Most MSM, AI LLM trained on shit, resources online point to the fake narrative that ukraine (the borderlands, formerly wild lands or dikoe pole) has some kind of lineage tied to Kievan Rus and that it was not entirely a fabrication by the USSR. It is a fake nation that speaks a russian dialect and fabricated its own history and identity. Give me books to prove this right because it is the truth, give me books and resources, english russian whatever,(USER WAS WARNED FOR THIS POST)
What the hell? How is Ukrainian identity "fake" any more than any other ethnic or national identity?
Котле́та по-ки́ївськи. In seriousness, Crimea is the home of the Tatars, Donetsk was founded by a Welshman, and Lugansk was built by an Englishman.
Ergo neither Russian nor Ukrainian has any right to the land, fuck your anti-Communistic bourgeois nationalistic war, fuck the Nazis on both sides and that includes YOU, OP.
May the workers on all sides either lay down their arms or turn them on their capitalist masters.
>>2514422Piss off Zigger.
You don't need to dig through books, just historical maps, for example look up how Odessa was founded
A nation is primarily a community, a definite community of people.
This community is not racial, nor is it tribal. The modern Italian nation was formed from Romans, Teutons, Etruscans, Greeks, Arabs, and so forth. The French nation was formed from Gauls, Romans, Britons, Teutons, and so on. The same must be said of the British, the Germans and others, who were formed into nations from people of diverse races and tribes.
Thus, a nation is not a racial or tribal, but a historically constituted community of people.
On the other hand, it is unquestionable that the great empires of Cyrus and Alexander could not be called nations, although they came to be constituted historically and were formed out of different tribes and races. They were not nations, but casual and loosely-connected conglomerations of groups, which fell apart or joined together according to the victories or defeats of this or that conqueror.
Thus, a nation is not a casual or ephemeral conglomeration, but a stable community of people.
>>2514422i dont remember sources but in my research its real. ukrainians were russian peasants that moved into polish cities while russia and poland were trading territory back and forth during ongoing urbanization. the aristocracy spoke polish and the workers russian but also some of them were polish immigrants so commerce ended up being done a hybrid of both and after a few hundred years it became a distinct entity.
this makes it a historically constituted community of people with a common language territory economic life and psychological makup. it may seem like they aren't because theres so much russian influence and the languages are similar, which is very different than something like kazakhistan or estonia, but if ukraine isn't a nation then neither is belarus or moldova
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm >>2514422Look up Ukrainian's people republic, it preceded the soviet republic
>>2514449A nation state is an arbitrary political demarcation of territory. Nationalism and nation states are a rather recent phenomenon that began in the 18th century when various European powers began declaring themselves nation states and defining their national identities by some arbitrary set of ethnic/linguistic/religious standards and drawing new lines on all the maps.
>ethnostate shit
Never change
The dictionary definition of nation is "a group of people united by common descent, language, or culture." but you can see the problems with this 18th century idea still being used in the modern era where people move around the world much more freely than they did in the 18th century. Nations have populations composed of immigrants from all over the world and the cultural demographics of these nations bear little resemblance to what they were when they first declared themselves be nations, to the point where it's now considered rude to even imply that someone's heritage has any bearing on their nationality. Maybe it's time to retire the word "nation" and come up with something else.
>>2514499The main thing constituting a nation is not spooks like descent or culture, but a common language, history and economic activity among the population. NAF
>>2514465And it was a German/Austro-Hungarian puppet state
>>2514499I think rejecting the entire concept is way too far. There are many situations in which we realise that our original conception of something is flawed, but never should it mean pretending it doesn't exist. Similar logic is applied to gender where people, once they realise that gender isnt some objective biological fact, leap to an equally rediculous idea that gender "doesn't exist".
Nations exist and national rights also should be protected. A country is not just a random arbitrary line drawn in the earth. These things matter, even beyond the interests of the nation state. America (and so too in the past the Soviet Union) is a nation that doesn't represent ethnic continuity but still contains the national idea. When we say that immigrants count as American, we are saying that they are capable of embodying that same idea.
Ukrainian nationalism was created by German and Austro-Hungarian imperialists to create an artifical rupture in Russia. Hence why each "independent" Ukraine has only ever been a German client regime.
>>2514508The origin of a thing is but one facet of it. More relevant is the nature (especially the material reality) of Ukrainian nationalism today, which is tied to fascism and certainly represents the regressive end of global politics. Ukrainian nationalists are on the side of imperialism
>>2514507
>doesn't represent ethnic continuity but still contains the national idea>the national ideaAnd what is the idea of America? Is there a unanimous agreement on what America is supposed to be? It seems to me like, national identity is defined entirely by whichever political party happens to be in charge at the time.
>>2514511I dont think the nature of a thing to change destroys or precludes it
Furthermore, the whole idea of a homogenous-cultured nation state is a historical fiction to begin with - these nations were all multicultural regions from day one with a bunch of completely different languages and customs, they just decided that one of the languages is now "the national language" and some of the cultures are now considered part of "our nation" and everyone else is not.
>>2514506Yes ? Shows the soviet didn't make it up, and the fact that the soviets kept it shows that Germans didn't make it up either, it's fairly clear that amongst the people of Ukraine, even at that time, they felt they had a seperate national identity, obviously the Germans used this against the Russians to further their interests but it doesn't mean that no one called themselves Ukrainians before 1918, obviousmly saying that Ukrainian indentity existed in the Kievan Rus is nonsense, but so it saying that Russian identity existed back then as well, nationalism was only born in the 18th century with the French Revolution, and even being generous, you can only date it to the end of the middle ages with Joan of Arc.
>>2514504>The main thing constituting a nation is not spooks like descent or culture, but a common language, history and economic activity among the population. NAFThe Vatican City is a nation. The Confederate States of America was a nation for a few years then it wasn't. Texas used to be a nation called Mexico then it became a nation called Texas then it became part of the US, then the Confederacy, then the US again, and to this day they still complain about there being too many Mexicans there and can't decide if they want to be another new nation or not. It's arbitrary.
>>2514528thats why its not just language. nations form because of capitalism which is why a common economic life is one of the criteria. this defines a nation as something with a definite historical continuity, as stalin says a historically constituted community of people
>>2514499>18th century ideanations are real economic entities and the basis for both global capitalism and its sublation by international communism. you cant just declare nations to be over without overcoming the mode of production that reproduces them
>>2514545Those are states. A nation is a group of people. For example the UKKK is a state while Wales is a nation that currently does not have a state because it has been subsumed within the wicked monarchical UKKK
>>2514569is england a nation?
>>2514572English are kkkrakkka kkkolonizer$ so no. Welsh are bipoc. The British Isles belong to the indigenous Celts, read Gonzalo.
Just to be clear, despite my belief that nations are arbitrary political demarcations dreamed up by European racists in the 1700s, I think Ukraine has just as much of a right to be an arbitrary political demarcation as Russia does.
I can link to an article from 1881 from Kremenets in what is today "Western Ukraine" about reactions of many locals to the "ukrainophile" movement out of which "Ukraine" came to be. In short, most locals identified themselves to be Russian and weren't enthusiastic about "Ukrainian" identity. It all changed after the Civil War and "Ukrainization" started by Lenin and continued by Stalin for some time (but then stopped and reversed in some places).
Article link:
https://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/Украйнофильство_с_его_затеями_о_двутекстных_учебниках_(Гогоцкий)(naturally, you have to know Russian or use translator software. I'd recommend to use some offline translator to not get marked by NSA or something like that)
Украина: выбор веры, выбор судьбы. Двадцать лет независимости Украины – двадцать лет борьбы за единство Русской Церкви. – СПб.: Алетейя, 2011. – 232 с.: ил. ISBN 978-5-91419-563-9
^has some important facts on the subject.
The USSR died a long time ago and Russia's former territiorial conquests are long gone. Russia has long since expended their enormous Cold War munitions reserves and have not even come close to defeating Ukraine's military and taking the country. And taking the country is only step one - even if Russians manage to do that and occupy the whole country, there's still about 38 million Ukrainians and 90% of them now vehemently hate Russia because of the war and they're not going to sit quietly while Russians occupy their country. Imagine the US trying to hold Iraq, but worse because the Ukraine is a much more developed country with a highly educated population who have significantly greater numbers and resources and weaponry than the insurgents the US military did battle with trying to hold onto Baghdad, and Ukrainian resistance groups will likely receive continued arms and support from NATO; the war simply goes from being a costly symmetric war of attrition between Russian and Ukrainian militaries to a costly assymetric war of attrition with resistance factions indistinguishable from the civilian population engaging in urban guerilla warfare, something Russian troops are probably not prepared for. It will drag on for years and years, Russia desperately trying and failing to maintain civil order across a huge modern industrial nation full of millions of pissed off heavily-armed citizenry who want them dead and have nothing to lose, a good portion of them probably ex-military. No matter how you slice it, this thing is unwinnable for Russia.
>>2543484Keep dreaming nafoid
>>2543484cool headcanon reddit, except most ukrainians don't care for their corrupt regime and have to be forcibly recrooted from the streets
It's quite funny to see Russians complain about the non existence of other nations while their defining national trait is historically being the prison of the nations they conquered, colonized and genocided. A tsarist policy the neoliberal shock therapists like Yeltsin and Putin didn't take much time to get back to.
>>2543518that must have sounded very profound in your head
>>2543502If Ukrainians don't give a fuck about the Ukrainian government and Ukraine, why do they keep struggling?
An army that has only kidnapped people instead of soldiers isn't able to do anything. So why hasn't the front line collapsed yet?
>>2514578shut up you commie pidoras
>>2543484damn dude nearly every single point you made is false
>>2514422If anything Russia is a completely artificial state with Moscow ruling its colonies.
another great post on nationalistpol dot org
All nations are imagined Anon.
>>2546152Bullshit. Nations are an objective reality, do tell me - are modes of production also just imagined? If you answer with "yes" you might as well throw all your historical materialism out the window.
>>2546341No because it's an objective reality whether you're engaged in productive labour or appropriating a surplus. Its not an objective reality whether a German speaker is German or Austrian, it's a question of how they and their community identifies. Nations exist entirely within a society's superstructure, class does not.
>>2546355>Nations exist entirely within a society's superstructure, class does not.Anybody who disagrees with this is not a Marxist
>>2546341>Nations are an objective realityhow do we scientifically determine where nations begin and end?
>>2546341>Nations are an objective reality,This should be a bannable offence.
>>2546405Your mom should be a bannable offense
>>2546403I guess most here would agree with Stalin's definition, as it is the most clear and most common, whereas Rosa's and Lenin's definitions are a bit wobbly. Of course non-Marxists provide some useful ones as well.
>>2546355It's not an objective reality whether a German speaker is German or Austrian
Did you seriously think I meant nations by geopolitical borders? Borders that, especially in formerly colonized areas, where drawn with a ruler on a map through entire nations and tribes?
Language, as you mentioned, is very much grounded in materialism. There is a reason why many Marxists spent so much on writing about linguistics. And language is one of the most defining features of a nation, and as we know today, speaking a language also influences your psychological make-up, influences the way you think.
>No because it's an objective reality whether you're engaged in productive labour or appropriating a surplus.Economics isn't the only objective reality that exists lol. I cannot say that I identify as a Swahili but I've never even been to East Africa, don't speak a word Swahili and don't know a single Swahili speaker.
The relations of production are also "made up", following your logic, they are property relations written down in bourgeois law codes. Following your logic, the commodity fetish also "isn't real" because these goods don't actually have an imbued value, it's a fetish that ascribes life to a dead object; yet we can not escape it because
we live in a society, so it's material.
Again, you may as well denounce historical materialism and become a Stirneroid.
>>2546424>I cannot say that I identify as a Swahili but I've never even been to East Africa, don't speak a word Swahili and don't know a single Swahili speaker. Yes but if you were accepted as Swahili by the bulk of others who identify as such, then you would effectively become one. This is exactly how people become Americans after immigrating.
>The relations of production are also "made up", following your logic, they are property relations written down in bourgeois law codes.You're conflated relations of production with their codification. It's not a question of laws or subjectivity when one person works in the field and the other sits in the plantation house. That's the stark factual reality.
>>2546424It's the material reality that affects language, not the reverse, France has a gendered language and Hungary doesn't, but French people are on an average less sexist then Hungarians. Clearly Language has no impact on the relations between the two sexes.
>>2546341If nations materially exist then why doen't China simply buy up all the nationium so they're the only nation left? Why are they accepting money as payment rather than bartering for nationium?
>>2514422There is no way to reject Ukraine's claim to nationhood that does not explicitly reject Lenin and Stalin's revolutionary understanding of the national question.
>entirely a fabrication by the USSRTo do what, precisely? Are you going to regurgitate the fascist lie of Yeltsin and others that Russians were "oppressed" in the USSR?
>speaks a russian dialectWhether Ukrainian is a dialect or not is irrelevant to its status as a nation. The stipulation is for a shared language, not a unique language. Jamaicans speak their own dialect of English, does this mean they are not really a nation, but part of the English nation?
>fabricated its own historyIn what regard? Were Ukrainian historians in the Soviet period really liars and fascists?
>fabricated its own… identityAll nations have gone through an intentional process of nation-building and development of national identity. Nobody is born knowing that they are part of any nation, it is something that is consciously taught and formed. Part of national liberation/independence struggle is promoting an independent national identity in opposition to the dominant nation. Modern examples of this are the militant nation-building efforts of Palestinians worldwide and New Afrikans within the United States.
>>2543502>most ukrainians don't care for their corrupt regimeUkrainians not supporting the fascist NATO-aligned regime does not mean that they are primed to accept Russian rule or a Russia-aligned regime.
>have to be forcibly recrooted from the streetsA state of affairs that also provably exists in Russia, and again, not wanting to die in war does not mean supporting defeat on either side. Ukrainians who don't want to go to war don't necessarily support Russia, and Russians who don't want to go to war don't necessarily support NATO.
Ukrainian nationalism is as real as any other's in west Ukraine. The intrigue here is to see how the CIA worked with groups like the OUN-B for decades to radicalize the nationalism and spread it eastward. I doubt there are many books on this topic but blogs like Events in Ukraine touch on this sometimes.
>>2547525It was fabricated by German, Austrian, and Hungarian imperialists to fragment the Russian Empire, not the Bolsheviks. Ukraine is basically like how Americans pushed a Taiwanese national identity, or how the Japanese pushed a Manchurian national identity to fragment China. "Ukraine" was just a puppet state imposed on Russia by foreign powers, with a constructed anti-Russian national identity to force it.
Although the Bolsheviks did come to accept it because of the absurd amount of influence the SPD had on early Bolshevik policies, even when they became openly revisionist, the Bolsheviks still accepted their national policy about things like Ukraine.
>>2547525>Ukrainians not supporting the fascist NATO-aligned regime does not mean that they are primed to accept Russian rule or a Russia-aligned regime.The Soviet Union never, ever,
ever, tolerated the idea of a Ukraine pushing against Russia. They always celebrated the Pereyaslav Agreement. Ukraine even as a "separate identity" is only one that would have to be within the Russian sphere, the only way it could ever reject Russia as its center of development would be if it became nothing more than a dog of German imperial strategy against Russia, as HAS BEEN PROVEN HISTORICALLY.
>>2547662You don't "fabricate" a national identity, it forms trought out history for various different reasons, now obviously, political actors use it and it can be supported by various geopolitical actors for different reasons.
Sure, Taiwanese independance is supported by the USA, but there is also an undeniable factor of local support by parts of the population as a result of decades of different rule and history between the PRC and the Taiwanese Island.
As for Manchuria, Japan used the basis of a historical Manchu population, the same one that Puyi originated from to try to create a puppet state to divide China, sure the Manchu were a minority in this Manchuria, but they still existed nonetheless. States are fabricated, nationalities aren't, they're a representation the population of an area has upon itself.
As for Ukraine, while the Central powers did support Ukrainian nationalism in the Russian empire during WW1, this nationalism predates WW1, and Russo-German tensions, the Ukrainophile mouvement dates back from the 1860s, they were generally opposed to Both Austria and Russia and supported a union with Poland and Lithuania.
>>2547796The thing that people need to understand is that just declaring a nationality "fake" does absolutely nothing to loosen its grip on the consciousness of a population. Even if it could be proven beyond a doubt that the word "Ukrainian" didn't exist before it was fabricated by a bunch of German glowies in 1918, it wouldn't make one iota of difference for the situation there. Ukrainian nationhood has become a reality insofar as the vast majority of Ukrainians subscribe to it and make it a political fact.
>>2547856So should Communists also support Israeli and Taiwanese nationalism, just because it has been made a fact?
>>2547868Communists are against nationalism
>>2547525>There is no way to reject Ukraine's claim to nationhood that does not explicitly reject Lenin and Stalin's revolutionary understanding of the national question. The USSR being destroyed because of nationalism is a huge indication they were wrong about the national question.
>>2547872Wrong. Communists are nationalists, and are the most patriotic of nationalists.
>>2547879Retarded analogies about geopolitics like this is the hallmark of the pseud.
>>2547879No idea what you are trying to argue here. Maybe you should address what I said directly?
>>2547889<The class-conscious workers fight hard against every kind of nationalism, both the crude, violent, Black Hundred nationalism, and that most refined nationalism which preaches the equality of nations together with … the splitting up of the workers’ cause, the workers’ organisations and the working-class movement according to nationality. Unlike all the varieties of the nationalist bourgeoisie, the class conscious workers, carrying out the decisions of the recent (summer 1913) conference of the Marxists, stand, not only for the most complete, consistent and fully applied equality of nations and languages, but also for the amalgamation of the workers of the different nationalities in united proletarian organisations of every kind. >>2547964huh i wonder what was hapening in 1914 that made him write that
<The whole task of the proletarians in the national question is “unpractical” from the standpoint of the nationalist bourgeoisie of every nation, because the proletarians, opposed as they are to nationalism of every kind, demand “abstract” equality; they demand, as a matter of principle, that there should be no privileges, however slight. Failing to grasp this, Rosa Luxemburg, by her misguided eulogy of practicality, has opened the door wide for the opportunists, and especially for opportunist concessions to Great-Russian nationalism[…]<Carried away by the struggle against nationalism in Poland, Rosa Luxemburg has forgotten the nationalism of the Great Russians, although it is this nationalism that is the most formidable at the present time. It is a nationalism that is mere feudal than bourgeois, and is the principal obstacle to democracy and to the proletarian struggle. The bourgeois nationalism of any oppressed nation has a general democratic content that is directed against oppression, and it is this content that we unconditionally support, At the same time we strictly distinguish it from the tendency towards national exclusiveness; we fight against the tendency of the Polish bourgeois to oppress the Jews, etc., etc. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/self-det/ch04.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/bio/media/marx/79_01_05.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htmhttps://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/liu-shaoqi/1952/internationalism_nationalism/ch05.htm >>2547525Based Analysis Comrade MaoAnon, anyone who denies the existence of Nations is a Dumb Liberal Idealist Anarchist Western “Leftist” who believes Socialism is a Hippie Commune and who rejects the legacy of the USSR and Maoist China, as Real Communists (Marxist-Leninist-Maoists) embrace Stalin’s definition of the Nation as “a historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture” and uphold the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist principle of Self-Determination of all Oppressed Nations in their own SSR as articulated in Stalin’s “Marxism and the National Question”
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1913/03a.htm and Lenin’s “The Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination”
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jan/x01.htm , along with the National Delimitation Policy of the USSR
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_delimitation_in_the_Soviet_Union , which means that after World War III escalates into a Global Nuclear War that destroys the entire Global Capitalist-Imperialist System and allows for a World Maoist PPW to create a Global USSR that will place the Workers and Oppressed Nations of the World on the Shining Path to Communism, every Nation/Ethnic group will be given their own SSR, as shown in my Map of all of the SSRs and SFSRs of the future Global USSR, ✊😜🇨🇳🇰🇵🇨🇺🇵🇸🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️🚀☢️!
>>2548249So communists wouldn't support Taiwanese nationalism but would support Palestinian nationalism.
><Our reply to thisTo what?
<By supporting the right to secession, we are told, you are supporting the bourgeois nationalism of the oppressed nations. This is what Rosa Luxemburg saysThe right to secession
<If, in our political agitation, we fail to advance and advocate the slogan of the right to secession, we shall play into the hands, not only of the bourgeoisie, but also of the feudal landlords and the absolutism of the oppressor nation. Kautsky long ago used this argument against Rosa Luxemburg, and the argument is indisputable. When, in her anxiety not to “assist” the nationalist bourgeoisie of Poland, Rosa Luxemburg rejects the right to secession in the programme of the Marxists in Russia, she is in fact assisting the Great-Russian Black Hundreds.
>Communists are against nationalismno, they are in principle for self determination of peoples self organized into nations, however
<The recognition of the right to secession for all; the appraisal of each concrete question of secession from the point of view of removing all inequality, all privileges, and all exclusiveness. it is not a dogma, and must be evaluated according to the specific historical material conditions
>What is the lesson to be drawn from this concrete example which must he analysed concretely if there is any desire to be true to Marxism? Only this: (1) that the interests of the liberation of a number of big and very big nations in Europe rate higher than the interests of the movement for liberation of small nations; (2) that the demand for democracy must not be considered in isolation but on a European—today we should say a world—scale.
>That is all there is to it. There is no hint of any repudiation of that elementary socialist principle which the Poles forget but to which Marx was always faithful—that no nation can be free if it oppresses other nations. If tile concrete situation which confronted Marx when tsarism dominated international politics were to repeat itself, for instance, in the form of a few nations starting a socialist revolution (as a bourgeois-democratic revolution was started in Europe in 1848), and other nations serving as the chief bulwarks of bourgeois reaction—then me too would have to be in favour of a revolutionary war against the latter, in favour of “crushing” them, in favour of destroying all their outposts, no matter what small-nation movements arose in them. Consequently, instead of rejecting any examples of Marx’s tactics—this would mean professing Marxism while abandoning it in practice—we must analyse them concretely and draw invaluable lessons for the future. The several demands of democracy, including self-determination, are not an absolute, but only a small part of the general-democratic (now: general-socialist) world movement. In individual concrete casts, the part may contradict the whole; if so, it must be rejected. It is possible that the republican movement in one country may be merely an instrument of the clerical or financial-monarchist intrigues of other countries; if so, we must not support this particular, concrete movement, but it would be ridiculous to delete the demand for a republic from the programme of international Social-Democracy on these grounds. https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/jul/x01.htm >>2548271>but would support Palestinian nationalism. No they wouldn't, communists oppose nationalism, but the palestinian nationalism content of struggling against Israeli oppression would be.
>>2514455Once the bulk of Russia's regular army is neutralized in Ukraine the PLA will storm Siberia with little to no opposition
Max Stirner talked about the fabrication of all national identities
What do you mean by fabrication? Leninist nationalist theory say rural folk moves to urban centers and becomes majority, primary culture. So, ukrainian speaking peasants outnumbered russian speaking minority. But this is how things were going in the beginning of 20th century, what happened next was everybody adopting metropolian culture which happen to be russian culture, so by the end of 20th century ukraine has mostly russian population with some rednecks speaking russo-ukrainian surzhyk and western ukrainian minority mostly speaking ukrainian like they historically always did
Unique IPs: 40