Some Russians Think The USSR Still Exists

[anonimo]

the soviet genocides were a continuation of the tsarist atrocities like the circassian genocide. it wasnt sething soviet. it was just russians/cadaans doing typical russian/cadaan carnage. when the ussr collapsed kazakhs stopped being majority in kazakhstan because of importation of russians. even in chechnya chechens were not the majority in 1991. but chechens have strong dhiig. russians were forced to leave chechnya due to instability. look at crimea. before the stalinist mass deportation of tatars on freight trains and thousands died. dude did the same thing in the caucasus with the chechens.
View attachment 210252

I know brother.

The Russians have been at it since Ivan The Terrible.

Can I ask you to do something for me please?

Read up on what went on before Ivan The Terrible right up to the period where the Mongols established themselves in Russia.

Few men can philosophically claim moral superiority brother. From our biased Muslim perspective, Russian expansion was bad. However, from a Russian perspective, what went before was equally as bad. You get my drift?

History is not Black and White especially when looked at from a tribalistic lens. The best of us suppress our innate bias when looking at the past. Easier said than done though!

 

[reer]

I know brother.

The Russians have been at it since Ivan The Terrible.

Can I ask you to do something for me please?

Read up on what went on before Ivan The Terrible right up to the period where the Mongols established themselves in Russia.

Few men can philosophically claim moral superiority brother. From our biased Muslim perspective, Russian expansion was bad. However, from a Russian perspective, what went before was equally as bad. You get my drift?

History is not Black and White especially when looked at from a tribalistic lens. The best of us suppress our innate bias when looking at the past. Easier said than done though!

 

[Nilotic]

European supremacist views are not primarily due to Yanks, it has a complex History. It's roots precede the independence of the American Colonies.

The British Americans might have inspired others with their expansion into Indian territories, however, the concept of a racial hierarchy cannot be linked solely to Yanks as it has its roots in the general European dominance of the World, Eugenicist loonies etc. Spanish Colonial America had a racial system before the British colonies took off, look up their Caste system. Why do you think a Dominican who is quarter White will tell you off for associating him with 'Blackness'? In the case of Sub-Saharan Africans, the Atlantic and Arab Slave trade was a major fact in dehumanising them as lesser beings.

As a matter of fact, despite their Jim Crows laws etc., the Yanks abolished slavery before other New World countries such as Brazil. Moreover, no other country at the time went to war with itself to stop slavery, The American Civil War. What followed in the South was not perfect but the Northerners cannot be entirely blamed for reaching a compromise with the belligerent Southerners who had successfully undermined efforts at enfranchising A. Americans.

YouTube videos are good for an introduction into History but they don't always tell the full story.

I think I made it clear that the United States didn't initiate the creation of the global racial caste system but that they (at the heels of independence) were one of the chief purveyors for centuries; my paragraph contained enough qualifiers that properly contextualised the role of the United States.

Are you really of the view that the American Civil War was primarily fought over the morality of slavery and not economic competition between the North & South?

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.” -- Abraham Lincoln --

 

[anonimo]

I think I've made it clear that the United States didn't initiate the creation of the global racial caste system but that they (at the heels of independence) were one of the chief purveyors for centuries; my paragraph contained enough qualifiers that properly contextualised the role of the United States.

Are you really of the view that the American Civil War was primarily fought over the morality of slavery and not economic competition between the North & South?

Your stated that they were the 'primary source' hence my reply. They are one of may sources.

The United States has been the primary source of racism in the Western world for centuries; one of the reasons for the 'Revolutionary war' was a direct result of the British signing Treaties with Native Americans. The settlers found this to be intolerable.

If or when you get the time, watch this video:

As for the war being solely about slavery, no. It was however a crucial factor as the South could not countenance it's curtailment.

 

[Nilotic]

Your stated that they were the 'primary source' hence my reply. They are one of may sources.

The United States was the primary source for centuries and this obviously couldn't conceivably have precluded what transpired before its existence as an independent entity.

I never claimed that the U.S created the global racial caste system -- especially considering that it gained independence in 1776; the United States was an enthusiastic heir and torchbearer.

'The white man's burden', 'Manifest destiny' and the American invasions-annexation of Mexican territory, Hawaii, the Philippines and a host of other Nations.... essentially heralded America's arrival as the primary architect of white supremacy.

 

[anonimo]

The United States was the primary source for centuries and this obviously couldn't conceivably have precluded what transpired before its existence as an independent entity.

I never claimed that the U.S created the global racial caste system -- especially considering that it gained independence in 1776; the United States was an enthusiastic heir and torchbearer.

'The white man's burden', 'Manifest destiny' and the American invasions-annexation of Mexican territory, Hawaii, the Philippines and a host of other Nations.... essentially heralded America's arrival as the primary architect of white supremacy.

Dude, you cannot even make an argument regarding centuries chronologically speaking. They definitely weren't a torch bearer in their nascent period after gaining independence. The American period of dominance starts in the 20th century. They mainly looked to the Old World for inspiration prior to their extensive industrialisation accompanied by an accumulation of wealth.

As for your second paragraph, it mainly revolves around American imperialism, not the export of White supremacist ideas. How could they be the vanguard of 'White Man's Burden' when they were following in the footsteps of established global powers. I think you know 'White Man's Burden' was coined by the Brit Rudyard Kipling?

Regarding Mexico, before their own revolution, the elites were European Criollos who lorded over a mainly Mestizo population. Shit was a land grab by the Yanks, nothing less and nothing more as both States were dominated by 'Whites' politically. As for the Phillipines, the Spaniards were there before them so they weren't laying a path for other 'Whites' to follow.

Europeans who were at the height of their colonial power long before the Yanks came into the scene did not need lessons from the Yanks in relation to a belief that the White Man reigns supreme over others. They already subscribed to supremacist beliefs!