/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

It's on the far far east of Siberia.

By the time it was made all the bundists that would be interested were dead I think. I don’t think the Bolsheviks and the Bund even had good relations.

It was created after the Zionist project in Palestine was already in full swing. Maybe if it was created before then as a refuge for Jews it could have worked but by the time of it's creation Zionist ideology was already widespread making it meaningless.

>>2769609
It doesn't have infinite money from America. That's why most Jews decided to move there.

Why would Jews want to move to the far corner of Siberia, land that means nothing to them and where none of them have ever had a significant presence? Seems like Stalin wanted them there to get them out of the way.

>>2769643
It also had the use of developing the land there by sending in colonists

Who the hell wants to live all the way over there?

>>2769609
>What happened?
You can't be this retarded… they moved to Israel.

>>2769643
Stalin forced the jews into the JAO so forcefully that barely anybody actually went there

>>2769640
>Jewish population transfers to JAO
Is this motherfucker talking about Jews moving from territory about to be occupied by Nazi Germany in WWII to JAO???? What the fuck else could he be talking about

Do tankies really believe mass-deporting all the world's Jews into this fucking shithole of a territory is the way to solve the "JQ"?

>hey guize, once we destroy isn'treal we'll just round up all da jooooz and dump them in the JAO!"

Why would you move to the middle of nowhere when you're already enjoying an unprecedented amount of emancipation in the Soviet Union, especially compared to the other Eastern European Jews.

>>2769673
If Kulaks deserved deportation to Siberia (they did) so do Israeli Jews and their benefactors abroad tbh

>>2769679
"Deserved" doesn't mean much if we're talking about actual possible outcomes. "Deserved" means in your fantasy.

>>2769640
booo hooo cry me a river, considering how mask off jews are in israel, i would have just got rid of them

>>2769668
if that was remotely true,there would be a significant number of them living there
"so forced they resisted harder !" is a meme,every event in history where people were forcibly moved,they were moved

>>2769682
>>2769673
>tankies
>muh deportation
deportations saved most of their lives btw but you are right they should have just handed them over to the german collaborators

>>2769684
Good thing you have no ability to make these decisions.

Why not move them all to the historic places they lived in Poland?

>>2769686
Holy autism

As others have pointed out, nobody wanted to move to some random buttfuck nowhere in Siberia. Palestine had the appeal of being both the mythological homeland of the Jewish people and situated at a major civilizational crossroads, and in one of the world's most pleasant environments no less. They should have either chosen a more desirable location in the USSR like somewhere on the Black or Caspian Sea, or turned East Prussia into a Jewish socialist state. In the latter case it would have been far easier to justify removing the local German population (millions of Germans were already being deported to the new German borders, plus nobody felt bad for them for obvious reasons), plus it would have been a familiar environment for most European Jews.

>>2769833
Except that "East Prussia" is naturally Slavic territory, not Jewish territory. It was the Slavs who tilled the land prior to German settler-colonialism in the 12th century. What would be the purpose of the expulsion of the Germans if the restoration of its rightful owners was put off onto Jewish owners?

>>2769839
Jews are slavs

>>2769840
East-Prussia-Israel would be a Yiddish-speaking state, ie, a German-speaking state.

>>2769839
>Except that "East Prussia" is naturally Slavic territory
No territory is naturally anything, and that line of thinking is precisely the basis of Zionism. The majority of residents of East Prussia were Germans, that's who would have been displaced to make way for Jewish state there.

>>2769845
>No territory is naturally anything
Just as Israel is and can only ever be a militarist anti-Arab state, "East Prussia" was and could only ever be a militarist anti-Slavic state, as it was jutting in like a knife deep into Slavic territory while being an outpost of German civilization. It forever had to be a military outpost to secure itself, like how Israel jutts into the Arab world as a knife of Atlantic Civilization and thus must be a military outpost.

>>2769850
>Just as Israel is and can only ever be a militarist anti-Arab state, "East Prussia" was and could only ever be a militarist anti-Slavic state
By that logic all of Europe could only ever be a militarist anti-Basque state since Basques are the only actually Indigenous people in Europe, with the rest being Indo-European colonizers. Also, all Slavs should relocate to from Asian Russia and the former USSR to European Russia. This is nonsense reasoning. Territory changes hands constantly, populations split, mix, split again. You might as well start measuring skulls and mapping halpogroups of you're just going to reproduce the logic of Nazis and Zionists.

>>2769853
Basques are not a civilization, European civilizations emerge with the Indo-European languages for the most part.
Also how original, the Soviets were just like the Nazis! The most effective anti-Nazi state were just Nazis, too!
I'm describing Marxism as it was understood in the USSR in 1945. Explain why else "East Prussia" had been the headquarters of anti-Slavic militarism dating back not just to Lebensraum ideas, but back to Frederick the Great and before? Why was its very building architecture so militarist in nature? When something is so consistent and ubiquitous in a culture for so long any self-respecting Marxist would understand there to necessarily be material reasons for it. In this case, it's because the German inhabitants understood quite well that their role was as a military outpost. You do know that Germans initially settled the area as a result of Crusaders right? This wasn't some natural settlement.

>>2769839
I'm pretty sure East Prussia is Balt territory not Slavic (mostly).

>>2769873
>natural settlement
there's that word again

>>2769873
>Basques are not a civilization
Arbitrary and nonsensical distinction.
>Also how original, the Soviets were just like the Nazis! The most effective anti-Nazi state were just Nazis, too!
I didn't say anything like that. I'm applying your ass backwards reasoning to Russia. Why is all the land east of the Urals not "naturally" the territory of Turkic, Mongol, and Siberian peoples?
>I'm describing Marxism as it was understood in the USSR in 1945
No you aren't. Soviet nationalities policy never held that certain lands were reserved exclusively for X or Y ethnicity, or that they "naturally" belonged to anybody. They resettled populations all the time, they assigned lands to SSRs that had not historically been inhabited by their main nationality (e.g. giving Donbass to Ukraine). Such policies were always based on practical considerations, not the completely idealistic notion that a nationality can have an inherent and immutable claim to a piece of land forever.
>Explain why else "East Prussia" had been the headquarters of anti-Slavic militarism dating back not just to Lebensraum ideas, but back to Frederick the Great and before?
Simple, it wasn't. Thinking about nationality and ethnicity in those terms didn't exist before the mid 19th century. Germans did not think of themselves as a cohesive nation before this (i.e. Prussians had no concept of themselves as being "German" until about 150 years ago), and "Slavs" is an even broader group who don't think of themselves as a single people or nation even today. The idea that East Prussia's situation is comparable to Israel is simply not true.
>Why was its very building architecture so militarist in nature?
Because it's a strategically important region that occupies the entrance to the Baltic Sea, as well as a historic borderland between rival empires. This is why it remained heavily militarized despite belonging to the USSR and then Russia since the end of the war.
>You do know that Germans initially settled the area as a result of Crusaders right?
Yes and Slavs initially settled the Balkans as a result of raids into the Byzantine Empire. Should we drive out all the Serbs and Croats and give it back to the Greeks who had occupied it for centuries before that? This is the inherent insanity with this kind of thinking. Populations are constantly moving, the ethnic makeup of an area changes. When this process is ongoing through systematic displacement, apartheid, etc. as it is today in Palestine, then obviously Communists should oppose it and support the people being displaced. That's a completely different scenario than making claims of a land belonging inherently and in perpetuity to any one nationality, regardless of how long ago those people occupied it and what has happened since. Again, this is the basic premise of Zionism. You're basically telling me that East Prussia was promised to "the Slavs" (who again are not a single people and don't think of themselves as such) 1000 years ago.

>>2769673
literally no one was forcibly deported to the JAO they where given the choice to move to a zone where they would have devolved parliament and the chance to form a community in somewhere no one previously lived and to shield them from the invading nazi army you are retarded read a book

>>2769679
I find it bizarre that you honestly believe a future Palestinian government will be strong enough to deport millions of Jews in the first place.

>>2769922
What's more bizarre is how these people casually ignore the fact that none of the Palestinian resistance factions are calling for such a thing.

>>2769922
Jews are racist, they’ll never accept having equal rights to Arabs and would self deport to Florida and NYC

>>2769916
>No you aren't. Soviet nationalities policy never held that certain lands were reserved exclusively for X or Y ethnicity, or that they "naturally" belonged to anybody.
The annexation of Kaliningrad was EXPLICITLY because it was understood to be land naturally belonging to Slavic land people since ancient times. If I had my PC with me I would link you particular quotes but Stalin himself said that it was annexed because it was Slavic land before German colonization. Absurd that you say Soviets never excluded ethnicities from lands when you also admit Germans were excluded from Kaliningrad in favor of East Slavs.

>>2769916
>Simple, it wasn't. Thinking about nationality and ethnicity in those terms didn't exist before the mid 19th century.
The conversation is about civilizations you idiot. The fact that the German settlers were knights throughout the German lands all unified under a single Order in their holy war disproves you.

>>2769929
>The annexation of Kaliningrad was EXPLICITLY because it was understood to be land naturally belonging to Slavic land people since ancient times.
He may have said that, but then one wonders why he didn't give it to the Poles or Lithuanians, who were the people actually occupying it prior to German settlement rather than Russians. The Old Prussians were not Slavs, but Balts, and the main Slavic residents were Poles, not Russians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Prussians
The real considerations there were obviously practical, since East Prussia had never been Russian territory and "Slavs" are not an ethnicity or nation but a language family.

>>2769944
It doesn't disprove anything. The Teutonic Knights were mainly Germans yes, but they did not think of themselves as members of a German nation, nor was this their motivation for conquering the Baltic coast. The Northern Crusades were justified in religious terms and sanctioned by the Pope on this basis because the Old Prussians were pagans. Moreover most of the population remained and were eventually Germanized rather than being displaced. The goal of the Northern Crusades was to conquer and convert the Balts, not displace or eradicate them.

>>2769949
Russians have historically held the role of being the Slavic civilization's representative on the global stage, Pan-Slavism for example recognized the Russian Empire as the inspiration of the Slavic people more broadly, hence why the Slavic national flags all use the Russian red-white-blue color scheme. Russia was the nation upholding the most traditional representation of Slavic culture as embodied in the peasant communes. So of course a world-historic reversion of land to Slavic civilization would be tasked to the Russians. That's only as it should be.
>>2769957
>German nation
Fucking hopeless. Why so you think the Germans had a unified organized religion?? You pretend like before German nationalism emerged with figures like Fichte there was no German civilization? I guess Martin Luther's movement against Catholicism having particular momentum in German lands was just co-incidental. They mostly thought it was the right time by co-incidence. Or, German civilization was developed to a certain point to where they could detach themselves from Catholic allegiance only by then.

>>2770001
I love it when Leftypol engages in ethnic chauvinism but pretends it's somehow Marxist because it's Russian

>>2770001
>Russians have historically held the role of being the Slavic civilization's representative on the global stage
There is no "Slavic civilization". Slavs are not a single people. They don't have a single religion or language, they've never been united under a single state. Even Pan-Slavism as a movement didn't even exist before the late 19th century, and never made much progress beyond leading to the creation of Yugoslavia. Additionally Poland was arguably the more significant and influential Slavic power until the 18th century, and were also the only Slavs actually living in the region since 1945. This talk of "civilizations" is completely anti-materialist and totally at odds with Marxist Lenininist understanding of nations and the rights pertaining thereto. The only thing Slavs as a whole have in common is a language family, but by this reasoning Israelis and Arabs are part of the same "Semitic Civilization".
>I guess Martin Luther's movement against Catholicism having particular momentum in German lands was just co-incidental.
It didn't have much momentum in Bavaria which after Prussia was the largest, most powerful and influential German state, and also their bitter rival. It's majority Catholic to this day. That's not even getting into how Austria complicates things, or the fact that there the early stages of the Reformation arguably originated among Slavs (e.g. the Hussites being mainly Czechs).

>>2770001
>hence why the Slavic national flags all use the Russian red-white-blue color scheme
Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Bulgaria do not. That's like half of the Slavic nations.

>>2770021
>never been united under a single state
The fact that they even adopted Slavic language in the first place is because they were integrated into the Slavic cultural sphere, ie, Slavic civilization.
The Slavic languages spread throughout Europe because of populations learning it. They did so because they were within the fold of Slavic civilization, they naturally grew to see integrating with the Slavic culture as aligned with their trade interests. Thus they became Slavs. The language family was only so widespread as a manifestation of all these different peoples aligning in their relationship to a certain center of cultural development.

>>2770056
So then why is everybody from Portugal to India not considered members of a single Indo-European civilization?

>>2770064
>Slavic language spread through adoption therefore… all Indo-European language speakers share a cultural center
?????

>>2769609
Jews deserved their own SSR, not a mere autonomous oblast. Because of the blessing and the curse that is their 2.5K years old ethno-religio-civic tradition they are distinct enough people to merit that. It also needed to be placed, like, in Central Asia… maybe, like cut a piece from Kazakh SSR bordering the Caspian sea - could have made a real socialist alternative to Israel.

>>2770001
>>2769929
>>2769873
>>2769850
this u?
the east prussia proposal is ahistorical because JAO was created in the 30s, so there's no point when there is already a jewish area, soviet union in general tended to use ethnic policy to move populations around wherever it was necessary for development. germans and koreans ended up in kazakhstan. why? because that's where economic calculation says requires more people, the soviet union was based like that. no civilization spooks were involved.

>>2770131
Trotskyism

>>2770131
Kazakh too close to the West. East Prussia was too close. Israel is too close. Sticking all the Jews over by China was a good idea. There were no locals there willing to blow themselves up to keep Jews out.
The real question is why they picked such a faggy looking flag?

>>2770156
The rainbow is a biblical symbol or something

>>2770119
Slavs don't share a cultural centre, that's my entire point. Thus far you havent presented a single argument to the contrary. They practice different religions, speak mutually unintelligible languages, use different scripts, and gravitated towards different cultural centers themselves (e.g. Poles and Croats gravitating towards Western Europe and Rome while Russians and Serbs gravitated towards Eastern Europe and Constantinople). The only thing they share is a language family, and if this is all it takes then why not include all Indo-Europeans?

>>2770172
I literally explained how the spread of Slavic language itself was owed to different tribal peoples aligning towards a single cultural center in ancient times, thus adopting a common language. I don't understand why this must mean a completely different Indo-Iranian language must have similar circumstances. I'm talking about the origins of the Slavs around when the Sarmatians and Scythians became absorbed into a rising Slavic culture.
Yes, Poland and Croatia drifted away from Slavic roots. As I said, Russia is the representative of true Slavic civilization on the world stage. With any civilization, you can find regions in-between, for example, Bhutan is influenced by both the Chinese civilization and Indian civilization. So Poland has moved quite westward. But did the Soviet Union encourage this? No, the Soviet Union attempted to reintegrate Poland with eastern culture and eastern economic ties. They saw the westward look of Polish intellectuals as reactionary.

Jews in the USSR didnt want "an ethnic homeland" on a random patch of [russian empire colonised] land. The Jewish Territorialist movement in the USSR wanted to build up strong agricultural communities within the old Pale because that is where Yiddishland was. And it worked! The cooperatives in Ukraine and Belarus were successful as enterprises and as jewish self-determination; especially the ones in Crimea (which had a unique dynamic of having a native non-ashkenazi jewish population and new yiddish cooperative farmers that maintained very strong relationships with the local peoples). Real issue is that Stalin (and Beria) were fucking retarded vis-a-vis the national question and wanted to create weird mini-ethnostates built on linguistics and forcibly assimilate all the people there into to them. Also Stalin even before WW2 was shooting yiddish jewish interlectuals and after WW2 decided to murder the Jewish Antifascist Committee because ???

>>2770217
>decided to murder the Jewish Antifascist Committee because ???
Grover Furr has an entire book on Mikhoels so why don't you read that instead of insisting that your confusion is anything profound.

>>2770204
>I literally explained how the spread of Slavic language itself was owed to different tribal peoples aligning towards a single cultural center in ancient times, thus adopting a common language.
What cultural centre? At the time if the Slavic migrations across Eastern Europe in the 6th and 7th centuries the Slavs had no cities, no writing, no national consciousness, no political unity. Its also likely they didn't speak a single language even then. They were disparate bands of tribes flooding into the Eastern Roman Empire and conquering the people they found there. They were doing effectively the same thing the Germans did in East Prussia. They were then absorbed into the cultural orbits of Rome and Constantinople, which were themselves based on divergent churches, languages, economic centres, etc.
>Yes, Poland and Croatia drifted away from Slavic roots
In what sense are Poland and Croatia more separated from "Slavic roots" than Russia or Serbia? In both cases they practice religions and write in scripts given to them by Roman missionaries.

>>2770220
I don't know why you're so insistent on bringing up nationalism. The very fact that so many Iranian-speaking peoples of the Pontic Steppe adopted Slavic language is because of Slavic cultural outreach. Transmission of a culture implies a center from which that culture spreads. I agree that we're talking about a very early point at which this hadn't yet centralized into cities but it still was so.
>In what sense are Poland and Croatia more separated from "Slavic roots" than Russia or Serbia?
The Great Schism allowed for Slavic lands to declare their organized religion to be centered in their own land. Hence Moscow being known as Third Rome. Poland's Catholicism rejects this and favors maintaining their subordination to western Papal authority. Moscow embraced Rome for a long while due to having only found organized religion relatively recently, but outgrew its cradle as soon as it could.

>>2770246
>Transmission of a culture implies a center from which that culture spreads.
Only in the geographical sense that the speakers of a language had to originate from somewhere, but that's not the same as an actual cultural centre. The Baltic shores where the Slavs are thought to originate were not producing some kind of cultural output that defined Slavicness to which other communities were subordinate. Once Slavs settled in the Balkans or elsewhere, there was nothing tying them to their land of origin. This is entirely different from say, Arab civilization which had a common language, religion, and definite centres of cultural output (Mecca, Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo) which consistently influenced the entire society. Rather Slavs simply spread their language through migration and conquest before diverging into completely different ethnicities and polities, speaking different languages, and adopting different religions. If that's a "civilization" then so are the Indo-Europeans. They also migrated and spread their language, which are apparently the only criteria they need according to you.
>The Great Schism allowed for Slavic lands to declare their organized religion to be centered in their own land.
Eastern Christianity was centred in Constantinople, not Slavic kingdoms. It was also a foreign import from the Romans, not an indigenous Slavic religion. Even Moscow's framing of itself as "The Third Rome" can only take place after Constantinople (the Second Rome) is conquered, and still then it explicitly frames itself as a continuation of a religious and cultural tradition which is not Slavic but Roman. It also conveniently ignores the fact that the USSR was a state-atheist society so basing any claim to East Prussia on the religious legitimacy of the Orthodox Church makes no sense.

All of this nonsense to justify giving a piece of land to a people who had never inhabited it even historically, but who apparently lay claim to it based on vague claims of "leadership" of an ill defined "civilization" with exactly zero history of political, linguistic, or cultural unity. It makes even less sense than Zionism. I also noticed you casually glossed over the fact that East Prussia was occupied by Baltic peoples rather than Slavs before the Germans came.

>>2770246
>Moscow embraced Rome
Rome as in Constantinople and the East.

>>2770275
It's amazing how caesarpilled the world became. I think only China and Thailand don't care about the fucking Romans.