3 ms·

Most commonly accepted theory is that it was through the fusion of Viking elite + local Slavic tribes which led to the formation of the identity of the Rus, a p

Most commonly accepted theory is that it was through the fusion of Viking elite + local Slavic tribes which led to the formation of the identity of the Rus, a people who would be the civilisational ancestors of modern Ukrainiains, Belorussians and Russians. AFAIK, this narrative is broadly accepted by all of these modern peoples

drran 4y ago
- Maursault 4y ago
  > Russians (Russish, русские) are members of Russian Orthodox Church, Christians. They are not a tribe or nation, like Catholics are not a nation. "Viking" is not an ethnicity. It was more of a job title.
- uri4 4y ago
  You describe process that happened from 900AD. By this logic there are no nations of France, UK, Italy etc...
  - drran 4y ago
    British nation and Great British Empire is not a same thing. Italians and Holy Roman Empire is not a same thing. Erzyas, Finns, Mokshas, Tartars nations, etc. and Russian Empire is not a same thing.
- LudwigNagasena 4y ago
  Where did you get that nonsense from?
  - drran 4y ago
    It's openly available in any post-soviet country.
    - LudwigNagasena 4y ago
      I agree, post-Soviet countries are full of nonsense rhetoric. But there is no reason to carry it with you.
- foverzar 4y ago
  > Russian Federation doesn't contain a region named "Russia" (now Ukraine). > when locals are forbidden to speak their native language or pray to their own gods > Scratch a Russian and find a Tartar > means that Russish are not fully converted to Christians and are pagans by their nature I am seriously disturbed by the fact how fast these kind of discussions degrade into fascist skull measurement exercises. The whole trend of invoking the matters of Russian racial purity feels dangerously close to western 19-20 century rhetorics on people of Africa or Jews. Russians are Tatars, who are in turn pagans? What???? Russians comprise of multiple ethnicities (yes, including Tatars). And Tatars are largely muslims, not "pagans", don't be a racist! In real life the evil "Jail of Nations" not only does not forbid you to speak the native language, but actually teaches them and even allows their use in legal documents, unlike the good "Russia now Ukraine" which actually restricts the use of native language of 1/3 of the population, and it's not just the legal documents, it's also press and spoken communication in public places (i.e. if you are a shop owner, you can get fined for speaking Russian). How does that fit into your racial theories? Also, you'd probably want to lookup the word "colony". I get where this narrative of "colonial Russia" is coming from, but you'd have to completely uninvent the meaning of the word for it to make sense. Colonies are foreign (typically overseas) territories with a separate administration. There is a huge formal difference between colonies and incorporated territories. Russia didn't have any real colonies for at least 1.5 of a century. You can't just invent new random meanings for words just so that you can use their connotations in your propaganda - what you are doing is purely Orwellian newspeak.
  - drran 4y ago
    [flagged]

drran 4y ago

Maursault 4y ago
> Russians (Russish, русские) are members of Russian Orthodox Church, Christians. They are not a tribe or nation, like Catholics are not a nation. "Viking" is not an ethnicity. It was more of a job title.
uri4 4y ago
You describe process that happened from 900AD. By this logic there are no nations of France, UK, Italy etc...
- drran 4y ago
  British nation and Great British Empire is not a same thing. Italians and Holy Roman Empire is not a same thing. Erzyas, Finns, Mokshas, Tartars nations, etc. and Russian Empire is not a same thing.
LudwigNagasena 4y ago
Where did you get that nonsense from?
- drran 4y ago
  It's openly available in any post-soviet country.
  - LudwigNagasena 4y ago
    I agree, post-Soviet countries are full of nonsense rhetoric. But there is no reason to carry it with you.
foverzar 4y ago
> Russian Federation doesn't contain a region named "Russia" (now Ukraine). > when locals are forbidden to speak their native language or pray to their own gods > Scratch a Russian and find a Tartar > means that Russish are not fully converted to Christians and are pagans by their nature I am seriously disturbed by the fact how fast these kind of discussions degrade into fascist skull measurement exercises. The whole trend of invoking the matters of Russian racial purity feels dangerously close to western 19-20 century rhetorics on people of Africa or Jews. Russians are Tatars, who are in turn pagans? What???? Russians comprise of multiple ethnicities (yes, including Tatars). And Tatars are largely muslims, not "pagans", don't be a racist! In real life the evil "Jail of Nations" not only does not forbid you to speak the native language, but actually teaches them and even allows their use in legal documents, unlike the good "Russia now Ukraine" which actually restricts the use of native language of 1/3 of the population, and it's not just the legal documents, it's also press and spoken communication in public places (i.e. if you are a shop owner, you can get fined for speaking Russian). How does that fit into your racial theories? Also, you'd probably want to lookup the word "colony". I get where this narrative of "colonial Russia" is coming from, but you'd have to completely uninvent the meaning of the word for it to make sense. Colonies are foreign (typically overseas) territories with a separate administration. There is a huge formal difference between colonies and incorporated territories. Russia didn't have any real colonies for at least 1.5 of a century. You can't just invent new random meanings for words just so that you can use their connotations in your propaganda - what you are doing is purely Orwellian newspeak.
- drran 4y ago
  [flagged]