1
Thumbs Up |
Received: 213 Given: 91 |
When I visit Russia I will do this. These are not empty words, I will.
In England it is not possible to mention the historic fact that there was a British SS unit whilst in polite company. It would be considered extremely offensive.
Thank you, all this is fascinating for an outsider.
Well I live in a very violent country with high crime rates and a lot of dangerous places. It would not surprise me if many Russian cities are far safer.
Do you think these traits are from an Asiatic source?
Therefore it is a combination of many factors. But what role does ethnography play in the development of a civilisation and the innate temperament of a people? How can ethnographic differences explain divergence between Russia, Belarus and Poland for example?
Thank you for the recommendation.
Even among the middle classes I see this type of apathy. There is no sense of honour coming before all. There is an obsession with happiness at all costs, even though this is a dead end in itself.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5,088 Given: 3,785 |
No. It's common misconception to split all Eurasian sphere into Europe and Asia. But Russia, while having some similarities with both, is neither of them. It had its own processes that doesn't fit European nor Asian developments. Both Europe and Asia heavily influenced these processes, for example the centuries long existential threat generated by massive nomadic migrations from East shaped Russian social structure as rigid and militaristic. For thousand of years every generation of Russians (with one exception in 20th century) had their war.
Russia also adopted many features from both sides but had always transformed them to serve its own internal interests. Often some researchers claim that post-Mongol Russian power was just a copy of Golden Horde. It was not, because while it had supreme authoritarian ruler as it was in the case with Horde and even first Russian Tsar was considering himself a rightful heir of the Horde, it was based on different relationships between said ruler and military class.
People forming their cultural habits from interactions with external entities be it natural phenomena, other people or distant societies. Geography and climate serve as foundation for any further development because it forms the most immediate environment we live in and interact with daily. Availability or scarcity of certain resources naturally leads to development of rules and rituals serving to regulate consequent shortages during our interactions with people in immediate vicinity. That forms lifestyle common for a group of people and then affects interactions of the whole group with other groups. In these interactions certain rules and rituals could be exchanged between groups leading to unique cultural developments.
So in light of this Russians and Belorussians are almost indistinguishable. Same environment, same language, same habits and rituals.
But Russians and Poles are more different. That's because at some point culturally very close Slavic tribes adopted different rituals - Catholicism and Orthodoxy - and first one developed connection with distant groups in Western Europe. It didn't make them totally different instantly, in fact we have more similarities than differences even today, but the line of cultural split was drawn. So ethnographic factors had somewhat distanced initially close people.
At the same time adoption of different branches of same faith (similar rituals) has made initially such alien due to environmental factors entities as Russians and Italians a bit closer. There are many records of Orthodox Russian captives serving as slaves on Ottoman galleys escaping and seeking refuge in Venetian and Genoese colonies. They were provided shelter and food just because they were Christians. Many of them were brought before Pope himself and after thorough interview were granted free passage through entire Europe so they could return home. In this case ethnographic factors had brought initially totally alien people together.
I think today this issue addressed best by Jordan Peterson. I personally find his rants about "evil communists" as misguided, but his works in area of meanings and personal development are truly fascinating.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 213 Given: 91 |
Liberalism is a luxury of safe countries. England and Scotland could be liberal because the channel offered protection. In eastern lands there was no such protection, the steppe was open and many Asiatic peoples could come in. But we in the Anglosphere used to have some level of social cohesion that allowed us to face real threats. Today we are deconstructing our own culture because our own liberalism inclines us in such a direction. In the final analysis we’ll be left without any cohesion at all.
That is why I think Russian civilisation is superior. Although I’m an outsider and don’t know what I am talking about from any experience it looks like there is a lot of personal freedom in Russia but also collective obligation. You can drink beer but you cannot undermine one’s society or country with strange ideas.
Is the Eurasian idea, especially with respect to Mongol rule gaining popularity in Russia these days?
Thank you, this is very insightful and interesting analysis.
I read once on the internet someone expressed the opinion that Russian character differs from that of Belarusians and Ukrainians due to the absorption of FInno-Ugric tribes and Turkic peoples. According to this opinion it made Russians more melancholic and deep thinkers.
It is perhaps a slightly racist opinion of mine but I believe that temperament and mentality can be influenced by genetics. For example, children inherit the temperament and nature of their parents in many cases. Similarly if an ethnos absorbs many elements of a certain population it will assume their characteristics in some measure.
What do you think of this?
Very interesting. I never knew this!
It is good that we have a sensible voice in the English speaking world. I agree with you, his political opinions are somewhat disappointing and I dislike how he ties his philosophy into liberalism and free market ideas.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5,088 Given: 3,785 |
Here is the riddle Varys asked Tyrion (you should know if you follow GoT)
This riddle perfectly illustrates three traditional branches of power: king (warrior) represents power by violence, priest - power by knowledge, rich man - power by money (resources).“In a room sit three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man with his gold. Between them stands a sellsword, a little man of common birth and no great mind. Each of the great ones bids him slay the other two. ‘Do it,’ says the king, ‘for I am your lawful ruler.’ ‘Do it,’ says the priest, ‘for I command you in the names of the gods.’ ‘Do it,’ says the rich man, ‘and all this gold shall be yours.’ So tell me – who lives and who dies?”
I'm sure you know about War of Roses. In this war English aristocracy was almost exterminated. The class of warriors became weak, titles were sold for money. But who do you think got rich during prolonged devastating civil war? Thieves and marauders obviously. That was the quality of human material which started to dominate in ruling class. Power shifted from Warrior to Merchant. That's where liberalism originated. No honor, no dignity, everything could be bought and sold.
First liberalism dismantled rural communities, then extended families, now nuclear families are being destroyed, next will be total dehumanization of humans. Because what is human if not a social construct, right? It was all done to please The Merchant, to allow him access and control every aspect of human life so he could make profit on it. That's what your civilization truly is: while society proclaiming more and more freedom personally you facing more and more restrictions.
If we will take a look at Russia there was no period in its history when Merchants truly held power. Russia has always been ruled by Warriors. The only exception is brief period in 1990's but warrior types got back quickly and now biting chunks off merchants day by day. The major difference between them is if Merchants could only see hierarchy of money (whoever could accumulate more) a Warrior could see hierarchy of people characters (what people worth on their own, what could they do). In this system freedom is irrelevant, nobody really cares about it. Things that matter is what you can achieve, how much responsibility for yourself and others could you bear, how could you contribute to society, how high could you raise on social ladder, are you worthy to tell others what should they do. All these things require dedication and often personal sacrifice, you serve your role and there is no room for freedom. Obviously social hierarchy and all surrounding processes exist in the West too but there it serves His Majesty Profit. In Russia there are still many people for whom money are of secondary importance at best. In such culture ordinary people do enjoy far more personal freedom.
I'm not sure about all that Eurasian idea, don't think people care that much about it. However Russians are very inclusive, we are willing to accept anyone who shares same core cultural values no matter skin color or eyes' shape.
If anything Belorussians are the most broody and depressed of all East Slavs because they live in deep forests and swamps for centuries. Turkic character is totally opposite, swift and hot tempered. Hence why Cossacks from South Russia are the craziest, too much contact with Turkics.
Large part of temperament and mentality comes from hormonal balance. What you inherit from your parents is minimum and maximum limits of each hormone in your body. Then environment places it somewhere within these limits. If your genetically determined minimum is higher than average around you people will perceive you as some oddity for sure. But that's extreme, for most populations their ranges overlap a lot. That's why pretty much anyone moving into Russia will eventually become Russian as local environment shift their balance.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 213 Given: 91 |
Брат, извините не был ничего после очень много время. Я не забыл ваш слово и что вы писал. Но вот здесь.
Please excuse me for such a poorly constructed sentence. It's how a Scotsman tries to speak Russian! I did not use Google translation, I just typed it from my keyboard.
That is why in the British Isles we have so much liberalism. In Scotland as well, it was a mercantile society from the earliest times with the burghs. Merchants from Flanders, France and England settled there. It's one of the reasons we do not speak Gaelic today, because the new migrants spoke Germanic languages.
I suspect that a good portion of the British population could have mercantile origins.
There is a question I have about mercantile societies in Russia. Is it true that the Novgorod Republic was mercantile and liberal? And then Muscovy conquered it and expelled the population?
In many ways the freedom offered by liberalism is not any real type of freedom. Real individual freedom of the type that liberalism purports to advance is not possible under any system. Everyone must work, and limits on money and resources reduce consumer and life choices. It's no good having the freedom to travel anywhere when one cannot afford it. There is still authority and you still must sublimate yourself to an organisation which under liberal democracy is one's employer.
Under liberalism a person must be careful what they say or not express certain opinions because it could result in them being fired. In the USA which is the most extreme liberal country an employer can just fire someone without any reason at all. I don't think this is freedom, it's just the rule of a corporation in place of a party.
English speaking people seem to think that life in non-liberal societies is some type of misery where people have absolutely no freedom but it is not so. People still have the same personal freedom where any reasonable person would want it. For example, in Asian countries you can marry, drink beer, read books, experience religious freedom and own property. It's not such a major difference. In these non liberal Asian societies you can enjoy this personal freedom within reasonable limits but you also get to enjoy meaningful belonging to a collective identity.
What is important to a Russian when assessing the worth of a person?
And please tell me, how do Russian women appraise a man's worth? I'm not asking this question to be disrespectful, I'm just very interested by women and the way they assess a man's worth.
This is a good way to be.
That's probably why I am also very brooding, Lithuania is close to Belarus.
I don't think a weak person can survive in Russia.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5,088 Given: 3,785 |
That's interesting. Have you had significant Flemish migration back then?
Even if not majority is always following dominating social trends. Once merchants dominate majority will submit to rule of coin.
Fundamentally merchants in Russia have seldom been an independent actors. In most cases they were representatives of larger communities often elected into positions where they simply negotiated on behalf of their community. They had strong familial and religious ties to their communities and were rather in position of servitude than ownership no matter how much personal power they yield. Considering traditional mentality of the time people were fulfilling specific roles, they were all serving some purpose according to religious domain. Diverting from it was considered as acting against God's will and ruining one's soul.
Novgorod economy was based on trading corporations ruled by boyars. They held some lands as votchinas (early form of allods) and had large communes built around them. Since agriculture in the area is very limited production was revolving around hunter-gatherers activities, like furs, honey, wax, salt etc.
Formally social system was some semblance of republic with all layers of society, even peasants, having representative voices but in reality everything was ran by richest oligarchs from boyar families. But despite having trade as main source of livelihood boyars weren't pure merchants. Their main job was still war, which is what made them leaders of communities in the first place. They were still expected to participate in defensive battles and offensive military expeditions. Which they were eager to do since spoils of war were always a welcome addition to family wealth.
The reason for Muscovy to launch a military expedition against Novgorod was desire of some Novgorodian boyars to join Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. That happened at the peak of confrontation between PLC and Muscovy. There was a split in Novgorod on the matter with pro-PLC party willing to resolve it by force. That's when Moscow intervened and basically exterminated entire anti-Moscow faction. Pro-Moscow faction was obviously happy about it and ever since Novgorod was loyal ally of Moscow.
Now consider life in that liberal system you familiar with against system where you're part of tight community in which you're related to large number of its members. In such community your personal freedom will sure be limited, you likely to be forced to marry no matter your own opinion on that, likely will be told what to do in your life. Seems like no freedom at all.
Yet all those people who run your life do so because they sincerely care about you. They want to stop you from wasting your time on easily preventable mistakes you'll regret later. So you can focus on things that really matter and will make you happy on the long run. There is still large degree of personal freedom combined with certain safety and stability. Over and over I hear stories of regret from middle aged people about things they have or haven't done. They all wish there was someone around to push them the right way even if against their will. Which is totally impossible in liberal system where everyone is a unique and precious snowflake.
Some time ago all societies were organized as such communities. But in that case there is little could be done to take control over an individual since he always have community as top priority. He devoted to it and gets protection from it in return. No room for merchant type to play around. That's why these communities were destroyed, sometimes via deception of its members, sometimes by passing specific laws, sometimes by simple physical extermination.
Can't speak for everyone, especially younger generation. But obviously his values and priorities in life combined with personal abilities. What person could do, how could he contribute to common cause is large part of it.
That's very different from case to case. There are obviously gold diggers who only seeking wealth. There are those who need strong dominant man to keep them in check. I even met one woman who said if a man doesn't beat her once a week he doesn't worth her attention. Try to figure that one out.
But overall quality of women in Russia is on decline following general Western trend. Divorce rates are through the roof and no resolution to that is seen on horizon. Liberalism does it dirty work.
Baltics are even worse than Belarus in that regard. The climate is too depressive.
That depends on what you mean by weak.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 213 Given: 91 |
Yes a lot. In fact a very big amount.
Agreed.
And this is very much apparent in all that Russia has produced. It is unlikely that a merchant nation could produce a civilisation like Russia.
I saw a very interesting documentary on WWII on the Eastern Front. It was restored in HD. I saw the Russian soldiers sitting on tanks carrying the PPSH sub machine guns. It was obvious none of these guys are merchants at all. But here I am stating the obvious.
The reason I asked about Novgorod was because I read a book by a Western historian who mentioned the theory that Novgorod could have provided a more liberal expression of the Kievan civilisation. I'm not sure how valid such an idea is.
Thank you, I never knew this.
Once upon a time marriage of the type you described would have been considered conservative in Western liberal societies. Now days we are not even speaking about arranged marriages, it's a completely inconceivable notion for us.
Very much so, it's still freedom. In conservative societies a person is free within reason whereas in the West today we're free without reason and yet not really free in any meaningful way. Perhaps I am too modern to accept arranged marriage because I follow wherever my heart goes.
I don't think it exists anywhere in Europe anymore.
All very interesting. Thank you.
What can we do about this, especially in the West? Because I don't see any real solution for us. In the UK we can't even improve relations with Russia, all our political parties and politicians are Russophobic morons. The society is completely disintegrating.
Well basically losers. I don't think losers can survive in Russia. People who have no merits at all.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 5,088 Given: 3,785 |
That indirectly supports the idea of certain cultural element moving around Europe a number of times. It's unclear where it started exactly, some indicators suggest Middle East. But it was present in Roman Empire and later in Italian city-states, briefly stopped in Spain/Portugal, from there it moved to Netherlands and after war with Spain had proven these territories to be too exposed to military invasions it moved to Britain. The main feature of this element was inclination towards financial operations, mainly usury. The movement of this element could be traced by economy boost in the areas it was present at the time due to increase in investments.
So Flemish migration to Britain was last part of The Merchant's journey around Europe. After that some of it continued into US.
When a historian start speaking in "coulda/woulda" terms that's a strong indicator he trying to sell you propaganda. In this case he trying to paint a picture of liberal democratic Novgorod being destroyed by evil totalitarian Muscovy.
Firstly Novgorod wasn't a democracy, it was oligarchy in its most primitive and vile form.
Secondly the only difference between Novgorod and Muscovy was large degree of freedom Novgorodian oligarchs had from local prince and nearly full dependency of Muscovy' boyars on their prince due to economical specifics of respective regions. As result Novgorod, while being larger and richer, had always struggled to field a significant force due to lack of unity while Moscow had always acted as one solid entity with strict hierarchy. That scenario of small unified force taking over larger divided force has been repeated in history over and over as far as humans remember. But the actors within this specific scenario, princes and boyars, were essentially same thing on both sides. In modern terms it's one corporation taking over another.
It seems like there is a taboo on reasonable explanations when it comes to Russian history. The only causes allowed to be voiced are spontaneous outbursts of insane autocrats.
You can't be free if that "freedom" is handed to you on a plate. To be truly free you have to have solid unified numerous entity backing you up. Entity capable of resolving matters by violence.
That could be the sign of immaturity nurtured in you by that perverted system. Could be that you sacrificing long term fulfillment for immediate pleasure.
Balkans and Caucasus.
The process is irreversible. You have an army of aliens willing and capable of fighting in your country already. They aren't going anywhere and sh|t will likely hit the fan in your lifetime. Should be soon in fact. All you could do is prepare yourself for the worse. Keep your bunker well supplied, AK well oiled and yourself well worked out (without excesses). Library of useful literature for yourself and your children would be good too (in paper, forget about electronics). Probably the most important would be forming and maintaining tight community of like-minded people. Loners have very little chances of living through.
But that is worst case scenario. There is still chance for more or less peaceful resolution. It's small but still there. British elites had really screwed themselves over in last decade. Unless BoJo have some magic tricks up his sleeves UK is destined to become the 51 state.
We don't really have concept of losers in our culture. At least not in the form it exists in the West. Because success in the West measured by how much you earn and it's considered to be the result of your own efforts. You like to think you're in control and you getting what you deserve.
Until relatively recently in Russia success was a mere survival. If you managed to accumulate some wealth and gain status that's a nice little bonus. But even if you do everything right there is no guarantee for success. Because at any time everything you have could be taken away by the whims of Mother Nature or wrecking train of social process and there is little could be done about it. This fatalism is rooted deeply in our mentality so we don't have habit of harsh judgement towards the unlucky ones. We have a saying 'От тюрьмы да от сумы не зарекайся' which could be translated as 'don't count out a prison cell, a begging bowl may come as well'.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 213 Given: 91 |
By this are you referring to Jewish merchants? Because the patterns you mentioned seem to reflect the Jewish migrations throughout Europe.
If so, does it mean a lot of Scots could have Jewish ancestry?
If it is written by a Western author it is most likely going to represent his world view. And as you know most Westerners cannot understand Russia. Why they can't understand your country is beyond me. For me it is not at all strange.
Agreed.
And deep down this is how the West operates. It's not as liberal as people really think. There are limits to what you can say and do.
I am afraid so.
I heard it was still there in Russia in the 1960s? Is it true?
A lot of people don't want to acknowledge how dire the entire situation is getting here. No one wants to talk about it. If you have honest conversations about our problems people will exclude you. The moral cowardice here is appalling.
Well by losers I meant those people who are just absolutely the worst people, literally no desire to be good people. Lazy, cowardly, dishonourable etc.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks