3 ms·

So lets try to sort this out a little. First and very important matter to understand is that by 2014, Russia had completely weaponized its media. To understand

So lets try to sort this out a little. First and very important matter to understand is that by 2014, Russia had completely weaponized its media. To understand the power and extent of it, I will refer to earlier usage of this weapon that has been extensively studied - 2007 Estonian riots. Events revolved around a statue. You probably knew this but lets take a moment to appreciate the absurdity of this. Estonian capital had a bronze statue of a Red Army soldier in the middle of the city that was used as gathering ground for hard core Russia supporters around 9th May every year. The company was usually not large but because they consumed strong alcohol, it was noisy and disorderly and because many of them also waved red Soviet flags, it also attracted attention of Estonians who perceived this as demonstration of Russian supremacy and insult on their suffering because of the Russian occupation. Russian narrative of these gatherings was commemoration of the fallen soldiers who liberated Estonia. This did not help to bring two communities closer. When existence of the actual remains under the statue was confirmed, Estonian government decided to follow the Russian narrative and move the statue out of the city center to the cemetery and also rebury the remains there properly. If local Russians learned about this, small crowd, perhaps few dozen, game to protest against this relocation. This was the starting point to from where the weaponized Russian media kicked in. The peaceful relocation of the statue to the cemetery and reburial of the remains was reframed as plan to destroy the statue and the remains. Then this was used as backdrop to the narrative that it is all done as an attack against Russians, their memory and all the things Russian. Suddenly this became the main focal point of all the Russia, like it was the most important thing in the world. It was constantly hammered in the media for weeks, members of the Russian parliament gave their opinions and the narrative was getting more and more hostile by every day and more and more detached from the reality. Of course it was framed as expression of Nazism. It was complete mass hysteria. And it worked. Estonian Russians, who were mostly under influence of the Russian media, bought this false narrative and gathered to protest in thousands. The protests were violent, rocks were thrown at the police, which of course was not displayed in the Russian media, there it was a peaceful protest, but the situation was still mostly orderly and under police control. Until a complete hoax was used to spark disorderly riots that ended in city wide destruction of the private property. The statue was photoshopped out of the image, cut off from the legs, and it was then distributed in Russian media as proof that it had been destroyed. The footage of the police operation, that followed, was then displayed in the Russian media to portray it as Estonian government violent attack on the Russian population. More hoaxes were created like the claim that police officers murdered a Russian man on the street. In the end the riots were dispersed with great effort, the statue was moved to the cemetery as planned, it was not destroyed of course and the remains were properly reburied. In conclusion, Russian propaganda can create a complete fabrication of the reality and then use it as a weapon.

eveningcoffee 4y ago
Another very important aspect to understand is how Russia has weaponized falsified historical narratives. Claim that Estonian government attempts to rewrite the history was also very prominent Russian propaganda claim during the 2007 riots. Russia's most important historical narrative revolves around the victory in WW2 against Nazi Germany. In fact WW2 does not exists in Russia. Everything starts in 1941 with the attack of Nazi Germany against USSR. How the Red Army was in Poland and why it was in the attack position is not discussed. To be honest, contradictions on the level of schizophrenia are rather rule than an exception in the Russian narrative. For example there is claim that Hitler betrayed Stalin. But you can only betray your friend or allay, yet Stalin and Hitler were never friends or allies. The existence of MRP is either not discussed or is downplayed as "just" a non-aggression agreement. Its additional protocols where the spheres of influences were agreed on is denied, especially the division of Poland and attack against it in alliance is denied most fiercely. Immediate repressions on the occupied territories are naturally denied too. The fact that almost all the military and in large part also police officers were murdered in Baltic states and in Poland, is denied. Deportations of large part of the population, including women and children, into labor camps is also denied. There are two notable things I would like to point out. First one is that the men were mostly directed into labor camps especially designed to kill prisoners through forced work and malnutrition. The second one is that also large proportion of the Jews were arrested, murdered or deported. For example 200000 Polish Jews were deported into Gulag labor camps. This was also the reason why not all the Jews on the Russian occupied territories did evacuate before the German advance and fell prey of Nazis. The horrors continued when Russians returned after Germans left. These horrors are then presented as glorious liberation what of course is not an acceptable narrative to the survivors of the horrors but are not understandable to the brainwashed masses who do not have any understanding of the human suffering it caused. Every nation between the Germany and Russia has its own specific story but none of them is favorable toward Russians, except the Serbian story. The worst part is training of the Russian population to react strongly to the trigger words. Have you watched the movie Inglourious Basterds? I could not make myself to watch it because of the level of dehumanization it creates. Yet Russian population has been trained to react to the Nazi keyword with strong hate. Keep this in mind when you see another Russian spokesperson to call somebody a Nazi. Russian narrative about Ukraine has one additional important detail. In this narrative Ukrainian People's Republic never existed. In Russian narrative the history of Ukraine starts with the Russian puppet state - Ukrainian SSR, yet like every nation under the previous rule of Russian or Austrian empires managed to create their own nation state after WW1, so did Ukrainians. Yet the existence of this democratic state and its destruction by Russia is denied. Why is it so important? Because Crimea and large parts of then Ukrainian populated areas of current Russia belonged to this state. Next falsified historical narrative is Russia constantly being under attack for 1000 years yet constantly growing from small principality to vast empire over two continents. In this narrative Russia must constantly protect itself and is constantly suffering. This is basis for the Russian Christ of the nation concept that has been developed into perfection by Ivan Ilyin and is the main basis for the current Russian expansionist and imperialist ideology. Being attacked by Nazis and then expanding by protecting itself fits perfectly into this narrative. This leads to the Russian minority narrative. Nation that has large numerical dominance is considered somehow repressed by the nation that is ten to hundred times smaller in numbers on its own territory. It is not the Russians who have forcefully moved in large numbers into occupied territory that are the oppressors, it is the other way around. Like I mentioned, schizophrenic understandings are rather rule than an exception. There are of course more such false narratives but these mentioned form the basis of the Russian imperialist narrative that current regime has weaponized. So talking about Russian minority in Ukraine, or Russian majority areas in Ukraine, this has to be seriously taken into account. Ukrainian SSR was formed on basis of Ukrainian majority on its territories but still many territories with the Ukrainian majority like Kuban were left out. How was it then possible that Russians gained majority in many Eastern Ukrainian areas? There are three answers to this: Holodomor, deportations and Russification. Killing large part of Ukrainian population by man made famine, deporting native Ukrainian population into other territory and populating the territory with large number of Russians. Genocide and ethnocide, two imperialist tools of Russia over centuries. Therefore when somebody talks about oppression of Russian minority in Ukraine then this person is directly advancing Russia's imperialist policies. If somebody claims that this area has Russian majority in Ukraine then this person is again is directly advancing Russia's imperialist policies. If you are against imperialism then you will not do that. If you are against imperialism then you would try to advance policies that will try to heal results of previous imperialist actions. If you are against imperialism then you do not support any Russia's action against Ukraine. If you can't do that then you are not against imperialism, you are perhaps against US, but not against imperialism.

eveningcoffee 4y ago

Another very important aspect to understand is how Russia has weaponized falsified historical narratives. Claim that Estonian government attempts to rewrite the history was also very prominent Russian propaganda claim during the 2007 riots. Russia's most important historical narrative revolves around the victory in WW2 against Nazi Germany. In fact WW2 does not exists in Russia. Everything starts in 1941 with the attack of Nazi Germany against USSR. How the Red Army was in Poland and why it was in the attack position is not discussed. To be honest, contradictions on the level of schizophrenia are rather rule than an exception in the Russian narrative. For example there is claim that Hitler betrayed Stalin. But you can only betray your friend or allay, yet Stalin and Hitler were never friends or allies. The existence of MRP is either not discussed or is downplayed as "just" a non-aggression agreement. Its additional protocols where the spheres of influences were agreed on is denied, especially the division of Poland and attack against it in alliance is denied most fiercely. Immediate repressions on the occupied territories are naturally denied too. The fact that almost all the military and in large part also police officers were murdered in Baltic states and in Poland, is denied. Deportations of large part of the population, including women and children, into labor camps is also denied. There are two notable things I would like to point out. First one is that the men were mostly directed into labor camps especially designed to kill prisoners through forced work and malnutrition. The second one is that also large proportion of the Jews were arrested, murdered or deported. For example 200000 Polish Jews were deported into Gulag labor camps. This was also the reason why not all the Jews on the Russian occupied territories did evacuate before the German advance and fell prey of Nazis. The horrors continued when Russians returned after Germans left. These horrors are then presented as glorious liberation what of course is not an acceptable narrative to the survivors of the horrors but are not understandable to the brainwashed masses who do not have any understanding of the human suffering it caused. Every nation between the Germany and Russia has its own specific story but none of them is favorable toward Russians, except the Serbian story. The worst part is training of the Russian population to react strongly to the trigger words. Have you watched the movie Inglourious Basterds? I could not make myself to watch it because of the level of dehumanization it creates. Yet Russian population has been trained to react to the Nazi keyword with strong hate. Keep this in mind when you see another Russian spokesperson to call somebody a Nazi. Russian narrative about Ukraine has one additional important detail. In this narrative Ukrainian People's Republic never existed. In Russian narrative the history of Ukraine starts with the Russian puppet state - Ukrainian SSR, yet like every nation under the previous rule of Russian or Austrian empires managed to create their own nation state after WW1, so did Ukrainians. Yet the existence of this democratic state and its destruction by Russia is denied. Why is it so important? Because Crimea and large parts of then Ukrainian populated areas of current Russia belonged to this state. Next falsified historical narrative is Russia constantly being under attack for 1000 years yet constantly growing from small principality to vast empire over two continents. In this narrative Russia must constantly protect itself and is constantly suffering. This is basis for the Russian Christ of the nation concept that has been developed into perfection by Ivan Ilyin and is the main basis for the current Russian expansionist and imperialist ideology. Being attacked by Nazis and then expanding by protecting itself fits perfectly into this narrative. This leads to the Russian minority narrative. Nation that has large numerical dominance is considered somehow repressed by the nation that is ten to hundred times smaller in numbers on its own territory. It is not the Russians who have forcefully moved in large numbers into occupied territory that are the oppressors, it is the other way around. Like I mentioned, schizophrenic understandings are rather rule than an exception. There are of course more such false narratives but these mentioned form the basis of the Russian imperialist narrative that current regime has weaponized. So talking about Russian minority in Ukraine, or Russian majority areas in Ukraine, this has to be seriously taken into account. Ukrainian SSR was formed on basis of Ukrainian majority on its territories but still many territories with the Ukrainian majority like Kuban were left out. How was it then possible that Russians gained majority in many Eastern Ukrainian areas? There are three answers to this: Holodomor, deportations and Russification. Killing large part of Ukrainian population by man made famine, deporting native Ukrainian population into other territory and populating the territory with large number of Russians. Genocide and ethnocide, two imperialist tools of Russia over centuries. Therefore when somebody talks about oppression of Russian minority in Ukraine then this person is directly advancing Russia's imperialist policies. If somebody claims that this area has Russian majority in Ukraine then this person is again is directly advancing Russia's imperialist policies. If you are against imperialism then you will not do that. If you are against imperialism then you would try to advance policies that will try to heal results of previous imperialist actions. If you are against imperialism then you do not support any Russia's action against Ukraine. If you can't do that then you are not against imperialism, you are perhaps against US, but not against imperialism.