Topic: Donetsk, Kharkov, Lugansk - way to Russia. - page 7. (Read 734937 times)

Varjag - from Slavic/Rus verb "Varit'" - "to cook", related to the trade of those people, cooking salt. Varjagi were a Slavic people.
Khazars or Hussars or Cossacks (Kazaki) - same people of the Slavic origin.

If you start to go into genetics, maybe I should reiterate the following:
http://stanislavs.org/how-malorossia-was-turned-into-the-patch-quilt-of-discord-that-is-ukraine/

The publication from 27.07.2014 in KM.ru, which presents the research by Anatoly Klyosov. My translation of that article below:

    A leading scientist of the scientific direction of “DNA genealogy”, Doctor of Chemistry, professor of Moscow State University and Harvard University, Anatoly Klyosov in an exclusive interview KM.RU denied allegations of genetic differences between the Russians and Ukrainians.

    Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians represent a set of the same genera

    Nationalist school of Western Ukraine promotes the idea that the Russian and Ukrainian peoples are not closely related. This point of view is “based” on the fact that although once upon a time, Russians moved from what is now Ukraine, later they allegedly severely mingled with representatives of the Mongoloid race and are no longer Slavs.

    There is virtually no truth in this statement. Russians, Ukrainians and Beloarussians represent a set of the same genera, it is one and the same people from the genetic point of view. They have almost the same origin. Ethnic Russians have three main lines: R1a, I and N. 48% of Russians and 45% of Ukrainians are in haplogroup R1a. 22% of Russians and 24% of Ukrainians are in haplogroup I. Depending on sampling, these parameters may vary up to 4%.

    A more noticeable difference between our peoples is observed in haplogroup N, which is common in Northern Europe. It includes, in particular, a portion of Latvians, Lithuanians and Estonians, part of the Russian population of the Baltic states and the Russian north-east. 14% of Russians, 10% of Belarusians, and 1% to 4% of Ukrainians are in haplogroup N. Such a significant difference is due to the fact that Ukraine is located more south of the Baltic states, than Russia and Belarus. If we take the Belarusians, 52% belong to R1a, 22-24% belong to I, and as I said, 10% belong to N.

    I want to stress that when I say “Ukrainians”, I am referring to the inhabitants of the western regions. Furthermore, we specifically took the data from Lvov. Of course, we have somewhat different cultures, and different language, but not the origin.

    Assertions about the differences of our people is a part of the information war

    There is such a thing as a “haplotype tree”. It is formed by different means. The first option is for the population genetics specialists to go to the field, go to the cities and villages with a test tube. Researchers collect saliva or blood from the representatives of certain ethnic category and determine DNA by it. From the point of view of the academic science such data is considered to be more accurate. The second option is when people send their samples to commercial organizations. Science generally shuns such data, but in the end the results obtained by scientists and commercial companies, is approximately the same, and often times simply identical.

    So, we modelled this haplotypes tree , including to data on Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians. To do this, we did a DNA analysis based on 111 parameters (DNA Y-chromosome markers), whereas normal “academic” analysis only takes into account 17 parameters or less – often 7-8 parameters. We tracked such details, that the researchers do not usually go into. We superimposed the haplogroups of our peoples, and found that there is a match everywhere. Again, the difference is observed only in haplogroup N. It is connected solely with the geographical reasons.

    Thus, the question of the common origin of the Russian, Belorussians and Ukrainians is closed, although I am familiar with the “works” that deny this fact. They caused in me a great scientific and social resentment. These “scientists” spew nonsense and distort objective data. I regard such activities as a part of the information war.

No, he was Malorossian.

"Ukrainian is NO nationality. There is real Taras Shevchenko's passport in his museum in Kiev and in it it's clearly written: Orthodox Malorossian (aka, Malorussian). Passports of Ivan Franko and Lesia Ukrainka (Kosach) say: Rusin and Rusinka (for Lesia, who's a female). Ivan Franko wrote in hid diary: “Someone bloodily (terribly) insulted me today, they called me Ukrainian! Although everyone knows I am RUSIN.' FYI: before the 1917 Revolution (meaning Lenin's November 1917 Bolshevik coup as a result of which the USSR was formed in 1922) only those who betrayed the Russian Orthodox faith and converted into Greek Catholicism (Uniats). The word 'ukrainian' signified not nationality, but religious association. In the Universal Call to the Cossack World Bogdan Khmelnitsky writes: “I, the hereditary Russian Shliakhtich, hereby command!..”


Polish phase of Ukranisation occurred before 1772. Then the Austrians took over..
Bandera was just a bandit, who used nationalistic ideas as a front for his atrocities.


Yes, I deny that. There are Novorossians, Malorossians, Galicians (Rusins) - and even this is more of a geographic, than national separation. They all have their dialects, but so do people, who live in Moscow and Rostov-on-Don... I can freely read Rusin (Galician) publications from mid 1800, using only my contemporary knowledge of Russian.


You forgot the map with Kievan Rus and Galician Rus from before the Tara-Mongol invasion and the split of those lands... Russia suffered a period of feudal split-up, but it happened and was over much earlier than in the rest of Europe.

By singling out Moskovia, Novgorod and other feudal counties, you commit the same error as those, who single out Galicia, Malorossia, etc. The peope living in those counties were the same, it's the Counts possessing the land, who were different and fighting between themselves.

Russian general Rustam Muratov, who is in Donetsk as a Russian representative in the coordination centre for ceasefire, came under artillery shelling. Shelling lasted for 15-20 minutes, according t Basurin:
https://rns.online/military/Predstavitel-Rossii-v-tsentre-po-kontrolyu-prekrascheniya-ognya-popal-pod-obstrel-v-Donbasse-2016-03-06/?

Exactly. An why would I deny Golodomor - my great-grandmother from Siberia died of hunger in those years, as did a large number of residents of her village.

Ukrainians, trying to monopolise on the right to be the "martyrs", even "Ukranised" the name...

A small linguistic digression: Golodomor (Гoлoдoмop) - translated from Russian, means "mass death from hunger" from "Golod" - "hunger and "Mor" - "mass death". Ukrainisation of it into Holodomor (Xoлoдoмop) sounds absurd as it literally translates as "mass death from freezing", from "Holod" - "cold". It like the case, when Ukranisation turned a "male cat" (Rus: Кoт, Ukr: Кiт) into a "whale" (Russian and Ukrainian: Кит [pronounced: Rus: kit, Ukr: kyt])

To be fair, Stalin is only partially to blame for the deaths of the Russian people from hunger (and I am not separating between Russian from Siberia, Russian from Novorossia, Russian from Malorossia (Galicia was not in USSR at that time, though they now do the most of screaming about "Holodomor")).

The West was as much to blame. After the desolation and the destruction of the Russian industry after the 1917 coup d'etat, Stalin needed to re-industrialise the country. The West refused to sell anything for rouble (even in gold), but would take grain as payment. So it was a choice of dies from hunger or die from an imminent invasion due to weakened industry and defence.

Anyway, I see af_newbie is changing the subject, when he became uncomfortable with the one discussed. A typical logical fallacy.

---

There is an irony connected to Ukrainisation during the Soviet time. When part of Malorossia and Galicia were under Poland, and then Galicia was a part of Austria, both countries conducted Ukranisation of the borderlands to keep control over them and to stop them from looking towards Russia. But in both cases the efforts were quite half-baked and inconsistent. They supported some nationalistic movements, printed some brochures, and that's that.

It was in USSR that Ukranisation took on a massive scale. First, the very state of Ukraine was created (and represented in UN) by USSR, lands that were never a part of the borderland - Novorossia - were given to Ukraine and its residents were forced to adopt the Galician - Ukrainian - dialect. Lenin justified that transfer as a wish to give the new Ukrainian state an industrial base.

The official reason for the massive propaganda-machine-driven Ukranisation: by creating Ukraine they were making all of the nationalistic demands moot. I am not so sure. Lenin, and later Kaganovich, were Russophobes, and there may have been an anti-Russian agenda there. This is supported by the attempts to Latinise Russian and Ukrainian by the Communists in the 1918-1930, by the way Russia was obfuscated on the political arena, by the fact that to conduct the 1917 coup d'etat Lenin recieved funds from the West.

This fruitcake clearly has brain damage

‘Sorry, I’m from Ukraine’: Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko Rejects HRW Report

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/03/sorry-im-from-ukraine-kiev-mayor-vitaly.html

What Holdomor has to do with the Russians? The mastermind behind that was one of your own guys, Genrikh Yagoda. Also, the Holdomor was part of the Soviet famine of 1932-33.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_famine_of_1932%E2%80%9333

The vast majority of those who died were ethnic Russians (especially in Southern Russia and Northern Kazakhstan).

I found The Masks of Revolution on RuTube:

In French:
http://rutube.ru/video/11b2e424f8b8186d2168a66045ac49e4/

Full professional Russian translation (dub + subtitles):
http://rutube.ru/video/ebf657119ed2d3344366cff75c44b9a1/

Alas, not the English version.

Lesson on Geography, Nations, and Cultures: "The Ukrainian territory and its population. Anno 2017". It´s drawing near.

Bryant, when it comes to af_newbie - he is a lost case, a lost generation, who will repeat ad nauseum like a mantra, what he was taught by the Soros-funded schoolbooks in Ukraine, and despite all the historical documented facts staring in his face.

He does not care that, contrary to what he states, Ukanisation reached its peak during Soviet rule - simply because this does not tow the current party line.

To be fair, the map above is too coarse-grained. It does not reflect all the transitions of the lands that are now part of Western Ukraine. How it formed into Galicia Rus after the Tatar-Mongol invasion divided Rus in two, how those lands ended up in Lithuania, then came into Poland as part of the Commonwealth that he mentions, and then to Austria.

Each new master of those lands went out of their ways (with varying degree of success) to convince the local Russian population that they are not Russian. Austrians introduced the term Rusins (Ruthenians) around 1850s to segregate Galician Russians from other Russians.

No one "brought Russians into Ukraine" becase 1) there was no "Ukraine" and 2) Russians were already living there. And despite the hard-pressed Ukranisations, many there still identify themselves as Russians, or a part of the Russian world.

I'll have more on this topic later in a separate post...

Something's a'brewing in Novorossia.

Basurin said yesterday, referring to the intelligence service of the Donetsk Republic, that Ukrainian SBU started door-to-door arrests of residents on the Kiev controlled territories in the style of the 1930 Stalin's arrests of the Nazi German arrests on the occupied territories of the 1941...

In the meantime OCSE general secretary said that the "peace" in Donbass becomes shakier by the minute.

That was quick! Earlier YouTube killed the version with Russian subtitles.

"Ukraine: Les masques de la ..." This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by PREMIÈRES LIGNES TÉLÉVISION.

Ukraine: Les masques de la révolution - Ukraine: Masks of the Revolution. English subtitles

Published on Feb 9, 2016
http://www.geenpeil.nl

Without them, there would have been no Ukrainian revolution.

In February 2014, paramilitary groups fought against the police in the streets of Kyev and ousted President Yanukovych. They settled a new government.

According to western media, they were the revolution heroes. They fought on the right side.

But they are actually extreme-right militias. And they are now heavily armed.

The Right Sector, Azov or Svoboda created parallel irregular forces that easily go out of control. In Odessa, in May 2014, they were responsible for a mass killing without facing any charges. 45 people burnt to death. A massacre that didn’t get much attention.

How come western democracies haven’t raised their voice in protest?

Most likely because these Ukrainian nationalist militias actually played a significant role in a much larger scale war. The Ukrainian revolution was strongly supported by the US diplomacy.

In the new cold war that opposes Russia to the USA, Ukraine is a decisive pawn. A tactical pawn to contain Putin’s ambitions.

“Ukraine, masks of the revolution” by Paul Moreira sheds light on this blind corner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_6zoNweKII

The Ukraine of 1772 is different from the Ukraine of today. Only the present-day central Ukraine was there in the Ukraine of 1772. The Western parts were added during the WW2, and the Eastern parts were added in 1918. Eastern Ukrainians have nothing to do with Western Ukrainians. They are more similar to the Russians than they are to the Westerners. Refer the maps below for more details:

You are mixing two concepts: "propaganda" and "lies". One does not need to be equivalent to the other. In fact, while propaganda based on lies has the biggest here-and-now effect, due to sensationalism; propaganda, based on truth has a longer-lasting, calmer effect.

Of course propaganda is used in Russia, but it's the question of what information is used and how it is presented.

---

Sorry for shattering the brown-tinged imaginary reality created by Soros and co in the studios of CNN, Hollywood and BBC, but this must be done for the sake of the humanity in general. People who forget their history and let it get perverted, stop being people and become sheeple in the hands of the interested parties, as was aptly demonstrated in Ukraine over the last 20+ years. Me? I'm like a Pratchett's history monk - observing the history and keeping the records strait...

Those who brought Hitler's "lebensraum" into the discussion (despite the argument being wrong on so many levels) actually did a service to me. Thank you. You managed to draw attention to one fact that you are so studiously trying to ignore:

People in Novorossia (and some extent, in Malorossia) have been voting with their feet - in addition to the referendum held in Novorossia in 2014.

When Hitler invaded USSR, the only ones, who willingly moved in the Western direction and joined the invaders were either traitors, like Vlasov or outright bandits, like Bandera. Those, who couldn't fight the invasion, fled deeper into Russia.

In 2014, 2015 a different ilk of Nazis came and now, as in 1941, those, who could not stay and hold their ground, fled deeper into Russia - 3 million of them, predominantly women, elderly and children.

Bringing some reality to you delusional russians.

How can you people believe an ex kgb agent would not lie and use propaganda.
Im in lost of my words.

What's that supposed to mean? And what is the point of your public fap session here?

Completely invalid argument.  When Hitler moved East, he replaced the local population - killing it - with the Germans. 17 million Soviet citizens is the death toll of that expansion. Crimea returned after an illegal annexation to Ukraine (1954). Same with Novorossia (1922). I presume you never set foot there, or the locals would have shared a piece of their mind with you. Violently.

I don't think af_newbie and criptix can be helped. And no, Russia does not need to revise history - on the contrary, Russia foils the attempts of history revisions. The following is a historical essay for those, not blinded by hate and willing to think for themselves.

---

How Malorossia Was Turned into the Patch-quilt of Discord that is “Ukraine”
http://stanislavs.org/how-malorossia-was-turned-into-the-patch-quilt-of-discord-that-is-ukraine/

I am currently translating a larger documentary. Here I will present two fragments of the translated script, along with two still images, illustrating the points made there.:

What is “Ukraine”, “Ukrainian”?

    The revolt, headed by Bogdan Hmelnitsky started in 1648. After 6 years of war, in 1654, Periaslav Rada was signed. This is a document about reunification with the Moskovy State of a part of Western Rus, including Kiev and the territories of Zaporozhje county. It was signed by Czar Aleksei Mikhailovich Romanov.

    My the way, the phrase “reunification of Ukraine with Russia” appeared first in the Soviet history texts in 1920s.
    The historians knew perfectly well that in 1654 there was simply no such country as “Ukraine”. Those territories were called Malorossia. While the words “Ukraine” – Ukraina (slight difference in stress here, both words are the same) was used in Poland and Russia about borderlands. For Poles it is the lands of the middle Dnepr – the central regions of the modern Ukraine.

    Anna Razhny:
    In Polish it is called “pugraniche”. It’s the border in the cultural, national, political, even historical meaning. Ukraina meant for Rech Pospolitaja a far away border, a territory, where different ethnos could live. In this context Ukraina no longer exists in the present time.

    For Moscow, on the other hand, at one time Ukraina meant Tula, Kashira, Serpuhov – that was the Oka-river Ukraina – the border with the territories, from where nomads came.

    The word “Ukrainian” in the Russian language of that time, is a profession – a border guard (or someone, who lives on the border). While a resident of Kiev or Poltava was called a Malorossian.



Still frame above is a fragment of a dictionary entry. Judging by the revision of the Russian alphabet used, specifically by the letter “Ѧ”, this is a text from before the 1710 language reform of Peter I. The example usages are from Ivan the Formidable's texts of 1503. Here is a translation taking the pronunciation into account:

    Ukrain’nik (Укpaиньникъ) – Noun, a resident of a border territory.
    Ukrain’nyi (Укpaиньныи) – Adjective, as in “Ukain’nyi baron” – governor of a border territory.
    Ukrainjanin (УкpaинѦнинъ) – Noun, a resident of a border territory.

---

How and when did the term “Ukraine” as a national designation appear?

    Ultimately Poland ceased to exist in 1795, when the large states performed the third division of the Polish lands.
    Galicia, Zakarpatie (Transcarpathia) and Bukovina, populated by Russians, or as it was said then – Rusins (Ruthenians), came under Austrai-Hungary, while almost all of the Kievan Rus territories were taken by the Russian Empire.

    That is how a large portion of the Polish population ended up in the Russian Empire.

    The Poles are, of course, dreaming about resurrection of their beloved Poland – Rech Pospolitaja, and what is more, in the wider borders as they were before the partitioning.

    All their ire and hatred is directed at Russia. The idea is like this: sow separatism on those lands, tear them away from Russia, announce that the people there are not Russian, but close to Poles.

    In 1795 the Polish writer and historian Jan Potocki published historically-geographical fragments about Scythia, Sarmatia and Slavs. In that work, for the first time, Russians of Malorossia were called “Ukrainians”, a separate people, descendants of the Scythian tribe of Sarmatians.

    Potocki’s idea was very simple in its design: If Malorossian “Ukrainians” have nothing in common with Russians; if Malorossian “Ukrainians” is a separate people with its separate culture and history, then it follows that also Russia has no historical rights on the lands West for Dnieper, including Kiev. Then it follows that there is not gathering of Russian lands. It follows then that Russia annexed and occupied Malorossia/Ukraine.

    Potocki’s propaganda was first and foremost directed at the Western reader, who traditionally had a very vague idea what is Malorossia, Raussia, Kiev, and where all this is found.

    Pavel Kuzenkov:
    We see very clearly how neighbours were calling these “Ukrainians”. Up until 20th century they were called Rus. Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Romanians, all who surrounded this territory, never were in doubt that what starts from Transcarpathia is “Rus”.

    But it was the Polish publicists, who by the beginning of the 19th century turn a topographic term “Ukraina” into a name of a country. In 1801 the Polish bibliophile and publicist Tadeusz Czadzki published his work “About the name of Ukraine and the birth of Cossacks”. It was a new phase in forming of Ukranianism as an ideology. Tadeusz Czadzki further distinguished that Ukrainian Malorossians are not Russians, rather they are different people.
    Czadzki started the history of Ukrainians from the horde of the “Ancient Ukros”, who according to him moved in the 7th century from somewhere in Urals, across Volga to the Drepr river. The fact that neither the Polish nor the Russian chronicles ever mentioned any “Ukros”, didn’t in the least bother Czadzki.

    These theories may have remained as brain games of the intellectuals, if not for one “but”. Czar Alexander I, a liberal pro-Westerner, favoured the Polish nobility, considered it to be more educated and well-mannered, than Russian. During Alexander’s reign, Poles played an important role at the court, in the Academy. The Imperial Foreign Ministry was headed by an ardent russophobe Adam Czartoryski, and with his support the Poles got full control of the education system in Malorossia.

    Czartoryski’s close ally was a priest and historian Valerian Kalinka, who wrote about Malorossia thusly: “This land is lost for Poland, but we must do it so, that it becomes lost for Russia too.”



The still frame above is a definition of “Ukraina”. Judging by the alphabet, and specifically the usage of the Latin letter “i” this text comes after the 1738 language reform of Peter I, when usage of double-dotted “ї” before vocals was abolished (single-dotted and double-dotted “i” and “ї” is what distinguished present day “Ukrainian” from Russian).

The beginning of the text translates as follows:

    “Ukraina – thus were called the South-Western Russian lands of Rech Pospolitaja. This name was never official, it was used only in private conversations and became common in folk poetry. It is difficult to define the boundaries of the lands, known as “ukrainnyi”, more so that this name was not permanent and at different times covered varying stretches of land…

---

Recently, some of the Western-bread ultra-nationalists took up Tadeusz Czadzki’s segregation banner to a new low and started saying that Ukrainians and Russians are different people genetically, stating that Russians are not even Slavs… This propaganda was shot down in 2014 by a respectable study. I first learnt about it from the editorial column of Argumenty i Fakty. Here is a translated text of that note:

    It was initially clear for any reasonable person that Ukrainians and Russians are brothers.

    The recent massive and authoritative scientifically research proved: Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians do not differ from each other genetically.

    Let’s say it at once: the scientists studied the DNA of the Ukrainians on the basis of the genetic material of the inhabitants of the western regions of the country, namely, the city of Lvov, with which we markedly differ in language and culture. But, as it turns out, not the origin. Thereby the allegations of the Ukrainian nationalists, who say that Russians, having moved from the territory of modern Ukraine, have so much mixed up with the Mongoloid race, and that they stopped being Slavs, is completely debunked.

    However, as it was initially clear for any sensible person: Ukrainians and Russians are brothers. And let the borders, ideology, economic disputes divide us now – this is largely a consequence of the geopolitical game of Western politicians, who have managed to embroil us with each other. One just wants to exclaim along with the character of Kipling: “We are of the same blood!” But now, alas, we are unlikely to be heard hear – until someone (both inside Ukraine and abroad) harvest their own political dividends from our “brotherly spats”.

---

Full text of the above (there is more!) here:
http://stanislavs.org/how-malorossia-was-turned-into-the-patch-quilt-of-discord-that-is-ukraine/

Ukraine is only a few months away from complete disintegration and collapse. The national debt is about to cross 100% of the GDP, unemployment is at all time highs, and the inflation is in double digits. The Hryvnia is becoming less valuable than the toilet paper. 3 million Ukrainians have fled to Russia, and more than a million have fled to the European Union. The end is coming soon....

I heard that Yatsenyuk´s approval rating is zero per cent and that of Poroshenko slightly higher. How long is this mess supposed to last? Not even the nutballs who manhandled these characters into power seem to like them anymore.

Are these Lugansk people out of their minds? The Kiev Nazis have detained thousands of Russian speaking civilians from the Kiev-controlled area of Donbass, accusing them of helping the rebels. A simple Facebook post is enough to get detained by the Nazis. And while these civilians are languishing in the Ukrainian torture camps, the Lugansk guys are conducting a prisoner swap, where the numbers are favoring Ukraine. Abhorrent!