4 ms·
My point is that your statement "[Russia expansion] didn't involve massive conquest or colonialism" is demonstrably false. No amount of whataboutism or moving g
by vdaniuk 11y ago
My point is that your statement "[Russia expansion] didn't involve massive conquest or colonialism" is demonstrably false. No amount of whataboutism or moving goalposts will be able to change that.
- Mikeb85 11y agoAgain, Slavic peoples are indigenous to Russia. Turks, Mongols, Tatars, Lithuanians, Swedes, Arabs, etc..., aren't.
- guard-of-terra 11y agoOne can argue that uralic people (чудь) were rightfully indigenous to Russia.
- Mikeb85 11y agoThey're indigenous to a part of modern day Russia. Based on their genetic composition and linguistics (as well as their own distribution) they likely migrated from central Asia northwards, to Siberia, northern Russia, Finland, northern Sweden, etc... The other major Uralic group (Magyars/Hungarians) went south, joined with Khazar groups, and eventually spread to modern day Hungary. No archaeologist or historian doubts that Slavs are indigenous to the territory that is modern western Russia/Belarus/Ukraine...