Man, how far back did they have to go to find a picture of Zelensky happy?
Aren't Russian and Ukrainian basically dialects of one another?
Depends how you define dialects and languages. They are certainly very closely related and mutually quite intelligible.
In any case it is absurd to try to force over half of a country's population to stop speaking the language or dialect they grew up with.
The simple fact that the nationalists do not want to acknowledge is that the majority of Ukraine has always predominantly spoken Russian.
We have the same thing going in the Arab world, are the different Arabic dialects actually languages? it depends, but most would say no for cultural reasons. And of course even among Arabs, people hold their native dialect dearly.
I wouldn't call Ukrainian a dialect of Russian. They are somewhat mutually intelligible, the degree of this heavily depends on the regional variation of Ukrainian, the further west you go, the less it is. I think there's enough differences for it to be its own language.
It's quite beautiful, actually, and it's a shame that the sound of it makes me want to vomit nowadays.
The flattening of dialect continuums for either nationalist reasons or ease of reading a certain written version of important books (the Bible, often) has had some absurd results. The Russian dialect spoken in east Ukraine is not something that historically was spoken there outside of the influence from the Russian empire or the soviet union, but it's similarity to Russian was close enough for that to be an easy pickup. The dialect can shift more regionally until it's less intelligible and Russian was seen as always something different enough to need to speak it separately (as opposed to just shifting some sounds to be more understandable).
This whole thing gets flattened to meaninglessness and just "2 languages" or "2 dialects" because we obsess with this categorization with the desire for some meaningful Continuum through time. It's idealist to name this "distinction" as causal, but it still is easy to see the results of these processes as being tragic in so many contexts.
There is a gorgeous aspect to this historical situation, but of course we can't return to that: now we have standardized languages in much of the world and people who have been convinced to fight for those sets of ways of speaking. Idk what my point is exactly, besides that this is all socially determined (whether or not a language is mutually intelligible is determined by a social history, and whether it's considered to be a specific of some universal is also socially determined) and we communists should keep that in mind. It becomes material is liberation struggles, as well as during the oppression before it. But it's material under more primary material aspects
Sorry that rant got off topic but I still want to leave it
Don't be sorry, comrade! It's an interesting perspective, and I agree with you. We don't usually think of languages that way (well, at least I don't), but it's a valid and valuable approach.
Thanks comrade. Language philosophy is why I got into reading in depth books. The national question arises reallllly quickly once you try to understand this whole amazing tapestry of speech and writing around the world. And communism follows quickly to provide a framework for analysis and answers.
From what I've heard in the domain of linguistics the distinction is controversial and widely regarded as a political tool to make certain languages hegemonic
The line between language and dialect is more a question of politics than linguistics.
The right of self-determination is fundamental, so the fact that Ukrainians understand themselves as having a distinct national identity settles the question for me.
So do usian white southerners, we can infer from that neither that they really are separate nor that they deserve something.
I don’t think it’s true that white southerners have a sense of having a separate national identity.
It’s more than feeling distinct. Like, someone from northern England will note and even be proud of their cultural distinction from southern England or London but they would still absolutely see themselves as English.
Ask a Texan if they feel American and the overwhelming majority would say yes.
Ask a Texan if they feel American and the overwhelming majority would say yes.
3 months of Murdoch media telling them otherwise and suddenly there'll be a real movement to secede. The Ukraine as it exists now is a product of western manipulation, this identity clearly separated from and against russians didn't develop naturally.
Ukrainian nationalism was an issue for the tsars. It’s being harnessed and used by the west, radicalized for their purposes, but you are flatly incorrect to believe the sense of a Ukrainian national identity was invented by the west and you’re flatly incorrect to believe it’s recent.
You are allowing your current geopolitical alignment to write your account of history.
Ukrainian nationalism was an issue for the tsars. It’s being harnessed and used by the west, radicalized for their purposes, but you are flatly incorrect to believe the sense of a Ukrainian national identity was invented by the west and you’re flatly incorrect to believe it’s recent.
Was it a "Ukranian nationalism" featuring all ethnic Ukranians- or a "Ukranian nationalism" consisting of "Galicians," "Ruthenians," and the sort- west Ukranians, and particularly Catholics?
Everything certainly seems to point to it having been primarily the latter.
It was real enough for Lenin who emphasized the importance of self determination for the Ukrainians as distinct from the self determination of Russians when he argued in favor of creating a separate Ukrainian SSR so stop telling yourself this lie that it’s a purely Nazi or Polish creation.
The Ukrainian identity emerged alongside the Russian identity. It isn’t a “corruption” of a Russian identity. That’s a fucked belief to hold.
The Ukrainian identity emerged alongside the Russian identity. It isn’t a “corruption” of a Russian identity. That’s a fucked belief to hold.
Never said that, though FWIW my assumption was that the Belarussian and Ukranian identities splitting off from that of the general Rus, was due to the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth's influence. Not that their identities are invalid.
As for Lenin's actions- if you ask me, the mistake seems to have been giving culturally more ambiguous regions to Ukraine (probably as some sort of appeasement to west Ukranians, if I were to guess). Not like he, nor anyone else, was perfect- and he certainly couldn't have predicted events today.
Yeah OF COURSE the history of the region played a role in creating the distinction. How else could it happen?
Ethnic identities don’t emerge by being ordained by god. They emerge as a result of different shared histories.
OF COURSE the interaction between the Polish, Turkish, Mongol, and Russian empires played a role in creating the distinction. Over centuries.
How does that change the present reality that the distinction exists?
The reality is that a distinct Ukrainian national identity exists and isn’t new and that gives them a right to self determination.
Likewise the distinct national identity of the Donbas etc understanding themselves as Russian gives justice to their cause. I wouldn’t invalidate that by ranting about the Mongols changing the history of Russians.
How does that change the present reality that the distinction exists?
It changes the present reality in that the borders of modern Ukraine (and most borders, really) are a construct and not representative of the history prior nor the ethnic and cultural makeup of each district- they were drawn by Lenin.
And that seems to be at least half of the underlying issue in the conflict here (the other half being western instigation).
Actually it exactly gives the answer to where the current borders should lie by pointing to the way the people who live there understand themselves.
Donbas Crimea etc, clearly should go to Russia because that’s what the people who live there want.
And the western part who have long seen themselves as Ukrainian should be Ukraine.
Anyway we weren’t talking about the borders. It was about the language and I pointed out that a distinct identity saw itself as existing and said that was the end of discussion for me about the existence of the language (as opposed to a dialect) so this wasn’t about the borders it was about the existence of a distinct Ukrainian national identity.
The present borders don’t correspond to the mapping of where that ethnic identity actually predominates so yeah I support the right of self determination for the Donbas etc too, absolutely I do.
Fair enough, TBH I don't think we were disagreeing with anything then.
Zelensky will achieve this by making sure that every Ukrainian is either dead or a refugee.
