|
|
You know, if you want to act like a pretentious intellectual, a minute or two with google would do some good on topics that you are only marginally familiar with. The first known contact between Varangian Rus and Byzantium occurred either in Propontis or at the gates of Constantinople. And while Vladimir embraced Christianity in Cherson, he announced his -- and began the process of Christianinized his subjects -- in Kyiv. No Russian scholar would ever accept your analogy. The conquest of Crimea by the Tsarist state and the implied nationalistic pride in that -- and the transformation of Crimea into a Soviet resort reserved for the mid level elite of the Union -- is the origin of the emotional attachments modern Russians feel towards Crimea.
Thank you for sharing your google factoids. I think I am going to remain with my account, that the Greco-Slavic cultural symbiosis began in Kherson, not at the gates of Constantinople. That is to say, Byzantine Orthodox Culture in the Russian state had its origins in Vladimir's invasion, marriage, baptism and religious instruction in Kherson, and not with Oleg's attack on Constantinople, of which we know almost nothing. Oleg's reign was characterised by hostility to Byzantine proselytisation, and if you want to consider that “first cultural contact,” you are welcome to your narrow and pedantic interpretations.
Perhaps the Plymouth analogy was overstretched, so how about this more likely one: Kherson had the same significance in Russian history as the conversion of St. Stephen in Hungarian, or Clovis in French history. The Varangian legend holds the same literary place-holder in Russian history as the legend of Arpad and the Seven Tribes in Hungarian.
I think that's not actually true. The West isn't circling in Russia because it's so morally imperial( at least not primarily), the West is gaining influence because it's a economic success story. Russia is simply falling behind in terms of geopolitical power because it's not opening itself up. You can't just rely on ruling in some kind of semi-autocratic fashion and living off your resources and think you're not going to lose influence in our time.
The Eastern European countries turned towards Europe not because it's such a mighty superpower, but because they saw the chance of getting away from corruption, gain more rights and prosper in the long run. Cheap gas from Russia simply doesn't cut it anymore. Russia's response to gain more influence again over Crimea is just desperation.
You can't rule like Putin does and not lose power over time. The current Russia has an expiration date just as the Soviet Union had.
That is not what I was getting at, but regarding Russia not opening itself up: I think Matlock's op-ed in the Washington Post is correct on this issue. In the late-80's, Russians had largely formed positive, almost unreal expectations of the West, and even after the expansion of NATO, Putin, when he came into office in 2000 was largely willing to cooperate with the Western Powers on foreign policy issues.
In 2001, I saw the first dark clouds lining over the Eurasian horizon when Bush announced his withdrawal from the ABM treaty. Behind him were the neo-cons and their Project for the New American Century. Within this project, was the implicit intent to maintain Russia at her state of temporary enfeeblement during the 1990s as a permanent feature, and to deny her all the accouterments which issue from being an independent Great Power.
This was the source of sourness, and not any idealised fantasy about the relative attractiveness of Russia. Russia is unattractive relative to most nations to the West of herself, but this should not be exaggerated into unnecessary propaganda. Within her traditional areas of historical responsibility, Russia has had, and one hopes, will yet have a civilising role to play in the world.
|
On March 19 2014 06:00 zlefin wrote:
I agree it doesn't seem well setup for long term success in Russia.
And I think that's the major reason why Russia behaves like it does. Moltke has brought up the 'West didn't keep it's promises and expands into Eastern Europe and Russia feels endangered argument' again and again, but I don't see how that's true. Russia has hundreds of nukes, they're safe. They're already the biggest country in the world by far, that the European Union is growing is not going to change that.
I think far more important is that Russia just can't compete with the West. Basically the only thing they're really good at is antagonizing the West. We wouldn't be in the need of debating the Cold War 2.0 if Russia would not feel the need to be the big Eastern superpower they want to be. There is still so much trauma in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union that fighting the alleged enemy at their borders seems to be their primary sense of purpose.
and to deny her all the accouterments which issue from being an independent Great Power.
Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore.
|
On March 19 2014 05:39 Mc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 05:15 Banaora wrote:So Nyxisto, as you posted GDP for Romania, I'm going to post it for Russia: ![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Russian_economy_since_fall_of_Soviet_Union.PNG) It's from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_RussiaSo you see from this, Yeltsin mismanaged the economy and Putin was quite successful, if you want to attribute economic growth of a country to its leader. So there is certainly a fear that when sanctions really hit, people in Russia will be upset. But will they be upset about Putin? When will the sanctions hit? Half a year, a year, longer term? How badly will Europe be hit by them? Can Russia evade them somewhat by strengthening its ties with China or India? Do we want that? What does all this mean for peace in Europe? In my opinion it would be far better to integrate Russia and build Europe with them and not against them. There are already proposals to allow Ukraine to be associated with the European Union and the Eurasian Union of Russia. A guarantee for its territorial integrity (probably without Crimea) under the pretense that Ukraine will not become a NATO member state. If Ukraine pushes for NATO, I can see Russia invading. Some of Russia's military weapons are currently produced in eastern Ukrainian factories and I'm sure they don't want these under NATO command. I'm trying to find a better chart, but it's quite clear a lot of Russia's economic success since Putin can be attributed to oil prices. This is not the best chart but.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Crude_oil_prices_since_1861.pngI'm not an expert on economy, so I would accept an argument that Putin did a good job taking advantage of the situation and the gains can be attributed to Putin's handling of the situation. But accepting that, I would argue that Putin isn't setting up Russia's economy for long term success. They are a horrible place to do business (see corruption index, and politics over-meddling in business is obviously bad) and rely way too heavily on gas/oil prices to sustain their economy. Very fragile economy. Also Putin's aggression in Ukraine is causing countries to re-think doing business with them, and more importantly, to look for energy sources elsewhere. In the long term Russia is f*ed.
In the medium term (10-20 years) Russia can get in trouble economically from this. In the long term they have to change, just as every other country in the world. The faster EU moves away from coal, gas and oil or finds other partners to buy it from, the more will Russias economy suffer. Unfortunately bad economy has historically been a good reason to loot thy neighbors and hang some enemies and confiscate their money.
|
Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore.
Russia is undeniably a Great Power, and all the angry rhetoric telling her that she is not is merely hitting her with the only weapons available to the Western arsenal in this crisis: attacking her self-esteem. Even if you authentically believed that Russia by some weird metric of power has fallen below those ranks, this is irrelevant to the present scene. Russia thinks of herself and therefore behaves as a Great Power, and as Hamlet tells Rosencranz: "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
Russia might be better integrated into Europe today if there were no European Union, as she was in the 19th century. She would then have the luxury of conducting her relations with Berlin, without heeding the furies of Warsaw which must now always come attached to them.
|
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/19/world/europe/south-ossetia-crimea.html?_r=0
But within a few months of Russia’s recognition, shivering through the winter behind windows made of plastic sheeting, people began to wonder when the billions of rubles of aid pledged by Russia would reach them. The answer seems to have been that much of it was stolen: Mr. Malashenko said he estimated that 30 percent of the aid pledged by Russia had reached its target.
Russia’s federal audit chamber found that six months after the conflict, only $1.4 million had been spent on reconstruction out of a disbursement of $55 million in priority aid. By last year, the chamber estimated that $33 million had been lost or misused. South Ossetia’s government eventually opened 70 cases against former officials, alleging that they stole a total of $22 million.
The flows of cash changed South Ossetia, complained an academic from Tskhinvali, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of angering the local authorities. Officials who once lived modestly began to build lavish houses in “apricot and pink” and cruise the streets in “black cars with blacked-out windows,” she said, adding that she recently paid $6 for a cup of green tea.
|
On March 19 2014 06:39 MoltkeWarding wrote:Show nested quote +Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore. Russia is undeniably a Great Power, and all the angry rhetoric telling her that she is not is merely hitting her with the only weapons available to the Western arsenal in this crisis: attacking her self-esteem. Even if you authentically believed that Russia by some weird metric of power has fallen below those ranks, this is irrelevant to the present scene. Russia thinks of herself and therefore behaves as a Great Power, and as Hamlet tells Rosencranz: "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Russia might be better integrated into Europe today if there were no European Union, as she was in the 19th century. She would then have the luxury of conducting her relations with Berlin, without heeding the furies of Warsaw which must now always come attached to them.
Russia would be better integrated into Europe if it didnt keep reminding itself that "The West" is its enemy.
And if it actually respected human rights and the freedom of speech. See it looks bad on businesses who work closely with Russia every that that another political opponent gets thrown in jail for no reason other then decrying the great leader. It makes them weary of embracing Russian markets fully.
|
On March 19 2014 06:39 MoltkeWarding wrote:Show nested quote +Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore. Russia is undeniably a Great Power, and all the angry rhetoric telling her that she is not is merely hitting her with the only weapons available to the Western arsenal in this crisis: attacking her self-esteem. Even if you authentically believed that Russia by some weird metric of power has fallen below those ranks, this is irrelevant to the present scene. Russia thinks of herself and therefore behaves as a Great Power, and as Hamlet tells Rosencranz: "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
I don't know why the perception that Russia is not as powerful as it was during the Cold War would be 'weird'. Economically speaking the gap between Russia and the West has grown immensely. The US are soon going to be one of the biggest suppliers of gas in the world, we(Germany) are going to opt out of fossil energy over the next decades and countries in the middle-East are going be more important again. As Russia's resources are their biggest leverage I think it's fairly safe to assume that their influence is going to plummet further.
A countries most important resource in this century will probably be their human capital, and Russia's is running away. Every second young academic in Russia plans to leave the country permanently. Minorities like the Jewish community are practically fleeing the country since the 90's.
'Because Russia feels like a great power it is a great power' sounds like a Soviet slogan. And the Soviet Union imploded pretty fast.
|
Russia would be better integrated into Europe if it didnt keep reminding itself that "The West" is its enemy.
And if it actually respected human rights and the freedom of speech.
I'm not entirely sure where Moltke the "she" was well integrated in europe" has gotten from, in my history books even back then, russia already was cursed with the "anti-western-stuff". Going so far that royals were taught that freedom of speech, democracy etc (basically everything "western") is a really shitty thing.
edit:
Just as a sidenote, talking about a country like it is a person, is the weirdest (and annoying) thing i've ever read.
|
On March 19 2014 06:43 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 06:39 MoltkeWarding wrote:Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore. Russia is undeniably a Great Power, and all the angry rhetoric telling her that she is not is merely hitting her with the only weapons available to the Western arsenal in this crisis: attacking her self-esteem. Even if you authentically believed that Russia by some weird metric of power has fallen below those ranks, this is irrelevant to the present scene. Russia thinks of herself and therefore behaves as a Great Power, and as Hamlet tells Rosencranz: "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Russia might be better integrated into Europe today if there were no European Union, as she was in the 19th century. She would then have the luxury of conducting her relations with Berlin, without heeding the furies of Warsaw which must now always come attached to them. Russia would be better integrated into Europe if it didnt keep reminding itself that "The West" is its enemy. And if it actually respected human rights and the freedom of speech. See it looks bad on businesses who work closely with Russia every that that another political opponent gets thrown in jail for no reason other then decrying the great leader. It makes them weary of embracing Russian markets fully.
Yes, Russia could abandon her self-respect, national ambition and sense of mission in favour of becoming an outer march of the American Imperium, in the same sense that a cat can voluntarily take a bath. But she is not going to, because the world, for better or worse, has endowed us with a Russia as she is and not the Russia you would wish her to be.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
Why do everyone here think that Russia is completely against the West?
If Russia finally positions herself as "I was on my knees for so many years, let's get up and show that I have brains and pride as well", it's not same to say that "Russia is absolutely anti-Western".
Seriously, sometimes i just wonder why noone brought an argument that we have bears on the streets.
In current world, everything is linked. We can't just drop Europe, Russia, China or US and expect same results.
|
|
|
Self-respect and a nation that feels the need to fake polls "just because" as you put it, .. hmkay. Guess for "some" people that's fair enough.
|
On March 19 2014 07:02 MoltkeWarding wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 06:43 Gorsameth wrote:On March 19 2014 06:39 MoltkeWarding wrote:Because they're not anymore.Realistically Russia's future lies within the European Union. I know that's not their self-conception, especially it's not the idea that Putin has in mind, but Russia is never going to be the big scary guy in the East anymore. Russia is undeniably a Great Power, and all the angry rhetoric telling her that she is not is merely hitting her with the only weapons available to the Western arsenal in this crisis: attacking her self-esteem. Even if you authentically believed that Russia by some weird metric of power has fallen below those ranks, this is irrelevant to the present scene. Russia thinks of herself and therefore behaves as a Great Power, and as Hamlet tells Rosencranz: "there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Russia might be better integrated into Europe today if there were no European Union, as she was in the 19th century. She would then have the luxury of conducting her relations with Berlin, without heeding the furies of Warsaw which must now always come attached to them. Russia would be better integrated into Europe if it didnt keep reminding itself that "The West" is its enemy. And if it actually respected human rights and the freedom of speech. See it looks bad on businesses who work closely with Russia every that that another political opponent gets thrown in jail for no reason other then decrying the great leader. It makes them weary of embracing Russian markets fully. Yes, Russia could abandon her self-respect, national ambition and sense of mission in favour of becoming an outer march of the American Imperium, in the same sense that a cat can voluntarily take a bath. But she is not going to, because the world, for better or worse, has endowed us with a Russia as she is and not the Russia you would wish her to be.
If you think its impossible to maintain your self-respect, ambition and sense of mission (whatever that means) without indoctrinating your entire population into believe that the west is a bunch of neo nazi fascists who arnt worth the air they breath then I can only shake my head at your ignorance.
Economic cooperation and national identity can very much co-exist, and as the history is showing us the course that Russia took after WW2 is not working out so well.
|
On March 19 2014 07:06 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
Why do everyone here think that Russia is completely against the West?
If Russia finally positions herself as "I was on my knees for so many years, let's get up and show that I have brains and pride as well", it's not same to say that "Russia is absolutely anti-Western".
Seriously, sometimes i just wonder why noone brought an argument that we have bears on the streets.
In current world, everything is linked. We can't just drop Europe, Russia, China or US and expect same results.
You can get up and try to maneuver yourself into a global power without all the propaganda Russia is using and without having to turn into a dictatorship with no freedom of speech where political opponents live in fear of there lives.
|
On March 19 2014 06:13 MoltkeWarding wrote:Show nested quote +
You know, if you want to act like a pretentious intellectual, a minute or two with google would do some good on topics that you are only marginally familiar with. The first known contact between Varangian Rus and Byzantium occurred either in Propontis or at the gates of Constantinople. And while Vladimir embraced Christianity in Cherson, he announced his -- and began the process of Christianinized his subjects -- in Kyiv. No Russian scholar would ever accept your analogy. The conquest of Crimea by the Tsarist state and the implied nationalistic pride in that -- and the transformation of Crimea into a Soviet resort reserved for the mid level elite of the Union -- is the origin of the emotional attachments modern Russians feel towards Crimea.
Thank you for sharing your google factoids. I think I am going to remain with my account, that the Greco-Slavic cultural symbiosis began in Kherson, not at the gates of Constantinople. That is to say, Byzantine Orthodox Culture in the Russian state had its origins in Vladimir's invasion, marriage, baptism and religious instruction in Kherson, and not with Oleg's attack on Constantinople, of which we know almost nothing. Oleg's reign was characterised by hostility to Byzantine proselytisation, and if you want to consider that “first cultural contact,” you are welcome to your narrow and pedantic interpretations. Perhaps the Plymouth analogy was overstretched, so how about this more likely one: Kherson had the same significance in Russian history as the conversion of St. Stephen in Hungarian, or Clovis in French history. The Varangian legend holds the same literary place-holder in Russian history as the legend of Arpad and the Seven Tribes in Hungarian.
Orthodox Christianity has already spread through Kievan Rus lands by 944 -- the Primary Chronicle is clear on this -- not only in the oaths Rus' nobles invoked when signing treaties with Byzantium but by references to churches built in Kyiv. Olga of Kyiv -- regent -- converted to Christianity and ruled as a Christian almost 40 years -- and two Kievan Princes -- prior to the rise of Vlodimir. Nor did Vladimir's conversion end periodic Rus raids on Byzantium, at least two major incursions occurred afterwards.
Kherson is not comparable to St. Stephen and no Russian historian -- whether Western or in Russia -- would ever make the comparison. Stephen is the founding father of the Hungarian nation and is venerated as such, alongside a separate religious cult. There is no equivalent veneration in Russian culture for Vladimir until the mid 19th century when there was a failed attempt to promote his significance as part of the broader imposition of Orthodoxy/Autocracy/Nationality ideology the Tsarist state sought to develop as an alternative to Western ideas. The position St. Stephen occupies in Hungarian historical imagination is held by multiple Russian historical rulers because there are multiple Russias.
As for Clovis, it seems pretty obvious that either Rurik -- the actual founder of the dynasty -- or Oleg -- the first prince of Kyiv -- occupied the comparable space. Vladimir is important as a historical figure, but attempting to bolt onto Crimea some sort of mythical homeland or origin of Russian culture is just wrong. The warmth it evokes in the Russians of today is almost wholly based on its importance as a Soviet era resort. Less Plymouth Rock, more Daytona Beach or Boca Ratton.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 19 2014 07:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 07:06 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
Why do everyone here think that Russia is completely against the West?
If Russia finally positions herself as "I was on my knees for so many years, let's get up and show that I have brains and pride as well", it's not same to say that "Russia is absolutely anti-Western".
Seriously, sometimes i just wonder why noone brought an argument that we have bears on the streets.
In current world, everything is linked. We can't just drop Europe, Russia, China or US and expect same results.
You can get up and try to maneuver yourself into a global power without all the propaganda Russia is using and without having to turn into a dictatorship with no freedom of speech where political opponents live in fear of there lives.
It's like other countries don't use propaganda. It's just part of political strategy, deal with it. It was always, it is and it will be. Easiest way to achieve something.
Who lives in fear of lives lol? Navalny? He was freed already once by prosecutorship, no reason to think that he will be jailed.
And whole Bolotnoe file is just farce. I will never believe that you can't solve it in 3 years with staying on same place. It's just impossible.
Don't get me wrong, i'm not defending everything what is happening here, but still.
|
On March 19 2014 07:06 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
Why do everyone here think that Russia is completely against the West?
Because the West isnt just a geographic or economic combination, its also certain values that the current leadership of Russia is opposed to. Free Press and rule of law are something that the Putin government has not much use for. And because for historical reasons the people in charge of Russia have managed to repeatedly make the people in Russia believe that this is just a nationalistic game between the West and Russia. Its not, its a game of Russian leadership vs. Russian people, which is why so many Russians who have left Russia manage to both keep their culture and become much wealthier/have more opportunities without relying on blat.
|
It's like other countries don't use propaganda. It's just part of political strategy, deal with it. It was always, it is and it will be. Easiest way to achieve something.
What "western" country did prohibit opposition, took webpages "off the net", etc? While i agree that propaganda is to be found in every nation, the way russia does it was last seen in the "west" in germany. 60odd years ago.
Quite a difference which you should not and can not deny.
|
The land of freedom23126 Posts
On March 19 2014 07:25 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +It's like other countries don't use propaganda. It's just part of political strategy, deal with it. It was always, it is and it will be. Easiest way to achieve something.
What "western" country did prohibit opposition, took webpages "off the net"? While i agree that propaganda is to be found in every nation, the way russia does it was last seen in the "west" in germany. 60odd years ago. Quite a difference which you should not and can not deny.
We didn't have opposition to prohibit it. That's a difference. And, sadly we still don't have =/
You can't call 50k of youngsters who were coming to meetings 2 years ago as opposition because they weren't coming with idea. It was just mainstream that you're against the system and it's cool to get bunch of selfies on meeting.
You can't call bunch of "leaders" who ran from country or "leaders" who don't want to listen each other as opposition. And so on.
But webpages, i agree. Quite obsolete move, i hope government will just think once more and stop doing it.
On March 19 2014 07:22 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 07:06 oo_Wonderful_oo wrote:
Why do everyone here think that Russia is completely against the West? Because the West isnt just a geographic or economic combination, its also certain values that the current leadership of Russia is opposed to. Free Press and rule of law are something that the Putin government has not much use for. And because for historical reasons the people in charge of Russia have managed to repeatedly make the people in Russia believe that this is just a nationalistic game between the West and Russia. Its not, its a game of Russian leadership vs. Russian people, which is why so many Russians who have left Russia manage to both keep their culture and become much wealthier/have more opportunities without relying on blat.
I guess, there is a difference. You just think about "Russia" as a country with face which is forming now and i think differently about this word :D
But yep, i understand.
|
Russian Federation117 Posts
There's no East vs West. There are Russia, USA, Germany and China. Sorry if someone feels insulted about it but the other countries decide nothing.
Somehow it has historically happened those 4 countries provide the neccessary stability in the world nowadays. In both aspects - economic and military power. It is their mission at this moment of time to play the roles of the opposites to keep everybody calm.
I've been in Russia, USA and Germany many times. The people are all the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
