of a full-fledged Ukrainian state, which was temporarily in the rank of a Soviet republic.
Here is the position of the Bolsheviks in 1920:

...Ukrainization of the city, bringing it closer to the village at least in language, breaking up the city - is very useful...

Do you remember who wrote this? A fiery revolutionary and internationalist, a native of Kursk province, comrade Fyodor Andreevich Sergeev, aka comrade Artyom.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The Bolsheviks did not even create, but proclaimed national republics not out of hatred for the Russian people, but with the goal of at least somehow relying on local socialists and the local poor.

And for what purpose did they annex Russian territories to national republics? For what purpose did they conduct forced Ukrainization with dismissals without observing labor laws? And in general, how does the declared internationalism fit in with the forced imposition of a language alien to the majority of the population?

Quote: Vladimir_2U

A blatant lie about punishing those who evade "with the full severity of military-revolutionary laws."

Well, here is an example from later times - how the Ukrainian language was implanted in the Ukrainian SSR.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Alexey RA

Well, here is an example from later times - how the Ukrainian language was implanted in the Ukrainian SSR.

This is what it is "with all the severity of military revolutionary laws", right? In general, such a formulation "all severity" is at least imprisonment, and even the highest measure...
Then this is "all the severity"

A major blow to Ukrainization was dealt by the purge of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of "nationalists" proclaimed in December 1932. In addition to the purge of party ranks, there were mass dismissals of workers in education, science and culture accused of Ukrainian nationalism. In the period from March 1933 to January 1934 alone, about 4 teachers were dismissed from schools in the Ukrainian SSR on charges of nationalism (though primarily from Polish and German schools).

About two thousand collective farm chairmen were arrested, and arrests of former "right-wing communists" began. In 1933, the spelling commission recognized the 1927-1929 norms as "nationalistic" and revised them.

It is clearly evident that with this fuss around the USSR they are trying to cover up the entire insanity of the current Russian leadership both in relation to Ukraine and in relation to national policy within Russia.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Then this is "all the severity"

This is a belated admission that the chosen path was wrong. But 10 years of forming a "separate" and "independent" Ukrainian nation with its own state have not been in vain.
Alas, but the IVS could no longer return to its original concept of building the USSR. And all that was left was to partially mitigate the consequences of the work of the fiery Bolsheviks.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

It is clearly evident that with this fuss around the USSR they are trying to cover up the entire insanity of the current Russian leadership both in relation to Ukraine and in relation to national policy within Russia.

The insanity of the current national policy does not at all cancel out the insanity of the Soviet policy with its indigenization and internationalism.

[kor1vet1974]

From the beginning, the author claimed that Ukrainians were invented by the Poles, and the Ukrainian language by the Austrians, but now it turns out that the Bolsheviks invented not only Ukrainians but all other peoples. Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, etc., spoke Russian before the revolution, and the Bolsheviks invented Georgian and others and forcibly made them study them.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The article presents that the Bolsheviks as such played the main role in the "formation" of the Ukrainian "nation" - obviously this is not so, at that time it was Ukrainian nationalists who attached themselves to the Bolsheviks who contributed to this.

Just to understand what the Bolsheviks meant by the word "internationalism":

... internationalism on the part of the oppressive or the so-called "great" nation (although great only by its violence, great only in the way that the Great Derzhimorda is) should consist not only in the observance of the formal equality of nations, but also in such inequality that would compensate for an oppressive nation, a large nation, the inequality that develops in life in fact. Whoever did not understand this, did not understand the really proletarian attitude towards the national question, he remained, in essence, on the point of view of the petty-bourgeois and therefore cannot but slip every minute to the bourgeois point of view.

What is important for the proletariat? For the proletariat, it is not only important, but also essential, to ensure it with a maximum of confidence in the proletarian class struggle on the part of foreigners. What is needed for this? This requires not only formal equality. To do this, one way or another must be compensated by his conversion or his concessions to the foreigner for that distrust, that suspicion, those insults that were made to him in the historical past by the government of the "great-power" nation.

That is, internationalism in the Leninist style is pay and repent for the Russian people. Hence the welcome of all sorts of local nationalists, including open enemies of the Soviet power.

[Foul skeptic]

That is, internationalism in the Leninist style is to pay and repent for the Russian people.

Alexey, did Olgovich bite you? I thought that after you had been explained twice before, using a simple example, what kind of "inequality" is written about here and why it is impossible to build "equality" without it, you would refrain from such copy-pasta in the future.
It's sad of course.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

I thought that after you had been explained to me twice before, using a simple example, what kind of "inequality" is being written about here and why it is impossible to build "equality" without it, you would refrain from such copy-pasta in the future.

Can the inequality of a large nation in relation to small nations be interpreted in any other way? At whose expense will the privileges of small nations be?
In fact, VIL was proposing the same thing that BLM had recently been pushing. Only in this case, the white oppressors were Russians.

[Foul skeptic]

Can the inequality of a large nation in relation to small nations be interpreted in any other way?

Didn't you understand what was written to you last time?
What exactly from what was written last time is unclear to you? I will explain.
I think if we start from specifics, we will quickly come to an understanding of the far-fetched nature of “VIL proposed the same thing that BLM recently pushed.”

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Alexey, did Olgovich bite you?

No, I'm not a fan of the RKMP.
It's just that the USSR's national policy of "two with a plough, thirteen with a spoon" and the policy of indulging in local nationalism in 14 republics out of 15 makes me a little angry.

[Foul skeptic]

It's just the national policy of the USSR "two with a plough, thirteen with a spoon"

The "we feed everyone" option is strikingly reminiscent of our neighbors. Not even at the time of the collapse of the Union, but already in the 21st century.
There, too, Donbass believed that it feeds everyone, and Ukraine believed that it was subsidized.
Although formally yes, Donbass was subsidized. True, it brought in every third (or fourth, I don't remember) dollar of Ukraine's foreign exchange earnings. The result of the oligarchs' games is a broken economy and devastation both there and there.
Russia (RSFSR) was wound up in the same way as the Ukrainian SSR. Others were also pulled in, but on their own initiative. In relation to the RSFSR and the Ukrainian SSR, they worked purposefully - they were the basis of the Union, the largest, the most populated, with the greatest margin of safety. Basically, the words about "we feed everyone" are confirmed either by 1) a funny picture from the Communist Party with the GDP indicator in the USSR, and in dollars. or 2) Gaidar's book or 3) the latest statistical collections on the RSFSR, where at the very end they inserted tables with commodity-money balances between the subjects of the USSR.
If you look into how the figures were obtained, manipulations will be revealed. They simply made calculations, on the one hand showing the export value of the goods, and on the other hand, the value at which the goods were received according to internal settlements.
Let me explain it this way:
We give Ukraine oil for only one ruble, and sell it to other countries for 5 rubles. That is, we subsidize Ukraine by 4 rubles. Ukraine sells us, for example, a pump, the price of which includes the cost of the energy source that was spent on the production of this pump. But at a price of not 5 rubles, but one ruble. And that is why we bought the pump not for 24 rubles, but for 20 rubles. Everyone is happy, some have an inexpensive pump, others have inexpensive oil. In the 90s, it "suddenly" turned out that cooperation is not just a slogan, but a working mechanism in the social economy.
And people were simply deceived with stories about "freeloaders" - divide and rule.
The Balts have shown and continue to show themselves from a very unattractive side, but the fact that they had a higher standard of living is not a consequence of "currying favor" to nationalism, not of the "USSR showcase", but of the high concentration of production of goods with high added value for a small number of the population of these countries, a large number of which (goods) were imported and provided currency. This can be accepted or not accepted, but it is so.
Or the fact that in Uzbekistan book publishers published interesting books (adventures, action-packed stories by foreign authors, etc.), while in the RSFSR, classics and social realism were the twenty-fifth circle, this was also not due to "currying favor" with nationalism. It was simply "well, why change anything, we'll fulfill the plan anyway, and here we have to go through a commission." And in Uzbekistan, publishers simply got their asses off their chairs, took them and went through them.
All are freeloaders.
But now it turns out that all the gunpowder in the USSR army was made from Central Asian cotton. And there was no need to import it.
There are many nuances that make the search for freeloaders simply a search for scapegoats.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Alexey, did Olgovich bite you?

judging by your opuses, you've been bitten by something mad

[Olgovich]

Quote: Alexey RA

the so-called "great" nation (although great only for its violence, great only as great as the bully is)

Well, he says that about the Russians - "the so-called" great, "great only in violence" - and what's wild is that there are still "oppressed" Vile S and others who like this.

Quote: Alexey RA

What is important for the proletarian? For the proletarian it is not only important, but also essential to provide him with maximum trust in the proletarian class struggle from the foreigners.

, Ilyich finally gained the trust of foreigners: they tore down, grateful, the monuments and his nationalism. It's a pity he didn't live to see it...

[Vladimir_2U]

107 years ago, our heroic ancestors showed the whole world that the situation from the dystopian novel "1984" (although essentially anti-communist), when ordinary people are doomed to be a disenfranchised gray mass for centuries, is by no means some kind of once and for all established reality.

And thus, for the entire 20th century, they set the course of world history, raising our country to the status of one of the two political poles of the planet, which even the most ardent anti-Sovietists do not argue with.

Happy holiday. Happy Great October Socialist Revolution Day!

And despite all the dialectic of the historical process, when a rise is followed by a decline, this invaluable experience will undoubtedly determine the progressive future of humanity.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

when ordinary people for centuries are doomed to be a disenfranchised grey mass, is by no means some kind of once and for all established fact.

yes, the thieves were removed quickly - 70 years is nothing by historical standards.

[Chack wessel]

Please tell us how the Russian population repented before the Ukrainians during the Soviet era?

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The article presents that the Bolsheviks as such played the main role in the "formation" of the Ukrainian "nation" - obviously this is not the case

good "proof"

Obviously, THIS is it: If you learn what a nation is, you will learn that before VOR there was none (for example, the country of Ukrainians, etc.), but after - there is

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Ukrainian nationalists who joined the Bolsheviks

d sticks to d.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The stupidest lie about Lenin deciding to pacify some rebels by "giving them their native language". Just nonsense.

"Just Nonsense" is a great document
ukryazyk by force they introduced it, there are a million examples, yes..

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The Bolsheviks did not even create, but proclaimed national republics not out of hatred for the Russian people,

Out of love for him? Then tell me HOW and in what ways did Russians benefit from the creation of national republics in them and outside - in terms of territory, language, culture, etc.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

A blatant lie about punishing those who evade "with the full severity of military-revolutionary laws."

yes, you are completely ignorant - there are examples below from Alexey RA and there are a lot of them - HOW they fired people from work, deprived them of their rights, etc.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And you, Olgovich, are such a defender of Russians, only when it comes to the Soviet past, as soon as the conversation turns to the current blatant facts of oppression of Russians and the Russian people, you don’t say a word...

what is pushing you out of laws? Created a new natsssr? Rewritten as non-Russian, like in sovoukrains? Forced to learn the language and foreign history? No?

What is oppressing you?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Olgovich

Quote: Vladimir_2U
And you, Olgovich, are such a defender of Russians, only when it comes to the Soviet past, as soon as the conversation turns to the current blatant facts of oppression of Russians and the Russian people, you don’t say a word...

What laws are pushing you? Did they create a new natsssr? Rewrite them as non-Russians, like in sovoukrains? Force them to learn the language and foreign history? No?

Hello, "defender" of the Russian people, you defend the Holodomor no worse than the Khikhols, and the Pshekomor no worse than Kaczynski, and you cover up the pro-British policy of replacing the Russian people with migrants, there are simply no words, in the best traditions of Russophobes... Open your eyes, there are plenty of articles on this topic in VO. Although to whom am I writing this,

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

"defender" of the Russian people, you defend the Holodomor no worse than the Khikhols, and the Polish Holodomor no worse than Kaczynski

I defend the TRUTH.
By the way, the famine was, first of all, in the NOVOROSSIYSK regions of the so-called "Ukrainian SSR" created by you and other Russian regions.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

pro-British policy of replacing Russian people with migrants

What parallel planet do you live on, dear sir?
This is BOLSHEV's policy: "oppressed and dying" Kyrgyz, Tajiks, etc., under the caring wing of your Russophobes, have grown in numbers at the expense of Russia in 6-7 once (find out how many Russians there are yourself), while the Russians were being brutally dispossessed, turned into collective farms, toiling hard at the so-called all-Union (in reality Russian) construction sites, including in the Union republics, robbed by unimaginable tributes, loans and taxes, straining and stopping giving birth.

You built the Russian cross for Russians, but not for Tajiks.
And now you're surprised? No shame, nothing else.

[Vladimir_2U]

107 years ago, our heroic ancestors showed the whole world that the situation from the dystopian novel "1984" (although essentially anti-communist), when ordinary people are doomed to be a disenfranchised gray mass for centuries, is by no means some kind of once and for all established reality.

And thus, for the entire 20th century, they set the course of world history, raising our country to the status of one of the two political poles of the planet, which even the most ardent anti-Sovietists do not argue with.

Happy holiday. Happy Great October Socialist Revolution Day!

And despite all the dialectic of the historical process, when a rise is followed by a decline, this invaluable experience will undoubtedly determine the progressive future of humanity.

[Foul skeptic]

You built the Russian cross for the Russians.

Who arranged it:
1) "German Cross"
2) "Polish Cross"
3) All other "crosses"?

[Olgovich]

[quote=Disgusting skeptic]Who arranged it:
but you, the oppressed and tortured by the Russian people, don't have extinction? Why is that? [quote=Disgusting skeptic]German cross"
2) "Polish Cross"[/quote]
development of society.

And the Russian cross is a consequence anti-development(millions from the corpses of hunger, multi-million exiles, camps, hundreds of thousands shot, millions of dispossessed, wild permanent hunger, wild pouring of alcohol on millions instead of benefits, etc.)

[Foul skeptic]

But you, the oppressed and tortured by the Russian people, don't have any extinction? Why is that?

Who among us does not have extinction? Specify. Let's laugh.

development of society.

The development of society is the reason for the excess of mortality over birth rate.
"Anti-development" of society (a meaningless "term") is the reason for the excess of mortality over birth rate.

Well done.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Who among us does not have extinction? Specify. Let's laugh.

You are not Russian.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The development of society is the reason for the excess of mortality over birth rate.
"Anti-development" of society (a meaningless "term") is the reason for the excess of mortality over birth rate.

I can't help you if you don't understand.

[Foul skeptic]

You are not Russian.

1) How will you prove your words?
2) So there is no extinction among "non-Russians"? This is illogical. Depopulation of the indigenous population occurs in almost all developed countries (and even some developing ones)

I can't help you if you don't understand.

I just showed you what you're talking about.
You can't help in any way because there is no logic in your words.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

How do you prove your words?

You said it yourself, sclerosis?

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Depopulation of indigenous populations occurs in almost all developed countries

completely already? once again: NO ONE IN THE WORLD had this: millions of corpses from hunger, multi-million exiles, camps, hundreds of thousands of people shot, millions of people dispossessed, wild permanent hunger, wild pouring alcohol on millions instead of benefits, abortions of 180 million, etc.

Bring back these victims and then we'll talk.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

there is no logic.

You have no conscience or compassion for the victims, only cynicism, that's what's sad.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

and not to see the pro-British policy of replacing the Russian people with migrants, there are simply no words, in the best traditions of Russophobes...

Oh, what a luxurious answer...

Quote: Olgovich

You built the Russian cross for Russians, but not for Tajiks.

The USSR has been dead for 30 years now... But it continues to import all sorts of crap into Russia without control. Oh no, the USSR never imported it... And who does this? Is it those who keep squealing about the Holodomor and Katyn?

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The USSR has been dead for 30 years now... But it continues to import uncontrollably all sorts of bullshit
to Russia

Name these nations.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Oh no, the USSR never imported it

it's because of illiteracy that you don't know anything

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And who does this?

for catching again:
This is BOLSHEV's policy: "oppressed and dying" Kyrgyz, Tajiks, etc., under the caring wing of your Russophobes, at the expense of Russia, grew in number by 6-7 times (find out how many Russians there are yourself), while the Russians were cruelly dispossessed, turned into collective farms, worked extremely hard on the so-called all-Union (in fact, Russian) construction sites, including in the Union republics, were robbed by unthinkable tributes, loans and taxes, overextending themselves and stopping giving birth.

You built the Russian cross for Russians, but not for Tajiks.
And now you're surprised? No shame, nothing else.

[Alt 22]

Regarding your inadequate nonsense about "the Russian cross was built by the Bolsheviks for the Russians" - and you, my dear sir, have you seen the graph of the decline in birth rates for Germans? Or for the Finns - where the birth rate sometimes fell even more than in Russia?
By the way, under the USSR that you hate, the number of Russians was 119 million people (in the RSFSR), and that’s without the Russians of Crimea and the millions of refugees from Ukraine.
In 2020, the number of Russians in Russia - including the Russians of Crimea and millions of refugees from Ukraine - already amounted to 105 million people, that is, the loss of Russians amounted to 14 million people!
Fourteen million in thirty years!!!
And this is without any Bolsheviks, only under your capitalists.

[Foul skeptic]

If you learn what a nation is, you will learn that before VOR there was none (for example, the country of Ukrainians, etc.), but after - there is

In colonies, a political nation first appears, and then a country. As a result of the struggle with the metropolis. And not the other way around.
Before 1775, there were such "13 colonies". The people inhabiting them realized themselves as a separate political nation. That is why now there are no "13 colonies", but there is the USA. Not the other way around.
The All-Ukrainian National Congress that formed the UCR is a fact of transition from one of the peoples of the empire to a political nation and it is before the October Revolution. And naturally, this does not arise spontaneously, but is the culmination of certain historical processes.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

In the colonies, first a political nation appears, and then a country.

You, "oppressed", have become completely Russophobic - what kind of NOVOROSSIYA is a colony?

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The All-Ukrainian National Congress that formed the UCR is a fact of transition from one of the peoples of the empire to a political nation

Get rid of the Ukrainian nonsense, stories and dreams.

this "nation" did not understand each other in the east and west, etc.

The UCR is NOT a state, it did not represent anyone or anything.
State after the VOR

[Foul skeptic]

what NOVOROSSIYA colony?

How do you imagine the process of empire formation and the hierarchy of governance?

UCR is NOT a state

Naturally.
The All-Ukrainian National Congress, which formed the UCR, is a fact of transition from one of the peoples of the empire to a political nation, and it predates the October Revolution.

State after the VOR

And what about the US government after the Revolutionary War?
There was already a separate political nation in the British colonies.

[Olgovich]

Quote: A vile skeptic

what NOVOROSSIYA colony?

How do you imagine the process of empire formation and the hierarchy of governance?

UCR is NOT a state

Naturally.
The All-Ukrainian National Congress, which formed the UCR, is a fact of transition from one of the peoples of the empire to a political nation, and it predates the October Revolution.

State after the VOR

And what about the US government after the Revolutionary War?
There was already a separate political nation in the British colonies.

learn what a colony is. You have both Smolensk and Moscow as colonies.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

The All-Ukrainian National Congress that formed the UCR is a fact of transition from one of the peoples of the empire to a political nation and it is before the October Revolution

yeah, just like the clown meeting on Malaya Arnautskaya.
Get rid of the Ukrainians, I asked you.

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

And what about the US government after the Revolutionary War?
There was already a separate political nation in the British colonies.

and in Russia there are no colonies or ukrainians

[Foul skeptic]

You have both Smolensk and Moscow as colonies.

I do not have.

yeah, just like the clown meeting on Malaya Arnautskaya.

No

and in Russia there are no colonies or ukrainians

History refutes your words.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

You have both Smolensk and Moscow as colonies.

I do not have.
yeah, just like the clown meeting on Malaya Arnautskaya.

No

yes, liar

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

History refutes your words. There are no colonies or ukrainians in Russia.

where?
I'm tired of you and your own.

[AlexSam]

Another usual article by the inveterate populist VO. "Intellectuals" from the post-Soviet generations eat, everything is fine. For people with a Soviet education, the author's scribbling is cheap and empty, but it will do for them. A hurray-patriotic educational program.

[Eugene Zaboy]

In particular, half of Kazakhstan is the former Russian Southern Urals and Siberia, where Kazakhs have never lived.

An interesting question. The Kazakhs themselves claim that they arrived in Kazakhstan as part of Genghis Khan's army. At least, that's what their legends and historians say. In fact, quite recently by historical standards. Where the Bolsheviks got the idea to give these territories to the invaders is completely unclear.

[AlexSam]

Quote from Eugene Zaboy

It is completely unclear where the Bolsheviks got the idea to give these territories to the invaders.

Many people would like to know the answer to this question, but apparently we will never know. Or maybe the Bolsheviks were thinking in analogies with Ukraine when they included the South-East into its composition.

[Illanatol]

Quote from Eugene Zaboy

The Kazakhs themselves claim that they arrived on the territory of Kazakhstan as part of Genghis Khan’s army.

Nonsense. Kazakhs are descendants of the Kasog tribe, who lived in this area long before the "Tatar-Mongol invasion".
Rather, the descendants of Genghis should be considered the Dzungar tribe, who chased these Kazakhs across the steppe like wet rags until the Russians interceded...

[kor1vet1974]

Kazakhs are descendants of the Kasog tribe

Aha, it turns out that the Kazakhs are our distant Adyghe relatives... I wonder what tribe they were from and when they moved from the Caucasus to that steppe.

[AlexSam]

And the Adyghe are the descendants of the Sauromatians)

[Eugene Zaboy]

Quote: Illanatol

Nonsense. Kazakhs are descendants of the Kasog tribe, who lived in this area long before the "Tatar-Mongol invasion".
Rather, the descendants of Genghis should be considered the Dzungar tribe, who chased these Kazakhs across the steppe like wet rags until the Russians interceded...

But the scientist Radik Temirgaliev writes that this theory does not correspond to reality, and the Middle Zhuz appeared first. He traces the origin of the name "Orta Zhuz" to the phrase "Orda Zhuz", that is, "zhuz, where the horde, the khan's headquarters is located", and explains that it was on the basis of the Middle Zhuz that the Kazakh Khanate subsequently arose. He also draws attention to the fact that it was the khans of the Middle Zhuz who became pan-Kazakh rulers.

Where then did the Huns live, who took Rome and are now supposedly Italians, and before Rome they attacked China? The Southern Slavs came to Yugoslavia from the Caspian steppes again, and now it is Kazakhstan. Perhaps the Kazakhs need to sort out their history, otherwise they sound like invaders.

[Edward Vashchenko]

To understand how ethnic communities are formed, from the point of view of modern research:
The transition of ethnic groups from one state to another: ethnic group, nationality, people, nation – occurs (conditionally, but still) exclusively within the framework of a change of formations.
It is impossible to create a SPECIAL nation outside the framework of a formation! No development of capitalism – no nation.
If we put it conditionally: ethnos – tribal system and the period of its collapse, ethnos and nationality – neighboring-territorial community, nationality and people – feudalism, people – transition to capitalism, nation – capitalism.
This is not an axiom, but a pattern. The formation and development of an ethnos, as a minem within Europe, occurs exclusively in this way.
Only with such a template should we approach the assessment of its development.
These patterns became obvious only in the 50s; previously, no one had any idea about them.
Therefore, even in school textbooks there is still such a concept as the ancient Russian nationality, which did not exist in nature.

[Olgovich]

one of the leaders of the Ukrainian national movement, the chairman of the Ukrainian Central Rada, the "father of Ukrainian history" Mykhailo Hrushevsky arrives, followed by other Ukrainian nationalists. Hrushevsky was elected a full member of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He republishes the "History of Ukraine-Rus", where Kievan Rus was considered a form of Ukrainian statehood and the ethnogenetic and cultural differences between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples were proclaimed

The Nazi who fought against Russia was favored by the Bolsheviks and carried out his Nazi activities in the USSR.

It is hard to imagine greater savagery and betrayal.

The article is a plus, although there are some ambiguities: Stalin handed over the Russian Donbass to Ukraine, and predicted the Ukrainization of Russian cities, but he was unable to do so...

[Edward Vashchenko]

It is hard to imagine greater savagery and betrayal.

Yes, it is possible,
Korchinsky, a terrorist and extremist banned in our country, came to Moscow at the invitation of the administration after he fought against our fighters in Chechnya.
Zelensky, a terrorist and extremist banned in our country, never left Russia, earned all his money here, and even showed TV series to the delight of Russians on a state channel, like "Matchmakers".
And the former members of gangs in the State Duma...

[Olgovich]

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

Korchinsky

You are funny: Korchinsky took up a government position and implemented his Nazi ideas in Russia, like Grushevsky and a bunch of other Nazis in the USSR?

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

Zelensky, a terrorist and extremist banned in our country, has never left Russia

the clown didn't come out, but was banned later - don't you see the difference?

Quote: Eduard Vaschenko

And the former members of gangs in the State Duma...

With an outstanding conviction?
Remember, a criminal is one who is convicted by the COURT, not by the Persian courts.

[Frettaskyrandi]

And the former members of gangs in the State Duma...

And at the head of the subjects of the federation.

[BAI]

So Saint George began with persecution of Christians. And became one of the most revered saints.
And the Chechens are now fighting well in the North-Eastern Military District.
For Russia

[Slavutich]

So Saint George began with persecution of Christians. And became one of the most revered saints.

What kind of Zen fairy tale is this about St. George: he immediately stood for the Faith, against the pagan emperor.

[S.Z.]

Horses mixed in a bunch, people ...

Just to prove the unprovable and squeeze in the unsqueezable.

What borders of Ukraine are being discussed? Not the current ones? Modern Ukraine consists of former parts of Malorossiya, Novorossiya, Poland, Lithuania and the Hetmanate itself (probably, it can be called proto-Ukraine).

But this is not the main thing - modern Russia has also come a long way towards its borders.

If people feel like they are Russian (or Ukrainian), then they are Russian (or Ukrainian).

It doesn't matter at all for what reason.

If we take genes, then Avitr will be very disappointed.

[Was mammoth]

By not recognizing Ukrainians as a people, the author does not recognize Belarusians as a people either?
What other peoples does the author not recognize?
«Recognizing the federation as a transitional form to complete unity, it is necessary to strive for a closer and closer federal union, bearing in mind, firstly, the impossibility of defending the existence of the Soviet republics, surrounded by incomparably more powerful militarily imperialist powers of the whole world, without the closest union of the Soviet republics; secondly, the need for a close economic union of the Soviet republics, without which the restoration of the productive forces destroyed by imperialism and the ensuring of the well-being of the workers is impossible; thirdly, the tendency towards the creation of a single world economy as a whole, regulated by a common plan by the proletariat of all nations, a tendency which has already been quite clearly revealed under capitalism and is certainly subject to further development and complete completion under socialism." (Vol. XIX, p. 219).
https://leninism.su/works/115-conspect/4328-lenin-o-natsionalnom-voprose.html?
"The independence of Ukraine is recognized by both the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the RSFSR (Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic) and the Russian Communist Party of Bolsheviks. Therefore, it is self-evident and quite generally recognized that only the Ukrainian workers and peasants themselves, at their All-Ukrainian Congress of Soviets, can and will decide the question of whether to merge Ukraine with Russia, whether to leave Ukraine as an independent and autonomous republic, and, in the latter case, what kind of federal connection to establish between this republic and Russia." (Vol. XVI, p. 460).
https://leninism.su/works/115-conspect/4328-lenin-o-natsionalnom-voprose.html?showall=1
P.S. Food for thought.
In tsarist Russia, Great Russians (Russians) made up 43%, in modern Russia - 89%.
Half of the nobles are "foreigners".

[Olgovich]

Quote: There was a mammoth

By not recognizing Ukrainians as a people, the author does not recognize Belarusians as a people either?
What kind of people

WHERE does he not recognize?
It's about HOW they are created.

If the Bolsheviks had introduced a nation, for example, Pridneprovska-we would discuss it today,

[Foul skeptic]

If the Bolsheviks had introduced a nation, for example, the Dnieper people, they would be discussing it today.

Well, answer for yourself - why didn't the Bolsheviks "introduce the Dnieper nation"? Well, since they are tyrants who, left and right, at random, created "previously non-existent nations and invented languages ​​for them."

[Olgovich]

Quote: Nefarious skeptic

Well, answer for yourself - why didn't the Bolsheviks "introduce the Dnieper nation"?

and they didn’t care about introducing anyone, so they introduced whatever they came across.

[Foul skeptic]

and they didn’t care about introducing anyone, so they introduced whatever they came across.

Well then why didn't they introduce it?
"Didn't get it" doesn't qualify as an argument at all.

[Olgovich]

Quote: A vile skeptic

and they didn’t care about introducing anyone, so they introduced whatever they came across.

Well then why didn't they introduce it?
"Didn't get it" doesn't qualify as an argument at all.

"gotcha" pulls

[Foul skeptic]

"gotcha" pulls

Doesn't it bother you that the "hit" by a "strange" coincidence correlates with very specific factors?

[Was mammoth]

Quote: Olgovich

WHERE does he not recognize?
It's about HOW they are created.

If the Bolsheviks had introduced a nation, for example, the Dnieper people, they would be discussing it today,

Isn't the article about Ukrainians being a people artificially created in a test tube by the Bolsheviks?
Maybe it would be worth reading the original sources before writing an article?
And the Bolsheviks believed that the formation of a people is a process conditioned by the development of social and industrial relations, cultural and linguistic ties.
Were there any "excesses"? Certainly. "Let the f... God pray, and he will break his forehead."
Moreover, such decisions were made by people with an education inherited from the bright tsarist times. And so the artistic image of Chapaev answering peasants' questions or Nagulny studying English emerges.
I'll give you a couple of examples of "artificial nations".
There is the Republic of Tatarstan. I am surprised that some wild heads do not demand the return of the original Bulgaria.
Mordovia is nearby. The republic exists, but the nationality is fictitious.

[BAI]

that Ukrainians are a people artificially created from a test tube by the Bolsheviks?

Some colonel of the Austrian General Staff claimed that it was he who created Ukraine and Ukrainians

[Was mammoth]

Quote: BAI

Some colonel of the Austrian General Staff claimed that it was he who created Ukraine and Ukrainians

Version: The Austrians and Germans were allies. Lenin was a German spy. Conclusion: The Bolsheviks carried out the task of the Austrian General Staff.

[Olgovich]

Quote: There was a mammoth

Isn't the article about Ukrainians being a people artificially created in a test tube by the Bolsheviks?

about that. So what? Grown from a test tube, but now she exists0, because millions believe in fiction and it doesn’t matter anymore whether it’s true or not

[Totor5]

Ukraine - this Soviet Frankenstein monster, must be destroyed. And the goal must be set precisely like this, and not all these games of give-away with Trump.

[Sergei Fonov]

The construction of modern Russia is the construction of the Tower of Babel. Good intentions to develop the national language and national identity give completely different results. In Poland, both Tatars and Ukrainians have become Poles, and I think we have something to learn from them.

[deddem]

Quote: sergey backgrounds

The construction of modern Russia is the construction of the Tower of Babel. Good intentions to develop the national language and national identity give completely different results. In Poland, both Tatars and Ukrainians have become Poles, and I think we have something to learn from them.

When I was born, I was a Polish citizen, but Ukrainian by nationality. Our house was located in the center of the village, right on the village street and on all three sides, except for the one that faced the street, it was surrounded by houses of Polish families. We were like on an island measuring 25 x 30 meters. The boundaries of the plot reflected the relationship with the three Polish families mentioned. We were mortal enemies with one of them, the leader of which played the organ and therefore considered himself better than us. The reason for this enmity was never clear to me; following the example of my parents, I hated them just as much (if that was possible) and never greeted them. Everything was mutual. We were separated from this family by a brick wall three meters high and twenty meters wide, very strong and reliable. We had more or less good relations with the neighbor on the left; peace was mainly maintained by the housewives, since both sometimes ran out of salt or pepper and had to borrow. Our plot bordered his orchard and was edged by a row of fruit trees. The only thing that separated us from the neighbor on the right was a fence, which, by the way, belonged to my father, and from time to time he tried to move it a few centimeters toward the neighbor's garden, which led to a terrible quarrel. Such outbursts were short-lived, and we became good neighbors again. There were two children in the family who were my only playmates and from whom I learned Polish - but not vice versa, since they belonged to the ruling class. The fact that I grew up with two Polish children greatly weakened my national hatred, but not my national pride. The village itself was no different from other villages: a kilometer-long street with multi-story buildings on one side of the road and a meadow on the other. And all this from a geographical point of view. However, from a political point of view, things were much more complicated. The village's inhabitants consisted of two almost equally strong ethnic groups - Poles and Ukrainians. Both groups formed their own closed community with its own church, cultural center, school and even a store. All other businesses, such as the lumber yard, the pub, and three other stores, were neutral because they were owned by Jews, of whom there were as many as the stores. These two ethnic groups - Poles and Ukrainians - were uncompromising enemies. The Poles had an advantage because it was their state. Where hatred alone was not enough, the administration came to the rescue. It goes without saying that the burgomaster, the gendarme and the parishioners were Poles. The Poles sought to suppress the Ukrainians and make them submissive. For example, no Ukrainian could get a paid government job until he had been baptized and was henceforth considered a Pole. By the way, this was considered the greatest disgrace among their compatriots. The Ukrainians did everything possible to emphasize their nationality and the customs and traditions associated with it, thereby further provoking the opposing side. When anger had accumulated to a sufficient degree, it would periodically burst out in the following way. At first, an oppressive silence and foreboding descended on the village. People began to speak more quietly and whisper more often. Then the time came. One day, several trucks with unknown men in military uniforms without insignia arrived in the village. They dispersed throughout the village and entered some Ukrainian houses in groups. Shouting and cursing, they burst inside, knocked down everything that came to hand, and then calmly left. If they caught a man or men of the family doing this, they would beat them half to death. It was a kind of "mobile detachment".
In all, our house survived three such "cleansings", the first of which took place shortly after I was born. I often heard my mother tell about it. My father ran away into the forest, where others were already waiting for him. The perpetrators drove my mother out along with us children and set to work hard. The furniture was smashed, blankets and pillows were cut up, pots were pierced, roof sheets were pierced with bayonets, window panes were smashed into small pieces, and the shards were poured into barrels with cucumbers and sauerkraut. The potatoes in the cellar were doused with kerosene, and a pocket watch hanging on the wall was destroyed with a blow from a rifle butt. This execution went on for quite a long time. Unfortunately, my grandfather was there. Since they probably respected his age, they limited themselves to a blow to the ribs with a rifle butt. The blow was fatal. Two years later, the spectacle was repeated, the third action took place on the morning of 1938. I was at school. When classes were over, we went home. On the village street there were several cars full of men who had already finished their work. Several Polish residents were standing next to them and talking to the passengers in the cars. I remember this scene so clearly because one of the men suddenly pointed at me and said: “This is Stashinsky’s son.”
You can imagine what my heart was in at that moment, but it all ended with this very remark. This time the soldiers were more humane, they did not break anything, but threw everything on the floor and poured several jugs of milk on it. It should be emphasized from the very beginning that my grandfather, father and especially his brother belonged to the intellectual elite of ideological Ukrainians in the village. There were not many of them, about 10-15 families. All these families were rich, and only two - ours and another - belonged to the lower class. Paradoxically, it was my uncle who set the tone. Without this explanation, it would be incomprehensible why we were so favored by the mobile units. Gradually, I learned about all this from about the age of five. For several pre-school years, I attended a kindergarten at the House of Culture. Kindergarten is the name, but in fact it was a day center. We went there in the morning and returned home in the evening. It was also a nationalist institution, designed to preserve the nation. I don’t know the background of this movement. They probably didn’t want to give in to the Poles, who had a state-funded kindergarten in their village, which was actually run by the church. The kindergarten and school were run by Catholic nuns and lasted about 2-3 years. At least we had a teacher who taught us songs and told us stories. All this was financed by our parents. But it is this funding that proves how serious the Ukrainians were about not failing and doing the same as the Poles. The two nationalities had an active cultural life. Theatrical performances, choir evenings and lotteries were held almost every Sunday. All this was organized by various clubs and amateur groups. Sometimes a national cultural group would come from Lviv. Christmas, Easter and Whitsun were also celebrated together. Thanksgiving was celebrated with a parade. The Polish population did the same, and every Sunday after that there were fights between the two ethnic groups. On Sundays and holidays people wore clothes that were part of the national costume. This included only embroidered shirts and blouses, the former for men, the latter for girls and young women. Full national costumes were worn only by members of secular groups. The predominant colors were blue and yellow, reminiscent of the national flag. People were very inventive, so it often happened that two sisters or two friends dressed in such a way that one of them wore one color and the other another. They always dressed like this together. They saw the intention, were full of joy, but did not violate the prohibitions. It also happened that in church some church hymns were sung to the tune of a nationalistic song - nationalistic, mind you, not folk, folk songs could simply be sung without dangerous words.
These 15 families did not belong to any party, they were simply members of a national association called Prosvita (Enlightenment) and received its publications. In the autumn of 1939, the Russians invaded the country. It was considered time for revenge. Red was added to the blue and yellow flag. The 15 people discovered that they had long been communists, but in their own way. They created a local government and became a militia. My uncle became the chief of the militia. In this way, they kept the whole village in check. Of course, their violence was directed against the Poles. Night after night, my uncle disappeared with his men and meted out justice. The most important weapon in this “justice” was rubber truncheons. Many Poles were arrested, some disappeared. At meetings, they sang the Internationale, and then, more secretly, the nationalist anthem. But the Russians did not immediately understand what was happening. It took a long time before they were informed about the inhabitants. Then, of course, the situation changed. The Poles became allies, and 15 people were forced to leave their posts. The most important of them, including my uncle, had to go to prison. Thus, the illusion of dominance over the Poles was over.

[BAI]

Why did the author start the time count from the October Revolution?
And the Provisional Government has nothing to do with it? After all, the Bolsheviks had to clean up its legacy

[Nord11]

The very foundation of the collapse of the USSR was laid by the Bolsheviks themselves, dividing the country into national apartments. And that is how the country fell apart.

[Sugar Honeyovich]

And before them the camp fell apart without division. But also for national apartments.

[Sergey Dymsky]

We'll have to retrain everyone. On the territory of the former Ukraine there should be a history textbook that doesn't mention such a thing as the state of Ukraine at all. Only as a borderland of Rus or Poland and no Ukrainian language. Only the Little Russian dialect of Russian.

[the same doctor]

In general, everything is according to Tolkien. From the light elves, the aliens who seized power forged evil orcs

[flint]

Normal article, after its in the new territories of the Russian Federation, Ukrainianism must be destroyed as a serious disease of the Russian people. Otherwise, after some time, there will be people again who want to call a Maidan.

[Oleg133]

The Russian Federation is the successor to Lenin's work in fighting Great Russian chauvinism and fattening up national formations.

[Seneca]

Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian were formed in the 14th century.
After the future Belarusian and Ukrainian lands became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Western Russian language (“Ruska mova”) was formed in the territory of “Lithuanian Rus” in the 117th-XNUMXth centuries[XNUMX]
Until the 119th century, Western Russian was supra-dialectal throughout the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but from the XNUMXth century, written sources indicate the emergence of a “Ukrainian complex,” that is, colloquial Ukrainian speech began to affect the characteristics of writing in Western Russian. The division of Old Ukrainian and Old Belarusian (original Polesian) dialects was not complete, and in particular, it disappeared in business correspondence by the end of the XNUMXth century [XNUMX]. This causes difficulties in defining written monuments as Ukrainian or Belarusian and heated debates among researchers.
After the formation of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in 1569, the development of the Ukrainian language occurred under the significant influence of Polish, and its “Polonization” took place. Soon, a new stage in the development of the language began – the advancement of folk dialects in clerical literature took place. The literature of that time was reflected in such monuments as, for example, the “Peresopnytsia Gospel” (1556-1561), which was translated from “Blgar into the Russian language”, the Volyn Gospel (1571), the Lenten Triodion (published in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, 1627), and the works of Ivan Vishensky.
Since the end of the 1619th century, grammars have appeared that attempt to standardize the Old Ukrainian language; among them, the most significant are the grammar of Melety Smotrytsky, published in 1596, and the bilingual Church Slavonic-Old Ukrainian lexicographic works of the turn of the 1627th-XNUMXth centuries - "Lexis" by Lavrenty Zizaniy (XNUMX) and "Slaveno-Russian Lexicon" by Pamva Berynda (XNUMX), codifying the collection of Ukrainian vocabulary.
Around the first half of the 120th century, the main features characteristic of the modern Ukrainian language emerged[XNUMX].

In the 1th-XNUMXth centuries, popular speech exerted an increasing influence on the book language, especially in interludes, verses, etc., as well as in the works of individual writers (Galyatovsky, Nekrashevich, Konissky, etc.). At the end of the XNUMXth century, in connection with the annexation of Ukraine to Russia, the influence of the Russian language on the Ukrainian language increased[XNUMX
The first creator of works in the literary Ukrainian language, repeating the spoken language, is considered to be I. P. Kotlyarevsky [121] and his first work is "Aeneid" written in 1798. I. P. Kotlyarevsky wrote in the style of comic poetry "Burlesque" based on Ukrainian speech and folklore
The formation of the modern Ukrainian literary language is associated with the Ukrainian poet T. G. Shevchenko, who finally established the living spoken language as its basis.
The best representatives of Ukrainian literature include Marko Vovchok, Ivan Nechuy-Levytsky, Panas Myrnyi, Lesya Ukrainka, Mykhailo Kotsiubynsky, whose works contributed to the further development of the Ukrainian language.


Ukrainian language in the Russian Empire according to the 1897 census (by districts)
Gradually, in the 102th and early XNUMXth centuries, the Ukrainian language began to be oppressed by the state authorities[XNUMX]. The Ukrainian language was called a dialect of the Russian language, and its originality was denied.
Since the 1930s, as a result of the curtailment of the Ukrainization policy and the return to Russification, the Ukrainian language began to gradually lose ground in education, book publishing and various spheres of public life.[132][133][134][135] The share of those considering Ukrainian as their native language in the population of the Ukrainian SSR between 1959 and 1989 decreased from 73,0%[136] to 64,7%[137]. The decrease in the share of those considering Ukrainian their native language was especially noticeable in the south and east of the republic[136]: in the Luhansk region - by 15,6% (from 50,5% to 34,9%), in the Donetsk region - by 13,8% (from 44,4% to 30,6%), in the Zaporizhia region - by 11,7% (from 61,0% to 49,3%), in the Kharkiv region - by 10,7% (from 61,2% to 50,5%), in the Dnipropetrovsk region - by 10,6% (from 72,1% to 61,5%), in the Nikolaev region - by 9,2% (from 73,4% to 64,2%), in the Kherson region - by 8,0% (from 75,7% to 67,7%). This situation began to change only after Ukraine gained independence.

[Seneca]

Screwed from the wiki about a non-existent language

[Alt 22]

Nonsense ...
"Ukrainization of Russians-Little Russians" - so Russians or Little Russians?
In the Russian Empire, "Russians" was not just one nationality, but the ENTIRE GROUP OF EASTERN SLAVIC PEOPLES.
And that is why, during the census of the Republic of Ingushetia in 1897, the numbers of all three ethnic groups - Great Russian, Little Russian and Belarusian - were indicated in the census both separately and in their total numbers.

But after February 2022, the "there are no Ukrainians" sect became more active and began to throw out this nonsense, I see, already on Topvar.

[gusev_sa]

Mr. Samsonov has started an old record. There was no Ukraine, there were no Ukrainians. There were Ukrainians and the Ukrainian language at the beginning of the 20th century. The process of forming nations is ongoing. There was no USA at one time, the USA appeared, Russia did not exist at one time either. The purpose of such scribbling is obvious. To obscure the real reasons for the ongoing tragedy.