Are Mongols the reason Russia is so different from the rest of Eastern Europe in terms of rule?

[Methuselah]

Russia (and Belarus) are only not democratically led traditionally Christian countries in Europe/bordering Europe. It is often explained by Moscow being influenced by Mongols and taking over the whole Russia including Novgorod.

[Cristiano viejo]

Vodka, rather.

[Vandor]

Vodka, rather.

For example, Finland drinks much more vodka than Russia, so it's barely related. Russian Empire had a lot of Scandinavian immigrants in 19 century, searching for better life while Norway and Sweden used to be the worst drinking countries of Europe, widely alcoholized.

Alcohol influence in Russia may be significant in 20 century when lots of yesterday peasants infested cities, becoming a so called "working class", lots of them who didn't suit in new reality turned into petty criminals, bums, alcoholics. There's no time in village to be alcoholic, only strong ones survive there, you marry early, make some 5-10 kids (some of them will not survive) and those who survived will help you to maintain the household.

I have no idea about main question of the post, but alco question in Russia is a 1920s-1960s case caused by artificial rapid elimination of village life, breaking the masses mentality, rapid industrialization with rapid movement of huge human masses from one type of society to other. It was a huge experiment.

[Vandor]

Russia (and Belarus) are only not democratically led traditionally Christian countries in Europe/bordering Europe. It is often explained by Moscow being influenced by Mongols and taking over the whole Russia including Novgorod.

Democracy label today is a joke, if you do something wrong against the mainstream you're receiving autocracy/tyranny label in one night. Just like Hungary, for example. Political labels is a magic game for the plebs, anyway. There's no democracy and it's natural, because masses should not decide anything. Most of so called "democratic kantris" can be only despised as the foundation their rulers are based on is maintaining the useless hedonist societies and piss in the ears with speeches, making the plebs think they're worth something.

[Methuselah]

Vodka, rather.

Vodka is a big issue in Russia indeed, but there are other reasons too.

[Methuselah]

For example, Finland drinks much more vodka than Russia, so it's barely related. Russian Empire had a lot of Scandinavian immigrants in 19 century, searching for better life while Norway and Sweden used to be the worst drinking countries of Europe, widely alcoholized.

Alcohol influence in Russia may be significant in 20 century when lots of yesterday peasants infested cities, becoming a so called "working class", lots of them who didn't suit in new reality turned into petty criminals, bums, alcoholics. There's no time in village to be alcoholic, only strong ones survive there, you marry early, make some 5-10 kids (some of them will not survive) and those who survived will help you to maintain the household.

I have no idea about main question of the post, but alco question in Russia is a 1920s-1960s case caused by artificial rapid elimination of village life, breaking the masses mentality, rapid industrialization with rapid movement of huge human masses from one type of society to other. It was a huge experiment.

You are right that also Scandinavia and Baltics are part of Vodka belt but Russia always had problems with alcohol, let's be honest. Harsh life.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/article...urrency-russia

https://time.com/6082058/russian-revolution-vodka/

[Methuselah]

Democracy label today is a joke, if you do something wrong against the mainstream you're receiving autocracy/tyranny label in one night. Just like Hungary, for example. Political labels is a magic game for the plebs, anyway. There's no democracy and it's natural, because masses should not decide anything. Most of so called "democratic kantris" can be only despised as the foundation their rulers are based on is maintaining the useless hedonist societies and piss in the ears with speeches, making the plebs think they're worth something.

I respect your opinion and our conversation, but i just can not understand this Russian type of thinking where they say "democracy is a joke etc etc". I agree that there are things that we don't know about (different influencers behind the scenes, hidden corruption even in developed countries) but there is literally democracy let's say in Finland. Even if your definition of democracy is different, you should at least know that Northern European way of ruling is more democratic and Russian way is more "Tsarist". You don't need to believe in the power of democracy in order to accept this. In Finland for instance, we vote for people who try to influence things, it's not direct democracy but it's not corrupt or led by only few people. In Russia it's literally unEuropean. This is the reason why Russia is not considered Europe.

[Lemminkäinen]

Russia (and Belarus) are only not democratically led traditionally Christian countries in Europe/bordering Europe. It is often explained by Moscow being influenced by Mongols and taking over the whole Russia including Novgorod.

Yes, Ghengis Khan ruled there and gave new standards of living. Ivan the Terrible founded the Tzardom and the Russia Empire. Similarly Gustav Vasa beat Danes created Sweden and started the Swedish heyday.

Our president Kekkonen drank all Sovjet leaders under the table. It is not that the Finns drink vodka, but the glory of our former president still shines in Russia.

[sean]

Are Mongols the reason Russia is so different from the rest of Eastern Europe in terms of rule?

Nope. But zemstvo or duma political structure was probably influenced by Kurultai.

Russia is the way it is because of Tsarism. The institution of serfdom in Russia grew more restrictive only after the collapse of Mongol dominance, in fact Russians back then were defacto slaves of corrupt boyars, even when they abolished serfdom without ceasing to be a monarchy, they were obligated to work for local authorities, and Communist revolutions have only worked in places where fundamental liberties and property rights are borderline non-existent. I think the survival instinct of the nation is strong because they were invaded from all directions from Europe to Asia. Teutonic Crusaders were worse than Mongols, Swedes and Nazis for instance, they succeeded in creating the Baltics, which has only ever been a geopolitical thorn in Russia's side.

[Methuselah]

Yes, Ghengis Khan ruled there and gave new standards of living. Ivan the Terrible founded the Tzardom and the Russia Empire. Similarly Gustav Vasa beat Danes created Sweden and started the Swedish heyday.

Our president Kekkonen drank all Sovjet leaders under the table. It is not that the Finns drink vodka, but the glory of our former president still shines in Russia.

Only if Kekkonen could end the Soviet Union but this goes to Gorba. Too bad Russia was a total mess in 90's with failed reforms like privatization etc. Why in hell Russia couldn't get proper professionals to deal with these problems?