Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RedditUser91805 t1_j5igly8 wrote

Why are you presuming ethnic Russians want to be part of the Russian state? What type of blood and soil fascist apologia is this? This is the type of rhetoric and framing that gets immigrants all across the world attacked over accusations of dual loyalty.


Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5j9guy wrote

Just based on referendums. They want independence because they want to be allowed to speak their own language and not be shelled by the actual blood and soil fascists from Western Ukraine. The ones that declared Bandera a national hero in 2010 and still honor his statue. Maybe look in to who that was.


BrotherM t1_j5iguf6 wrote

I went to the Crimea when it was occupied by the Ukraine...the people there, by and large, from all the conversations I had, definitely wanted to be part of the Russian State (that's why people in the Crimea voted to join the RF when the Soviet Union collapsed...they were only kept in the Ukraine by threats of force by Kiev).


madrid987 t1_j5ipbeo wrote

Frankly, it was true that the Russians in Crimea were quite anti-Ukraine. The same is true of Donbas's Russians. In fact, Donbas has more ethnic ukrainians, but the Russians tried to incite them into pro-Russia. There are numerous Russian diasporas in the world, but Russians in Ukraine are particularly severe.

The Russians in Kazakhstan don't have that inclination.


BrotherM t1_j5kuos2 wrote

There isn't really any ethnic difference between Russians and Ukrainians, just cultural.


Allgoodonesaretaken9 t1_j5lby4u wrote

Explain that to the people in Western Ukraine. The ones that honor Nazi-leader Bandera still.


BrotherM t1_j5lgekq wrote

Oh I would :-)

Those Jew-murdering-Nazi worshipping fucks.

Ain't a damn thing good about Banderites.


RedditUser91805 t1_j5ih6du wrote

That's an interesting bending of history. Please remind me, is the current year 1994?


BrotherM t1_j5kv63o wrote

No, and people in the Crimea still prefer to be part of Russia. They always have! They were just stuck in the Ukraine because when they tried to separate, peacefully, from the Soviet Union (as did the Ukraine itself), then join Russia, the Ukraine threatened to roll in tanks.


kertnik t1_j5io1zv wrote

Your words aren't supported by any electoral or statustical data


canttouchmypingas t1_j5izdf8 wrote

They are, people just don't agree with the data as they believe it's manipulated


kertnik t1_j5j29r1 wrote

Well, Ukraine wasn't ever as repressive as Russia, and in no elections those parties that supported uniting with Russia (note that this is not the same as pro-Russian parties) never had more than 7% of votes.


canttouchmypingas t1_j5j2mi2 wrote

You replied to someone talking about Crimea, there was a referendum and most of the west doesn't accept it. This is the evidence to my counterclaim that his words are indeed supported by data, people just don't agree with it as they believe it's manipulated:


kertnik t1_j5j3ao2 wrote

Well, this 'referendum' can't in any way be more evidential than Ukrainian elections, just because it was contucted with military in polling places, under occupation (albeit peaceful), with no equal treatment of the opposing side (no pro-Ukraine narrative was allowed). And moreover, there are lots of discrepancies that implies those numbers were just written without even counting the ballots


canttouchmypingas t1_j5j5zgp wrote

You seem to be debating the data and are elaborating on why you think it's manipulative, that's not the point. You made a claim that there's no statistical data to back it up. I said there was, it was just contested, and provided a link. The only point is that there is data, contrary to your initial claim


kertnik t1_j5j7n2e wrote

It isn't data, I can myself create same thing that '96% Canadians are in favour of joining to the UK'.

Data becomes data when it is real, not just made up.


canttouchmypingas t1_j5jazik wrote

Just because you don't accept it doesn't make it real, you're getting a bit ahead of the point on why you disagree with it. I noted as such in my initial counterpoint where I said that data exists, people just believe it's manipulated. You believe it's manipulated and thus won't accept it, but that does not mean that it does not exist. You claimed that there was no data, I showed you the data. You cannot write it off either as its being used as one of the main claims by Russia. To them its very real and not manipulated. We cannot pretend it doesn't exist because we don't like it. That is the only point I have to make, that your original claim of no data existing is inaccurate. It does exist, it's simply not accepted by the west. There is a difference between nonexistence and nonacceptance.