@@MarkWTK Yes. The joke is the population buried their weapons in their back gardens for the day they can finally rise up and become independent again.
@@grimwaltzman Its not about tsarism, he did so willingly and knowingly to increase his power and influence. I dont remember where but Stalin supposedly hid the fact that he was georgian.
Petras Paulaitis is actually buried in my town's cemetery. After serving second sentence, he came back to Lithuania in 80s, to my town. Here he was under constant KGB surveillance. The surveillance documentation mentions local dissidents, including my two uncles. Senior one was interrogated in KGB office, other dissidents were even locked up in the militsya cells for "calming down"
@lati long in Lithuania KGB apparatus lost its momentum only in about 1988-1989, when they saw that its time for change and tried to get best economic and political positions using their status(exactly like in Russia, think about Putin)
How does the current Lithuanian government differs from Soviet one? Just a recent move from Lithuanian Contsitutional Court of Justice is a huge scandal itself. 200% communistic thing. They call it "sovok" in Russia.
@@Eugenijus81 It always amazes me when Russians label something clearly not communist as such, like, you of all people should know that. But then again, propaganda is a favourite tool of any incarnation of the russian state. And much of what was seen as "communist" in the USSR was just blatant authoritarian nonsense you'd find in a fascistic state too. Communism =/= authoritarianism.
@@Oujouj426 accoring to my passport, I am Lithuanian ;) Well, what can I say? If you guys like to live in an authoricratic country, you have it all. I may refresh your memory: Germany has been such a country as well, during the period between 1933 and 1945. They have ended up not that good. Until now Germany is not a sovereign state. As well as all the countries that used to be parts of USSR.
@@Eugenijus81 You've made several pro-Russian and anti-former Soviet states comments under this video. You can't even pretend like you care about opposing authoritarianism or fascism seeing as you've got nothing to say about Russia's preparations to invade Ukraine. Why do you even live there when you clearly have no love or loyalty for your country? If Russia ever attacked the Baltic countries, would you even fight for your "homeland"?
Very well explained. As a russian German I can confirm that all things went as explained. Maybe you forgot to mention about the soviet passport, which had the section "nationality ". It wasn't possible to have no nationality, being just a citizen of the USSR like it is common in the USA. Actually it was an instrument for separating the citizens in more or less politically reliable groups. As a German f.i. you couldn't get jobs related to state security.
@@SHAHIDKC To fully answer the question, the USSR imported many Germans for forced labor during the post-War reconstruction, as well as POWs. Most didn’t get back to Germany, though not all of them died. Plus Russia had an existing German population anyhow-the pre-Revolutionary Tsarina was German, after all.
@@urhunn7778 Some of argued that he was a great leader that he was able to navigate successfully the powder keg of ethnic tensions. Without him as leader, the country collapsed into civil war.
@@badluck5647 He navigated nothing. He killed his own trusted men, such as Andrija Hebrang, put in the jail every communist who dared to mentioned democratisation, both in Serbia and Croatia. The Yugoslav Army was a stalinist force, just they didn't worship Stalin, but Tito. Yugoslavia was living from American lines of credit, which mostly went for the Yugoslav Army and their crazy instalations. Economy collapsed in the middle of the 70s and once more in 1982. The standard was higher than in the USSR, that's certain. But the mess Tito left...
19:37 "parents sent their children to Russian-language schools" Definitely NOT TRUE about Estonia. Ethnic Estonians did not put their children into Russian-language schools to improve their career options. 19:42 "the emerging political and social class elites in the Union Republics spoke Russian as a first language." Again in the case of Estonia, yes, the political elites spoke Russian, but that's because these were ethnic Russians imported from Russia.
Well, I don't know how about most of other Soviet republics, but it's true that most of local people used to learn children in their own mother tongues (hello Latvia!). But I spoke to a guy from Uzbekistan in early 2000s, and according to what he told, in Uzbek SSR most of educated people did use Russian language as the primary means of communication in their daily life. Even in 100% uzbek families. But once again... Baltic States have never been a true USSR. We've been like a "showroom of socializm" for the West.
8:52 It's probably worth mentioning that national heroes who did not fit that mold of the USSR were essentially banned. Their monuments destroyed and during most of the USSR it was even borderline impossible to include any information about them in history books, other than maybe denouncing themas evil imperialists and so on. Pre-USSR history in individual republics history books was heavily compressed, and simply generalized as some horrible period, before the Soviet period which was supposed to be seen as solving all of their problems.
the quote in your opening statement was not from General De Gaulle but is most often attributed to Romain Gary a resistance fighter.My remark might seem irrelevent but that quote clearly goes against De Gaulle's beliefs. For further understanding I would invite you to read De Gaulle By De Gaulle writen by Pierrefite it sums up pretty well his beliefs. Awesome work as usual tho !
This was a nicely informative video. The relationship the USSR had with the minorities under it's control can be summed up in one word "Complicated." My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
Not so complicated, there was a dominant group (Russians) who slowly assimilated the smaller groups. Then comes the red menace and promises yhese minorities many things (as Marxists always do) yo destroy the empire. When they won they repressed the minorities.
Genocidal. Simple as that. Nothing complicated about the mass shootings, mass deportations and mass russification of all small nations occupied by Russia. Moldova is a testament to that.
whenever it is "complicated" the large dominant ethnic group always grows on the extent of smaller minorities. So complicated is automatically always bad. Why do you think former Polish or Bessarabian Jews finally ended up in Israel only speaking Russian. Or when the offspring of Wolga Germans that emigrated to Germany and had to learn German again. When two minorities had to deal with each other, like the deported Koreans in Kazakhstan, or the Germans in Kirgistan, which language did they use when communicating with each other: Russian And what happened in the Donbas, where thousands of deported labourers were sent to work in the mines and factories there: it became Russified and Ukrainian died out.
After the Russian defeat in the Crimean War in 1856 and the Polish rebellion of 1863, Tsar Alexander II increased Russification to reduce the threat of future rebellions. Russia was populated by many minority groups, and forcing them to accept the Russian culture was an attempt to prevent self-determination tendencies and separatism.
They've also been given a wrong end of the stick, when then under Ukrainian law, they weren't legitimised and given an ownership of the land. That allowed Russia (after annexation of Crimea) to start moving the people away from the place, where they just began settling in. By "Just", I mean over the past 25-30 years or so.
@lati long I mean that was expected, considering what tatars did to russians in crimea when they arrived(Tmutarakan principality) and how they later raided russian countryside for centuries
And their troubles ain’t over yet. The Maiden Revolution was a time of change in Ukraine. But before long Crimea was dragged into the center of what can best described as a war.
just like Petras Paulaitis, Crimean tatar leader Mustafa Dzhemilev also spent decades in prisons and labour camps for demanding freedom for his people. He has the longest hunger strike record of 303 days (they fed him by force). It seems in the great soviet union you cannot die from hunger without the official state decision!
@lati long Because most of their houses were owned by retired Soviet sailors from Russia, all their schools were transformed into Russian schools and the religious houses were turned into cafes and clubs by Soviets
There's an entire Tatar republic in the Russian Federation. People there speak Tatar. There is no meaningful difference between Crimean Tatar and Tatar Tatar. In a way, Stalin just gave the Crimean Tatars a ticket home. After all, that people genocided the Ostrogoths (the population of Crimea before the so-called 'Crimean Tatars'.
@@mitchyoung93 He didn’t send the Crimean Tatars to Tatarstan. He sent them to Uzbekistan. He was intentionally exiling them because a few of them collaborated with the Axis. And the Tatars taking Crimea from the Ostrogoths many centuries before does not justify them being driven out of their homes at gunpoint and replaced by Slavic settlers.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." -Anatole France It's remarkable how much in common american capitalism and Soviet communism were for the average person.
@@kaseybrown7945 If you think Soviet communism and American capitalism are equally bad, count yourself lucky that you don’t know how bad Soviet communism was.
@@kaseybrown7945 Again, you are not even comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing lard and lamb chops. Yes, if you squint hard enough, you may see some similarities, but one is clearly better than the other. Lastly, Bangladeshi Muslim guy here - came to the US with not much. The US has been very kind to me, and I have not experienced the oppressive power structures you speak of.
The Soviet union was like PRC China, Lao PDR and Vietnam SR, crazy diverse. The PRC recognized 56 ethnic groups. The Lao PDR recognized 47 ethnic groups and 148 speaking languages. Vietnam SR recognized 54 ethnic groups. All their media show how beautiful culture, harmonization and happiness of those ethnic groups have.
You sure? Stalin, specifically, forced everyone to use those scripts? I think you may be forgetting that during Lenin's time Stalin was the Commisar for Nationalities - that was literally his job.
@@socire72 Maybe by himself, or his colleagues. But one thing for sure is when Stalin ruled soviet union. Minorities' culture was damaged and russified. I am a kazakh myself, and we still use cyrillic instead of our traditional arabic scripts, which we used for about thousand years
19:30 In some regions there were no non-russian schools. In northern Kostanay region of Kazakh SSR only two Kazakh schools existed as for 1989, one in the regional center, and the second in lightly populated region that was just recently integrated into the region then. Kazakhs comprised 23% of population back then, (in my region, and 40% overall) and USSR government tried to assimilate us. After 1960, Kazakh schools started to close in mass in northern Kazakhstan, and the next year Virgin Lands region was created to be transferred to Russia. Fortunately, our nation survived and maintained its integrity.
@@Eugenijus81 No, they did not deserve it, you psychopath. If Germany had won, would you have said these massive amounts of people would have been right to be killed for dubious "Soviet collaboration"? No, you wouldn't, because you're a nationalist that makes exceptions for your country to do heinous crimes against humanity. The USSR murdered thousands and crippled entire nations within its borders to smother any resistance to their imperialism. The lands between Germany and Russia had people fighting on both sides of the conflict to keep the other side away, whether this was by their own choice (the minority), or by Nazi and Soviet conscription. Get your head out of your ass before your country engages in another imperialist invasion of a people that are just trying to live their lives.
@@triadwarfare, oh, that's another very interesting thing. The point, why hunger has occured, not only in Ukraine, but also in Krasnodar Kray and Stavropol Kray is that Russia used to purchase lot's of licenses from the US and other countries of the West. Western countries didn't want to get paid with gold or western currencies, but wanted to get wheat. In order to pay, the communists did export as much grain as it was produced. Whithout building of power stations, car factories, plane factories and other industrial facilities, USSR would not be capable of fighting Germany in 1940s. So, now you know who blame for "Holodomor".
@@Eugenijus81 The French government persecuted individuals who had collaborated with the Nazis, not entire ethnic groups that had some members who had helped the Nazis.
Jevgenij Krivosejev It's absolutely clear that you don't know what you're talking about. The Soviets were far more brutal in the Baltic countries compared to the Germans. Soviets murdered more people in the Baltics in one year (1940-1941) than Germans did during their entire occupation (1941-1944). Red Army soldiers acted like medieval Mongols often murdering and t or turing random women, children and elderly people. German soldiers rarely did things like that in the Baltics. While the Germans of course committed horrible crimes against the Jews (there weren't many in Estonia and Latvia even before the war) they treated Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians better than the Soviets. There is a reason why many Estonians and Latvians preferred to fight even in German uniform against the Soviets rather than to let the Soviets to reoccupy their countries.
The virgin lands program could very much be seen as a continuation of Russian colonization in Central Asia, of trying to make unruly nomads settle down into "civilized" society...and its environmental consequences were definitely a lot of the reasoning behind the unity of the Kazakh state: the USSR didn't take the needs of the land and people into account, and Nazarbayev rose to power partially as an environmental activist. So while agricultural production may have been the main reason for it, I don't think the other colonial issues present in its implementation were seen as negative by the powers that be.
Uzbekistan wasn't too different IIRC. The Soviets beginning with Khrushchev decided to forcefully change the landscape of that republic to make it a cash crop region for the USSR (mostly cotton). The result is that one of the largest inland seas was destroyed, multiple communities displaced, and pollutants contaminating the environment. Even today, Uzbekistan as an independent country is still dealing with these issues. However, they are committed to still growing the giant cotton fields as nearly their entire economy was built around them (what made it even worse is that for years the country used forced labor including from children, but thankfully they've begun purchasing machinery from the United States to reduce or eliminate this practice). An example of outside meddling completely reshaping a land and people.
Yeah, I could see how environmentalism might become an issue in a state where the USSR and later Russia were routinely crashing rockets fueled with carcinogenic liquid and essentially nitric acid (dinitrogen tetroxide/unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine).
@@thunderbird1921 узбекистан это стране никогда в истории не существовавшая до образования СССР никогда в истории небылр такой нации узбеки нация узбеки была создана сталиным из пяти - семи маленьких тюркских и персидских народов живших на той територии не один из которых не назывался узбеки
@@thunderbird1921 далее ты применяеш термин *внешнее вмешательство* о каком внешнем вмешательстве идет речь если уз сср это территория СССР !? все что производилось СССР на територии уз сср производилось на своей суверенной территории )
It's sad that most of the Asian looking cultures in Siberia and even Mongolia were the subjects of Russification. But slowly things are getting back on track and these cultures are slowly reviving the long lost identity.
@lati long I wonder what Lithuanians would think if ethnic Russians in Ukraine declared themselves to be the soviet union and therefore independent from Ukraine
You people really need to learn to differentiate between "government" and "people". This stance is a stance of the Lithuanian government, there was no referendum.
The only Tibetans and Uighurs I see wanting independence from Xinjiang or Tibet that I know of are Uighurs or Tibetans born into immigrant families who left there in the 1940s or earlier. These Uighurs and Tibetans you see protesting in the West have never been to Tibet or Xinjiang, they are just descendants of immigrants who fled Xinjiang and Tibet when they were independent. They are completely Western people who have never visited China, much less the lands of their ancestors, and have decided to hide in the comfort of the US, Japan or Europe. If you talk to any Uygur or Tibetan living in China, they have views favorable to the Communist Party and the Chinese government. The Anglo-Saxon people or the Oriental people want to use the situation in Tibet and Xinjiang to destabilize China. You won't succeed, because the people are united! 我祝他們好運
One reason - although certainly not the main one - I keep watching these videos is the anticipation of the bell-button talk. These keep getting crazier and crazier. Thank You! :D
The issue is very complex and Soviet policies very changeable. Moreover, there have often been big differences between words and deeds, and between some nationalities and languages and others. Nevertheless, I consider the summary to be excellent. Congratulations! That said, a couple of questions. It is doubtful that Russian was promoted as a lingua franca during Korennizatsia. There are numerous counterexamples, such as the admission of letters in virtually any national language in central bodies during the 1920s and the encouragement of learning regional languages by ethnic Russians in the autonomous republics/regions/etc. On the other hand, the claim that under Khrushchev Russian ceased to be a compulsory subject is basically a fallacy. It was a statement in Khrushchev's theses that preceded the 1958 educational reform. It is well known that the reforms led to a much greater Russification of education, increasing the number of hours devoted to Russian and totally or partially eliminating dozens of languages as languages of instruction. Of course, this was done according to the supposed will of parents, but very rarely was there any consultation. (This is not to say that such Russification was welcomed by many parents, especially in the autonomous republics of Russia, as you rightly point out, but that is another matter).
@lati long I think the resentment of Russia treating the countries in the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact as colonies and vassal states was pretty universal among Eastern Europe. However, the oppression was different in each region.
Soviet history books were only focused on Russian history, completely ignoring history of nations of Caucasus and Central Asia, mentioning them only in context of imperial conquests and so on.
The Soviet government literally forced Russian speaking kids in areas than had never really spoken 'Ukrainian' to learn 'Ukranian' in schools. So I'm guessing you are not right.
нет конечно в закавказье уже мало кто знает русский в средней азии так же едва половина его знает и 10% средней азии говорит на нем дома с родственниками
First, it would be really useful for Georgians, Turkmens, etc to known Russian, as huge numbers of these folks work in the Federation. There were, for example, an estimated 500,000 Georgians in the Russian Federation as of 2020. Second, nearly all the ex colonial empires do the same. France promotes le Francophonia. Spain, who you'd think would be satisfied with its 17 or so countries that have Espanyol as official, promotes Spanish even in places like Morocco and Equitorial Guinea and the Philippines. Even Germany has its Goethe institutes around the world but especially in Central Europe.
@@yanneager4855 In some cases, when you know the background & context of personality, time and place really well, then yes, you can immediately say "this author could not write it".
@John g What a biggoted comment. Attacking linguistic minorities in north america for trying to survive in an increasingly global world when english speaking provinces like Ontario, Alberta and Manitoba de facto banned french education for decades to eradicate threats to majority anglo-saxon economic supremacy. We speak english, you don't speak french in return, it's not symmetrical. Denmark demand things be done in danish, why can't we do the same?
@John g In majority of countries where English is not a native and/or official language kids in schools have to learn at least one foreign language so stop complaining.
And indeed had 'pure wool' Quebeckers votes been counted for independence, you'd have it. Instead Trudeau the elder purposely flooded your land with immigrants who would vote to stay in Canada.
Excellent work...everything seems right, although a little historical context definitely illumines a lot of other moments, and I would argue that there are four+ distinct regions where nationalism and the Soviet Union's handling of it went very differently than the general outlines you explained here. 1)The West: You mentioned briefly the annexation of the Baltics (Kaliningrad, Karelia and Western Ukraine were also annexed during WWII)...I think definitely nationalism in the Soviet Union is hugely different regionally on the basis of that experience, in that large numbers of the people in those territories never had great love of the Soviet Union because their standards of living and such were always going to be compared to Western Europe/pre-war, and they felt themselves occupied. For this reason, at least from the often polemical Baltic and Ukrainian sources I have seem, Russification was undertaken at a later date and in more overt ways and more strongly in these regions (Almost completely in Kaliningrad, where Soviet nationalism, like in Crimea, was pretty strong due to the military ties), because their loyalty was always under question for good reason. The sources I have seen said that Lithuanian instruction was much more tightly controlled/persecuted than Central Asian languages ever were. It should be noted that Moldova is a bit of an in-between here; I don't know enough to make arguments. 2)The Caucasus Republics: I don't know very much, and while I know Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia today each have VERY different relationships to Russia and the Soviet Union on the basis of their historic and national experiences. But it's definitely different there than it is in regions 1 and 3. 3)The Caucasus Internal Republics: Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan. Obviously there were wars in the 1990s. 4)Central Asia: While Uzbekistan wasn't as undeveloped as the rest of the Republics come the start of the Soviet Union, (And Tashkent, like Almaty, had been an Imperial city for centuries, whereas South Kyrgyzstan was only integrated into the empire in the 1890s), there are definite differences in each nation. For example, the Tajik, Kazakh and Kyrgyz identities were created by the Soviet Union in many ways, as for example, there weren't necessarily firm dividing lines between Kyrgyz and Kazakh before the 20s, and Tajik as a concept was mostly created to break Tajiks from their ties to Iran (and the other central Asian nationalities could be seen as anti-pan-Turkish creations). The Persian-speaking Sarts are also interesting in their between-ness, eventually becoming Tajik or Uzbek. It's impossible to imagine the present identities of these nations without the Soviet Union. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan suffered a lot during the Basmachi (the draft riot revolution right before the soviet revolution in 1916), and the resulting violence and then the Civil War conquest, and collectivization of a nomadic society left a society/culture that was very much broken by the experience (I mean, it's estimated as much as 33% of Kyrgyz men may have died in 1916, and many more left for China), and the nations they are today were created and formed in the Soviet womb. While some culture and values have survived, the Soviet Union was formative in many positive (literacy, electricity, modernization, healthcare, education, racial unity, social welfare) and some negative: (racial and economic inequality, state violence, corruption) ways. So in Central Asia, a lot of Russification happened before the Soviet Union. The process afterward was more of "Sovietization," and a situation similar to the one under the Ottoman Millet system...a general pressure rather than a systematic change. Everyone learned Russian in school, but before that in nomadic areas there weren't schools. If one wanted to succeed and get ahead, one had to be a good Soviet and speak good Russian. Opportunities for non-Russian speakers in the Soviet Union were pretty limited. So Russification occurred, but it was part of a deeper "Sovietization" that often had other areas (collective farming) that were more of a sticking point. Kazakhstan and Ukraine also share modern nationalisms that have a strong foundation in the mismanagement mentioned in the video: the Virgin Lands, Aral Sea, space and nuclear testing waste (KZ), Chernobyl, and the famines. Whereas they were more closely tied to the Soviet Union and enjoyed closer and more powerful positions in Moscow than the other republics generally. 5)The Far East: A lot of territory shifted in the 1930s-40s, with things like the creation of Mongolia, the Chinese Civil war, Uighurstan at one point being part of the USSR, and the battles between Russia and Japan just before WWII. Definitely these parts of Russia today are very different from Moscow, and may feel neglected at times, but haven't seen very much nationalism and seem to be an intergral part of Russia. Tatarstan and other places not so far east or south may or may not be painted with the same brush, I don't really know enough.
@@可爱包-c4v: You are correct...I saw some maps that made me think so, but I think it was just the East Turkestan republic. Xinjiang was often disputed territory for much of 1920-1949, and the government was often more loyal to the USSR than to the Chinese Republic, but never formally annexed. The closest was the East Turkestan republic from 1944-1949, which was a Soviet satellite state in North Xinjiang.
The worst part of creating "Soviet people" where the attempt of Russification , and russian "superiority" propoganda (what growed in kind of Russian showinism). I think that where the main problem the USSR regime did, and that's what exactly did not liked to other nations in Soviet Union and eastern block. The false "soviet nationality" (meaning "russian"). This is the reason many soviet nations broke independent. Then and even now, the Russian people (as large nation) do not understand this, because did not feel the pressure of Russification.
Grossly wrong. Moreover - stupidly wrong. 1) There were no Russian "superiority" propaganda. 2) Enormous amounts of books and periodicals in great many languages of the nations that lived in the USSR were published. 3) There were no such thing as "Soviet nationality"; there was the notion of the Soviet Person (советский человек), plus the idea of equality of all ethnicyties and races. 4) The Russian language was taught in all schools around the USSR, but that fact had nothing to do with any sort of "russification"; Russian was the official language, plus it was the actual lingua franca among the counrty.
That is a gross over-simplification. I grew up in what is now Turkmenistan and everyone (including those who did not speak the turkmen language at home) were required to learn Turkmen at school. There were also schools in each city that ONLY taught in Turkmen. Also, all official documents have always been made in two languages. In some republics, particularly East of the Caspian Sea, many those who lived outside of major cities either did not speak Russian or their knowledge of Russian was very very poor. The Russian was the official language of the state, which is no different to any other nation that picks the language spoken by the majority.
@lati long Never heard the term "Sovistani". If you're talking about the Kazakh/Kirghiz/Turkmen and Uzbeks, their languages do indeed belong to Turkick group. Tajiks are not "Irani", but closely related to Afghans, but both Iranians and Tajiks speak a dialect of Farsi. The relationship between all has not changed much over the past 100 years.
@lati long If you listen to Russian nationalists, you will find out that the USSR was a machine of oppression for Russians, who were used to develop and support other republics and countries of the socialist camp to the detriment of Russia. And Russia itself was turned by the 90s into degrading regions with a population of alcoholics. They destroyed Russian culture and self-consciousness, fought against Christianity. Instead, they planted a false concept of the Soviet people, international friendship and communism. Russian history was banned except for 2-3 generals, 3-4 scientists, 10-20 writers, musicians and artists who were instilled with patriotism and false grandeur. And I'm not even talking about the times of Lenin and Stalin Now Russia is ruled by the Soviet boomer Putin, who is doing the same and risking repeating the same mistakes. The most amazing thing is that some of their claims will have quite convincing evidence. So it seems to me that all parties are right in this dispute.The Soviet authorities balanced in the national question and tried to please everyone, at the same time they tried to suppress dangerous phenomena and as a result earned the hatred of all sides, including the Russians.
One of the great ironies of Marx rejecting nationalism is that it was apart of several of left-socialist, left wing independence movements/governments along with left-socialist equivalent and quasi-socialist governments and movements. Tito's Yugoslavia, Ho Chi Min's Vietnam, Mugabe's Zimbabwe (if not the majority of anti-colonial movements in Africa), Castro's Cuba, Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, Ortega's first stint in Nicaragua, Nasserism, Syrian and Iraqi Baathism and Libyan Jamahiriya. So it's kinda funny when people say that nationalism is a right wing concept (originally it was branded a secular concept) when in fact like populism, nationalism has both a left and right
Ho Chi Minh and other Vietnamese nationalist groups were just wanting to reestablish a Vietnam based on 1887 borders. They were "nationalists" came from many backgrounds just wanted to recreate a shared nation, not based on ethnically boundaries. Not ethnic tribalism. Its similar to many African and Southeast Asian countries. Different with ethnonationalism in Europe (nation in Europe=ethnic group, while nation in Asia =/= ethnic group). Ho Chi Minh didn't care about ethnic Vietnamese Kinh splinters in Laos, Cambodia, China, Thailand.
@lati long lol "Han Chinese" subgroup pseudo hoax 💩 Genetic research found the Vietnamese Kinh have majority Austroasiatic O1b1 M95 Y-chromosome Halogroup and are closest on the genetic chart with the Muong ( Mwai) people.
@lati long One of the reasons why I like channels like this is because it doesn't paint the Cold War as in black and white terms as it's unfortunately taught
@lati long Yue or Baiyue peoples are not the same as Vietnamese, and ancestors of modern day Vietnamese were probably one tribe among 100 Yue tribes. No one ever call these tribes "Viet" or BaiViet tribes. And the Baiyue were not Chinese or Sinitic.
More over, "Vietnamese people" 's true meaning should be "citizens of Vietnam regardless of ethnic groups" while specific ethnic Vietnamese that people often regarding, are called Kinh, Kinh people, not really "Vietnamese people".
Meanwhile, everybody in the world must learn English. The United Nations speaks English. In order to get anywhere in the world, you need to learn English.
I remembered otherwise and surely enough: "There are six official languages of the UN. These are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish." In EU parliament we have 24 and they're translated simultaneously. But yep, English is the main gateway to the world, at least for smaller nations.
It would be interesting to have a segment on the recruitment of other Soviet citizens to too replace those who had been pushed out of their traditional homelands by the government.
While during the Cold War the non-russian minorities had to learn russian and the russian culture now some are frustrating that the russian minority is no longer in charge of the former republics.
The big problem is that the Bolsheviks inherited the Russian empire and needed an excuse to keep it together. Originally, there seemed to be an honest effort to encourage the different ethnic groups to be part of the union willingly. But as with just about everything Stalin did, all that was cast aside in favor of Russian supremacy, the way it was in imperial times. Perestroika tried to bring the country back to where it started post-Revolution, but the ethnic peoples had been so badly abused by the Stalinists that there was no going back. They bolted first chance they got. The Soviet Union fell apart because there was no reason for it to stay together. Maybe Stalin realized that earlier and decided the only way to hold the country together was by force. Just like Tito and even Saddam Hussein. The same thing is happening with Putin. He wants to restore Russia to its former glory and again nobody wants to play along. So he tries to do it with force.
When speaking of Stalin's urge to impose Russian supremacy, it is worth pointing out that Stalin and Beria were Georgians and both spoke with heavy accent. If the whole idea of "russian supremacy" is true, it most definitely didn't come out of Stalin himself.
@@trizvanov that’s what makes it all the more confusing. But Stalin was pragmatic to a fault. No way he was going to build a Georgian-centric nation, so he went with the largest, most predominant group. By doing so, he just re-created Imperial Russia.
@@msquaretheoriginal I don't think it is confusing at all. The Russian language was the most widely used in the country, so it made sense to use that as an official language. This isn't any different to English (Not French or Dutch or German) getting picked up as an official language in the United States. I grew up in Soviet Union but I am not an ethnic Russian. To suggest that Russian language or culture was somehow forced on all of the ethnic groups is a gross over-simplifaction.
@@trizvanov it certainly was in imperial times to the extent that education and publishing in the local languages were suppressed. My grandfather spoke better Russian than Polish as a result.
@@msquaretheoriginal In the Imperial times, maybe. Poland however was never a Soviet republic and as a result, Russian was never an official language in that country.
Don't give Luck or Brussels the credit. Hungary also managed to member of both and look at how they are going. The Blatics states had integrity. Simply being part of the club doesn't do that.
United States putting down democracy in latin America in the name of democracy and USSR putting down revolutions in eastern europe in the name of the revolution.
@@SHAHIDKC During the cold war in Latin America, America's priority wasn't spreading democracy. It was stopping communism. Democracy and human rights weren't really a priority until after the Cold War.
I recently visited the young Armenian republic. I was struck by how deeply the Soviet influence had penetrated, smothered and displaced the local language, architecture and lifestyle. It was sad to see and sadder to think how hard it will be for the Armenians to recover.
в армении при СССР на русском могло изъясняться 20 - 30% от силы и то на плохом и то в последние годы СССР 1986 скажем какое еще влияние проникло в армянскую (арабскую) культуру ? армения была первая республика СССР вышедшая из СССР после референдума о независимости
It's an open question whether Armenia would still exist without Russian (Imperial and Soviet) protection. It's not for nothing that 'Putin's Propagandist', Margarita Simyonan, is completely Armenia by blood and upbringing and self-identifies as Armenian.
Interesting is the similarity of the names Russia and Prussia. Note the word "Russification" refers to the policy of resettling Russians into non-Russian areas of the Soviet Union to begin subverting their cultures. The word “Prussification”, likewise, means the act of making something Prussian in similar ways - ironically though, the original Prussians (called the Brus/Prusai) were mostly exterminated by the Teutonic Order. Thus, it seems that Stalin’s methods and the beliefs of Hitler’s predecessors were well aligned when it came to the subjugation of other cultures. Note that Hitler and his adulation of all things Prussian, also, had ‘the Ukraine’ in his sights (where Russification had already been started by Stalin).
Having been a Cold war soldier 1975 to 1985 mainly in Germany i was able to follow many of the events you speak of i was working for (M I ) at the time both in Fulda and Berlin it was very interesting to see these things develope this is why i enjoy your channel so much it brings it in to focus. Thank you for sharing this Important era of history that so many have forgotten .
CCCP (USSR) sometimes uses nationalism as a weapon. Some Kazakhs live on the border between China and CCCP. CCCP publicizes nationalism to Chinese Kazakhs in order to make them independent and join CCCP. But CCCP became too poor, so the Soviet Kazaks beat the Russians (they heard the nationalism publicized by the Soviet Union, so they thought they were better than the Russians, Russians made them poor). did the Soviet Union use this method to get Armenia or Azerbaijan from Iran?
internationalism has always been part of Marxism, Leninists support the nationalism of the oppressed and oppose the nationalism of the oppressor, all Marxists are internationalists but Marxists part of an oppressed nation are proletarian nationalists
It has always been the same with Imperial systems in which everything falls under one of two categories, Imperial or Other. In a way Federalism with no other challengers evolve the same way with everything falling under Federal or other.
Kazakhstan had only about 30% of Kazakhs in 1959. Kazakh population suffered famine of 1920-1922, artificial famine caused by collectivisation in 1930-1933, where half of Kazakh population died as a result. Turned out that lands were now empty and Soviet government sent Russian colonists to repopulate them, turning Kazakhs into second-class citizens.
And now Kazakhs are 70% of the population and increasing while Russians are are dying off and leaving the country. May the womb of every Kazakh mother be blessed and fertile- you guys need to increase in number and strength as much as you can. I wish the same for every Turkic and Muslim nation in Eurasia, Russia, China, The Balkans, Middle East and Caucasus . It is time for us to take our revenge and again get on top like we used to be for thousands of years.
русские на землях нынешнего северного казахстана жили за столетия до 1920 ых годов по тому как то были именно русские земли а не казахские и в состав каз сср те земли были включены сталиным с целью разбавить в республике национальный состав русским населением думаю стоит заметить что в современном казахстане казахи именно казахи не основали не одного города и даже не одного аула или деревни все населенные пункты современного казахстана основаны русскими и построены русскими уже в советское время начинается компания перевоза казахов из земель граничащих с узбекистаном на север в русские земли Актюбинска Уральска Усть Каменогорска Семипалатинска Петропавловска Павлодара и прочих городов и их областей не нужно здесь расказывать сказок про *земли обезлюдели и на них начали завозить русское население* те земли и были русскими минимум с *1600* годов то есть с 17 века и жили там русские за 300 лет до появления такой нации как казахи которой если быть полностью честным до СТАЛИНА её создавшего вообще не существовало а по територии граничащей с современным узбекистаном кочевало несколько племен не одно из которых не называлось казахи
That forced Russian education "for their own good" sounds a lot like the motives of the residential schools in Canada that are drawing so much attention these days in the West. Would you say it is fair to compare these two systems in terms of motives? If so, is it fair to use that new "cultural genocide" buzzword for these policies?
Russian language is full to the brims of the ethnic slur, English language is grossly underpowered in that regard. Majority of ethnic Russians fully embraced Imperial ideology of domination and assimilation and sorta derive their national identity from that. In their mind they carry the torch of civilization to the savages, nevermind Russian civilization is thoroughly second or third rate if not for the Siberia tsars stole from the nomadic tribes and China a few centuries ago.
Russian culture is inherited from Mongolia and Eastern Rome. China and Mongolia had lived together for a long time, but the exchanges between the Han nationality (China's main ethnic group) and Mongolia are mainly religion (Buddhism), food, clothing and military technology (ancient era). Personally, Russia is the son of Eastern Rome and the Russian Empire and was raised by Mongolia.
I like Russian culture very much, but in Russia, there are only dumplings and tea from China. Russian food is influenced by the Caucasus, Russian art is like eastern Rome , and soul of Russian is like Mongolia.
@@可爱包-c4v What the hell are you high on to write such retarded nonsense? The Russian Empire has its origins in Rus and has nothing in common with stone age mongolia (which never even existed until it was established by Russians). The mongolians were always millions of years behind superior Russians. Look at all of the achievements of the Russian Empire. What has mongolia ever achieved other than poverty, yurts and stone age nomadism?
The one thing I'm interested in about the Cold War is the people who defected both to the Soviet Union and the United States another subject I would love to see a video made about is about the reality check in the game Call of Duty Cold War there's a mission where you in basically where you play as first a Russian spy the next thing you know you're going on a rampage inside the most secure building of a Soviet Union the kvg....
I've heard that the reason some Americans defected to the USSR is because they believed their living conditions would be better, many were down on their luck folks and even a few African Americans (though the latter never really got big). Tragically, at least some of them died in Stalin's purges, showing they had bought into a cruel and deadly lie. Defections to America by Soviet folks was probably much more common. Some of them were wanting out of the tyranny, while others were spies and diplomats who had their eyes opened upon seeing America and the West for themselves (one talked about seeing more food then ever before in their lives). Economic opportunities were also a factor in defections. It's astonishingly similar to the reasons many North Koreans try to defect in the current era.
A question. Of the 32,000 - 35, 000 Russian soldiers killed in the war with the Ukrain, how many were from the "minority" states as opposed to the Russians of Moscow and simular areas. Will these Russians only care when their children become casualties? Unfortunately, I am beginning to understand the reason for the degree of unnecessary destruction of civilian areas in Ukraine and the sending of the remaining Ukrainians to Russia. Do they even see the Russian minorities as humans worthy of life? I hope I am wrong . But, I want to be clear in my understanding.
Probably a disproportionate number were from ethnic minorities like Buryats and Tatars. But the overwhelming majority are from 'country' Russian oblasts. This mirrors the dead in recent US conflicts where a disproportionate number of Pacific Islanders (including from territories that aren't states) and Indians, but the majority are young white men from rural and exurban America. They die for a US regime that hates them.
@@mitchyoung93 Sorry dude but I was in the military and I am black. Units are not formulated based on race or region. They are deployed based on the needs of the mission. It is not the same,. My unit had every racial, ethnic, or regional representation you could imagine. We all were deployed to the same place. As the saying goes... bullets don't care who your mama is.
Almost all of the soldiers in Ukraine are professionals or they are volunteers. As for mobilization policies. All oblasts and republics within the RF are required to meet a quota based on their population. Naturally, Westerners want to use anything they can to drive Russians apart. Whether you are Tatar, Chechen, or Slavic, we are all Russian citizens and call Russia our motherland.
The facts are these. Currently, there have been 420,000 Russian casualties. The overwhelming majority have come from regions out of Moscow and St. Petersburg, Putin's base. These regions are already showing discontent due to the losses. The next mobilization will require the mobilization within Putin's base. What will be the result? Putin's only hope is that the West stops supporting Ukraine. That will not happen.@@sacWeapons
Either RUclips is a god and can read my mind since I have to make an essay about nationalism (and I was planning on using the Soviet Union's case as a thesis) or the algorithms are extremely good.
I found this video to be quite informative! If there is one sentence from here I can summarize the answer with, it's your sentence at the end (but replace the Bell Button with the national minorities): "...please make sure you [...] have granted the Bell Button independent rights, only to then take them away and have them restored at a later time, but by then, too much anger and resentment has built up and the Bell Button really doesn't want anything to do with you anymore." Thanks for the video! Also, nice pronunciation of those Russian words! Even Khrushchev's name was pronounced correctly at 13:04. Finally, thanks for the Ground News sponsorship! Were it not for me already having that, I would have taken it up!
I was first in the USSR in 1967. I traveled through 7 republics for a month with Ron Suny as a guide for a group of students. I made friends in Armenia and visited them 3 more times in the Soviet era as well as twice after Armenian independence. Ron fairly recently blamed (seen in this video) Lenin for allowing the different nationalities to continue their national development as described in the first part of this video. I found people in the Soviet era in Armenia to hold negative views of Russians. They continue to speak Russian as well as Armenian and are very welcoming to Russian visitors..
армяне (арабы) практически не говорят по русски и во времена СССР армения была республикой в которой русским владело самое маленькое количество населения и владело очень плохо возможно это объяснимо тем что СССР переселял в армению арабов из ирана и ближнего востока в 30 - 40 годы
I've been interested in cold war era military gear for a while, I found that east german stuff is my type of thing since most of my cousins are from Munich and have been there for generations. I'd love to see a video on the east german army/border guard/ stasi uniforms. I also have a east german military winter jacket simular to the afghanka winter jacket and I was wondering where this came from in terms of how it came about. It's in strichtarn and had german tags all over. But no info on it as the grenztruppen used great coats and the ddr did something simular. Anyway, love the videos and I've been binging them a lot. Thanks!
but "nationalism" if you are a small nation like Wales, Estonia, Ireland, Latvia, Armenia etc is about reversing the polities and ideologies which the (usually) larger nation has implemented to make you more like them.
I don’t mean to say that the USSR was a utopia or lived up to all of its ideals. But taken in a contemporary view, the Soviet Union was far less oppressive and discriminatory than say America
To say that the soviet republics have the right to succeed if they want and then after 1991 to be frustrated that the republics actually did so it's also hypocrisy. I'm referring to you Mr. Putin.
Reminds me of on old joke during the Cold War: Why do Lithuanians pour oil onto their flower beds? Answer: To keep the guns from rusting
sorry I don't understand. is the flower bed fill with guns?😅
@@MarkWTK Yes. The joke is the population buried their weapons in their back gardens for the day they can finally rise up and become independent again.
I know the same joke about ukraine and belarus people.
@@MarkWTK The guns are hidden under the flower bed.
Ironically, the Georgian Stalin became probably the greatest promoter of the Russification in the 20th century...
Well he did consider himself to be a russian of Georgian origin rather actually georgian. Pretty much tsarist assimilation at work.
@@grimwaltzman Its not about tsarism, he did so willingly and knowingly to increase his power and influence. I dont remember where but Stalin supposedly hid the fact that he was georgian.
Ironically, Putin shares many of his ideas.
@@DrSAM69 no, he doesn't. Putin, actually, is moving Russia in opposite direction.
@@Eugenijus81 Stalin was an authoritarian russian chuvanists and so is putin both of them are far right .
Petras Paulaitis is actually buried in my town's cemetery. After serving second sentence, he came back to Lithuania in 80s, to my town. Here he was under constant KGB surveillance. The surveillance documentation mentions local dissidents, including my two uncles. Senior one was interrogated in KGB office, other dissidents were even locked up in the militsya cells for "calming down"
@lati long in Lithuania KGB apparatus lost its momentum only in about 1988-1989, when they saw that its time for change and tried to get best economic and political positions using their status(exactly like in Russia, think about Putin)
How does the current Lithuanian government differs from Soviet one? Just a recent move from Lithuanian Contsitutional Court of Justice is a huge scandal itself. 200% communistic thing. They call it "sovok" in Russia.
@@Eugenijus81 It always amazes me when Russians label something clearly not communist as such, like, you of all people should know that. But then again, propaganda is a favourite tool of any incarnation of the russian state. And much of what was seen as "communist" in the USSR was just blatant authoritarian nonsense you'd find in a fascistic state too. Communism =/= authoritarianism.
@@Oujouj426 accoring to my passport, I am Lithuanian ;)
Well, what can I say? If you guys like to live in an authoricratic country, you have it all. I may refresh your memory: Germany has been such a country as well, during the period between 1933 and 1945. They have ended up not that good. Until now Germany is not a sovereign state. As well as all the countries that used to be parts of USSR.
@@Eugenijus81 You've made several pro-Russian and anti-former Soviet states comments under this video. You can't even pretend like you care about opposing authoritarianism or fascism seeing as you've got nothing to say about Russia's preparations to invade Ukraine. Why do you even live there when you clearly have no love or loyalty for your country? If Russia ever attacked the Baltic countries, would you even fight for your "homeland"?
Very well explained. As a russian German I can confirm that all things went as explained.
Maybe you forgot to mention about the soviet passport, which had the section "nationality ". It wasn't possible to have no nationality, being just a citizen of the USSR like it is common in the USA.
Actually it was an instrument for separating the citizens in more or less politically reliable groups. As a German f.i. you couldn't get jobs related to state security.
Russian German? How?
@@SHAHIDKC How do you think? A German ended up in Russia and never left. Simple as.
@@holyfordus thanks.
@@SHAHIDKC To fully answer the question, the USSR imported many Germans for forced labor during the post-War reconstruction, as well as POWs. Most didn’t get back to Germany, though not all of them died. Plus Russia had an existing German population anyhow-the pre-Revolutionary Tsarina was German, after all.
@@SHAHIDKC A lot of Germans migrated to Russia during the 18th century.
To be fair, Tito did a better job when he was in charge in Yugoslavia. I'm wainting for another video about Tito and his legacy.
He did no such job. Hatred in Yugoslavia was much more greater than in the USSR. He just had a great PR.
You must be kidding, right? Tito's Yugoslavia ended up in a huge massacre during the 1990s.
@@urhunn7778 Some of argued that he was a great leader that he was able to navigate successfully the powder keg of ethnic tensions. Without him as leader, the country collapsed into civil war.
@@badluck5647 He navigated nothing. He killed his own trusted men, such as Andrija Hebrang, put in the jail every communist who dared to mentioned democratisation, both in Serbia and Croatia. The Yugoslav Army was a stalinist force, just they didn't worship Stalin, but Tito.
Yugoslavia was living from American lines of credit, which mostly went for the Yugoslav Army and their crazy instalations. Economy collapsed in the middle of the 70s and once more in 1982. The standard was higher than in the USSR, that's certain. But the mess Tito left...
@@PP266 I'm not saying he wasn't a brutal dictator. I was just pointing out that he kept the multi ethnic nation united during his lifetime.
19:37 "parents sent their children to Russian-language schools"
Definitely NOT TRUE about Estonia. Ethnic Estonians did not put their children into Russian-language schools to improve their career options.
19:42 "the emerging political and social class elites in the Union Republics spoke Russian as a first language."
Again in the case of Estonia, yes, the political elites spoke Russian, but that's because these were ethnic Russians imported from Russia.
Who asked?
@@danielnikolaev2083 What a stupid comment
@@danielnikolaev2083 I did.
Thanks for sharing, crinihendrix1350
!
Well, I don't know how about most of other Soviet republics, but it's true that most of local people used to learn children in their own mother tongues (hello Latvia!).
But I spoke to a guy from Uzbekistan in early 2000s, and according to what he told, in Uzbek SSR most of educated people did use Russian language as the primary means of communication in their daily life. Even in 100% uzbek families.
But once again... Baltic States have never been a true USSR. We've been like a "showroom of socializm" for the West.
Bro, nobody cares about fucking estonia lol.
8:52 It's probably worth mentioning that national heroes who did not fit that mold of the USSR were essentially banned. Their monuments destroyed and during most of the USSR it was even borderline impossible to include any information about them in history books, other than maybe denouncing themas evil imperialists and so on. Pre-USSR history in individual republics history books was heavily compressed, and simply generalized as some horrible period, before the Soviet period which was supposed to be seen as solving all of their problems.
Okay? Do you think Germans should celebrate Hitler? No? Then you shouldn't celebrate terrible people.
the quote in your opening statement was not from General De Gaulle but is most often attributed to Romain Gary a resistance fighter.My remark might seem irrelevent but that quote clearly goes against De Gaulle's beliefs. For further understanding I would invite you to read De Gaulle By De Gaulle writen by Pierrefite it sums up pretty well his beliefs. Awesome work as usual tho !
This was a nicely informative video. The relationship the USSR had with the minorities under it's control can be summed up in one word "Complicated." My compliments to all those who made this video a reality.
Not so complicated, there was a dominant group (Russians) who slowly assimilated the smaller groups. Then comes the red menace and promises yhese minorities many things (as Marxists always do) yo destroy the empire. When they won they repressed the minorities.
Genocidal. Simple as that. Nothing complicated about the mass shootings, mass deportations and mass russification of all small nations occupied by Russia. Moldova is a testament to that.
whenever it is "complicated" the large dominant ethnic group always grows on the extent of smaller minorities. So complicated is automatically always bad.
Why do you think former Polish or Bessarabian Jews finally ended up in Israel only speaking Russian. Or when the offspring of Wolga Germans that emigrated to Germany and had to learn German again.
When two minorities had to deal with each other, like the deported Koreans in Kazakhstan, or the Germans in Kirgistan, which language did they use when communicating with each other: Russian
And what happened in the Donbas, where thousands of deported labourers were sent to work in the mines and factories there: it became Russified and Ukrainian died out.
After the Russian defeat in the Crimean War in 1856 and the Polish rebellion of 1863, Tsar Alexander II increased Russification to reduce the threat of future rebellions. Russia was populated by many minority groups, and forcing them to accept the Russian culture was an attempt to prevent self-determination tendencies and separatism.
Unfortunately, the Crimean Tatars were very affected by the deportations and nowadays they represent only an eighth of the population.
They've also been given a wrong end of the stick, when then under Ukrainian law, they weren't legitimised and given an ownership of the land. That allowed Russia (after annexation of Crimea) to start moving the people away from the place, where they just began settling in. By "Just", I mean over the past 25-30 years or so.
@lati long I mean that was expected, considering what tatars did to russians in crimea when they arrived(Tmutarakan principality) and how they later raided russian countryside for centuries
And their troubles ain’t over yet. The Maiden Revolution was a time of change in Ukraine. But before long Crimea was dragged into the center of what can best described as a war.
They also participated in the slave trade, selling over 3 million Ukrainians and Russians overseas - that's 25% of the Atlantic Slave Trade.
just like Petras Paulaitis, Crimean tatar leader Mustafa Dzhemilev also spent decades in prisons and labour camps for demanding freedom for his people. He has the longest hunger strike record of 303 days (they fed him by force). It seems in the great soviet union you cannot die from hunger without the official state decision!
@lati long Because most of their houses were owned by retired Soviet sailors from Russia, all their schools were transformed into Russian schools and the religious houses were turned into cafes and clubs by Soviets
There's an entire Tatar republic in the Russian Federation. People there speak Tatar. There is no meaningful difference between Crimean Tatar and Tatar Tatar. In a way, Stalin just gave the Crimean Tatars a ticket home. After all, that people genocided the Ostrogoths (the population of Crimea before the so-called 'Crimean Tatars'.
@@mitchyoung93 He didn’t send the Crimean Tatars to Tatarstan. He sent them to Uzbekistan. He was intentionally exiling them because a few of them collaborated with the Axis. And the Tatars taking Crimea from the Ostrogoths many centuries before does not justify them being driven out of their homes at gunpoint and replaced by Slavic settlers.
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” -George Orwell, Animal Farm.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread." -Anatole France
It's remarkable how much in common american capitalism and Soviet communism were for the average person.
@@kaseybrown7945 No, the Soviet communism genuinely was bad, whether for average person or not.. It's not even a debate.
@@kaseybrown7945 If you think Soviet communism and American capitalism are equally bad, count yourself lucky that you don’t know how bad Soviet communism was.
@@simteaz not equal at all, just sharing similar problems and oppressive power structures. The difference is in intensity.
@@kaseybrown7945 Again, you are not even comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing lard and lamb chops. Yes, if you squint hard enough, you may see some similarities, but one is clearly better than the other.
Lastly, Bangladeshi Muslim guy here - came to the US with not much. The US has been very kind to me, and I have not experienced the oppressive power structures you speak of.
The Soviet union was like PRC China, Lao PDR and Vietnam SR, crazy diverse. The PRC recognized 56 ethnic groups. The Lao PDR recognized 47 ethnic groups and 148 speaking languages. Vietnam SR recognized 54 ethnic groups. All their media show how beautiful culture, harmonization and happiness of those ethnic groups have.
In CPC China, many ethnic groups are branches of Han （汉）or Mongolian.
Yes they "show" despite the reality lol
The bell button must live a very interesting life. I'd read their biography.
They should do seperete video for it
BELL BUTTON APRIL FOOLS EPISODE!
The people demand it.
What the hell are you talking about?
Lenin gave Turkic people a single Latin alphabet. When Stalin took power, he forced them to use seperate Cyrillic scripts.
You sure? Stalin, specifically, forced everyone to use those scripts?
I think you may be forgetting that during Lenin's time Stalin was the Commisar for Nationalities - that was literally his job.
@@socire72 Maybe by himself, or his colleagues. But one thing for sure is when Stalin ruled soviet union. Minorities' culture was damaged and russified. I am a kazakh myself, and we still use cyrillic instead of our traditional arabic scripts, which we used for about thousand years
@@stairway5008 Yes, that is true, and in my view it was a mistake.
@@socire72 sounds like i just didnt understand, everything is fine then
19:30 In some regions there were no non-russian schools.
In northern Kostanay region of Kazakh SSR only two Kazakh schools existed as for 1989, one in the regional center, and the second in lightly populated region that was just recently integrated into the region then. Kazakhs comprised 23% of population back then, (in my region, and 40% overall) and USSR government tried to assimilate us. After 1960, Kazakh schools started to close in mass in northern Kazakhstan, and the next year Virgin Lands region was created to be transferred to Russia. Fortunately, our nation survived and maintained its integrity.
Nice story, I never knew any of this I wish we learned that in school in the US. Do stay safe if your still in that country with all the unrest now…
@@caseclosed9342 unrest is over, the frustration is not, unrest may start again tho.
You fail to mention the circumstances of these deportations. Many of them died even before they reach their destination.
@@Eugenijus81 No, they did not deserve it, you psychopath. If Germany had won, would you have said these massive amounts of people would have been right to be killed for dubious "Soviet collaboration"? No, you wouldn't, because you're a nationalist that makes exceptions for your country to do heinous crimes against humanity. The USSR murdered thousands and crippled entire nations within its borders to smother any resistance to their imperialism. The lands between Germany and Russia had people fighting on both sides of the conflict to keep the other side away, whether this was by their own choice (the minority), or by Nazi and Soviet conscription. Get your head out of your ass before your country engages in another imperialist invasion of a people that are just trying to live their lives.
@@Eugenijus81 victim blaming. Remember Holodomor.
@@triadwarfare, oh, that's another very interesting thing. The point, why hunger has occured, not only in Ukraine, but also in Krasnodar Kray and Stavropol Kray is that Russia used to purchase lot's of licenses from the US and other countries of the West.
Western countries didn't want to get paid with gold or western currencies, but wanted to get wheat. In order to pay, the communists did export as much grain as it was produced.
Whithout building of power stations, car factories, plane factories and other industrial facilities, USSR would not be capable of fighting Germany in 1940s.
So, now you know who blame for "Holodomor".
@@Eugenijus81
The French government persecuted individuals who had collaborated with the Nazis, not entire ethnic groups that had some members who had helped the Nazis.
Jevgenij Krivosejev It's absolutely clear that you don't know what you're talking about. The Soviets were far more brutal in the Baltic countries compared to the Germans. Soviets murdered more people in the Baltics in one year (1940-1941) than Germans did during their entire occupation (1941-1944). Red Army soldiers acted like medieval Mongols often murdering and t or turing random women, children and elderly people. German soldiers rarely did things like that in the Baltics. While the Germans of course committed horrible crimes against the Jews (there weren't many in Estonia and Latvia even before the war) they treated Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians better than the Soviets. There is a reason why many Estonians and Latvians preferred to fight even in German uniform against the Soviets rather than to let the Soviets to reoccupy their countries.
The virgin lands program could very much be seen as a continuation of Russian colonization in Central Asia, of trying to make unruly nomads settle down into "civilized" society...and its environmental consequences were definitely a lot of the reasoning behind the unity of the Kazakh state: the USSR didn't take the needs of the land and people into account, and Nazarbayev rose to power partially as an environmental activist. So while agricultural production may have been the main reason for it, I don't think the other colonial issues present in its implementation were seen as negative by the powers that be.
Well, there are a lot of Kazakhs who think that this was not a bad thing since we indeed were very backward. i guess it was a lesser evil
Uzbekistan wasn't too different IIRC. The Soviets beginning with Khrushchev decided to forcefully change the landscape of that republic to make it a cash crop region for the USSR (mostly cotton). The result is that one of the largest inland seas was destroyed, multiple communities displaced, and pollutants contaminating the environment. Even today, Uzbekistan as an independent country is still dealing with these issues. However, they are committed to still growing the giant cotton fields as nearly their entire economy was built around them (what made it even worse is that for years the country used forced labor including from children, but thankfully they've begun purchasing machinery from the United States to reduce or eliminate this practice). An example of outside meddling completely reshaping a land and people.
Yeah, I could see how environmentalism might become an issue in a state where the USSR and later Russia were routinely crashing rockets fueled with carcinogenic liquid and essentially nitric acid (dinitrogen tetroxide/unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine).
@@thunderbird1921
узбекистан это стране никогда в истории не существовавшая до образования СССР никогда в истории небылр такой нации узбеки
нация узбеки была создана сталиным из пяти - семи маленьких тюркских и персидских народов живших на той територии не один из которых не назывался узбеки
@@thunderbird1921
далее ты применяеш термин *внешнее вмешательство*
о каком внешнем вмешательстве идет речь если уз сср это территория СССР !? все что производилось СССР на територии уз сср производилось на своей суверенной территории )
It's sad that most of the Asian looking cultures in Siberia and even Mongolia were the subjects of Russification. But slowly things are getting back on track and these cultures are slowly reviving the long lost identity.
your comment is two years old, when there was still hope. Now those Asian Siberians are dying in Ukraine.
@@ekesandras1481 That's true. Russia been sending em in droves
Base❤❤❤❤
Lithuania's history in regards to its relation with the Soviet Union gives a glimpse to their current attitude towards the People's Republic of China.
@lati long I wonder what Lithuanians would think if ethnic Russians in Ukraine declared themselves to be the soviet union and therefore independent from Ukraine
You people really need to learn to differentiate between "government" and "people". This stance is a stance of the Lithuanian government, there was no referendum.
The only Tibetans and Uighurs I see wanting independence from Xinjiang or Tibet that I know of are Uighurs or Tibetans born into immigrant families who left there in the 1940s or earlier. These Uighurs and Tibetans you see protesting in the West have never been to Tibet or Xinjiang, they are just descendants of immigrants who fled Xinjiang and Tibet when they were independent. They are completely Western people who have never visited China, much less the lands of their ancestors, and have decided to hide in the comfort of the US, Japan or Europe.
If you talk to any Uygur or Tibetan living in China, they have views favorable to the Communist Party and the Chinese government. The Anglo-Saxon people or the Oriental people want to use the situation in Tibet and Xinjiang to destabilize China. You won't succeed, because the people are united!
我祝他們好運
One reason - although certainly not the main one - I keep watching these videos is the anticipation of the bell-button talk. These keep getting crazier and crazier. Thank You! :D
I also always look forward to that part of the video🤣🤣🤣
Yup! My favorite too! 😀
Can you please do a video about local and provisional governments in the USSR
Do you mean provincial governments?
Do you mean the government of republics? Or on a smaller scale?
@@socire72 smaller scale
The issue is very complex and Soviet policies very changeable. Moreover, there have often been big differences between words and deeds, and between some nationalities and languages and others. Nevertheless, I consider the summary to be excellent. Congratulations!
That said, a couple of questions. It is doubtful that Russian was promoted as a lingua franca during Korennizatsia. There are numerous counterexamples, such as the admission of letters in virtually any national language in central bodies during the 1920s and the encouragement of learning regional languages by ethnic Russians in the autonomous republics/regions/etc.
On the other hand, the claim that under Khrushchev Russian ceased to be a compulsory subject is basically a fallacy. It was a statement in Khrushchev's theses that preceded the 1958 educational reform. It is well known that the reforms led to a much greater Russification of education, increasing the number of hours devoted to Russian and totally or partially eliminating dozens of languages as languages of instruction. Of course, this was done according to the supposed will of parents, but very rarely was there any consultation. (This is not to say that such Russification was welcomed by many parents, especially in the autonomous republics of Russia, as you rightly point out, but that is another matter).
We should hear more about the Soviet crackdown on independence movements.
There is a reason that ex-Soviet nations still have a poor view of Russia.
@@doggo5577 Even Belarus doesn't look fondly on Russia.
I think the video already stated it well enough, independence movements did exists but its obviously against the very fabric of the Union states
@lati long I think the resentment of Russia treating the countries in the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact as colonies and vassal states was pretty universal among Eastern Europe. However, the oppression was different in each region.
@@ryhanzfx1641 Yes, the video painted the independence movements with a broad stroke instead of covering it country by country.
@lati long：This is a sad story. Belarus, Ukraine and Russia belonged to the same country hundreds of years ago (ancient Rus Empire).
Soviet history books were only focused on Russian history, completely ignoring history of nations of Caucasus and Central Asia, mentioning them only in context of imperial conquests and so on.
how many Soviet historical books have you read? you look like a person born after the collapse of the USSR.
study of national history in the Soviet Union is very developed. Today, some Chinese Mongolian scholars like Soviet materials
The Soviet government literally forced Russian speaking kids in areas than had never really spoken 'Ukrainian' to learn 'Ukranian' in schools. So I'm guessing you are not right.
The attempt to keep russian as a lingua franca in the former soviet empire is still a reality through Moscow's policy.
Yeah, language still remains one of the main weapons in kremlin's imperialistic ideoligy.
нет конечно в закавказье уже мало кто знает русский
в средней азии так же едва половина его знает и 10% средней азии говорит на нем дома с родственниками
First, it would be really useful for Georgians, Turkmens, etc to known Russian, as huge numbers of these folks work in the Federation. There were, for example, an estimated 500,000 Georgians in the Russian Federation as of 2020.
Second, nearly all the ex colonial empires do the same. France promotes le Francophonia. Spain, who you'd think would be satisfied with its 17 or so countries that have Espanyol as official, promotes Spanish even in places like Morocco and Equitorial Guinea and the Philippines. Even Germany has its Goethe institutes around the world but especially in Central Europe.
"The best way to keep a prisoner from escaping is to make sure he never knows he's in prison"
- Fyodor Dostoevsky
This explains the people who enjoy c o v i d lockdowns, for safety of course
Welcome to New York City
Very unlikely of him... source, please.
"The problem of internet quotes is that it's impossible to verify who really said that"
- Vladimir Lenin
@@yanneager4855 In some cases, when you know the background & context of personality, time and place really well, then yes, you can immediately say "this author could not write it".
Please do a story on the banking system of the USSR.
Great videos always good clear explanations well done very appreciated
19:21 As someone from Quebec, this hits too close to home with canadianization.
@John g What a biggoted comment. Attacking linguistic minorities in north america for trying to survive in an increasingly global world when english speaking provinces like Ontario, Alberta and Manitoba de facto banned french education for decades to eradicate threats to majority anglo-saxon economic supremacy. We speak english, you don't speak french in return, it's not symmetrical. Denmark demand things be done in danish, why can't we do the same?
@John g Well we aren't and these canadians are the ones that insisted that we should stay there despite that in 1995...
@John g In majority of countries where English is not a native and/or official language kids in schools have to learn at least one foreign language so stop complaining.
And indeed had 'pure wool' Quebeckers votes been counted for independence, you'd have it. Instead Trudeau the elder purposely flooded your land with immigrants who would vote to stay in Canada.
Excellent work...everything seems right, although a little historical context definitely illumines a lot of other moments, and I would argue that there are four+ distinct regions where nationalism and the Soviet Union's handling of it went very differently than the general outlines you explained here.
1)The West: You mentioned briefly the annexation of the Baltics (Kaliningrad, Karelia and Western Ukraine were also annexed during WWII)...I think definitely nationalism in the Soviet Union is hugely different regionally on the basis of that experience, in that large numbers of the people in those territories never had great love of the Soviet Union because their standards of living and such were always going to be compared to Western Europe/pre-war, and they felt themselves occupied. For this reason, at least from the often polemical Baltic and Ukrainian sources I have seem, Russification was undertaken at a later date and in more overt ways and more strongly in these regions (Almost completely in Kaliningrad, where Soviet nationalism, like in Crimea, was pretty strong due to the military ties), because their loyalty was always under question for good reason. The sources I have seen said that Lithuanian instruction was much more tightly controlled/persecuted than Central Asian languages ever were.
It should be noted that Moldova is a bit of an in-between here; I don't know enough to make arguments.
2)The Caucasus Republics: I don't know very much, and while I know Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia today each have VERY different relationships to Russia and the Soviet Union on the basis of their historic and national experiences. But it's definitely different there than it is in regions 1 and 3.
3)The Caucasus Internal Republics: Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan. Obviously there were wars in the 1990s.
4)Central Asia: While Uzbekistan wasn't as undeveloped as the rest of the Republics come the start of the Soviet Union, (And Tashkent, like Almaty, had been an Imperial city for centuries, whereas South Kyrgyzstan was only integrated into the empire in the 1890s), there are definite differences in each nation. For example, the Tajik, Kazakh and Kyrgyz identities were created by the Soviet Union in many ways, as for example, there weren't necessarily firm dividing lines between Kyrgyz and Kazakh before the 20s, and Tajik as a concept was mostly created to break Tajiks from their ties to Iran (and the other central Asian nationalities could be seen as anti-pan-Turkish creations). The Persian-speaking Sarts are also interesting in their between-ness, eventually becoming Tajik or Uzbek. It's impossible to imagine the present identities of these nations without the Soviet Union. Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan suffered a lot during the Basmachi (the draft riot revolution right before the soviet revolution in 1916), and the resulting violence and then the Civil War conquest, and collectivization of a nomadic society left a society/culture that was very much broken by the experience (I mean, it's estimated as much as 33% of Kyrgyz men may have died in 1916, and many more left for China), and the nations they are today were created and formed in the Soviet womb. While some culture and values have survived, the Soviet Union was formative in many positive (literacy, electricity, modernization, healthcare, education, racial unity, social welfare) and some negative: (racial and economic inequality, state violence, corruption) ways.
So in Central Asia, a lot of Russification happened before the Soviet Union. The process afterward was more of "Sovietization," and a situation similar to the one under the Ottoman Millet system...a general pressure rather than a systematic change. Everyone learned Russian in school, but before that in nomadic areas there weren't schools. If one wanted to succeed and get ahead, one had to be a good Soviet and speak good Russian. Opportunities for non-Russian speakers in the Soviet Union were pretty limited. So Russification occurred, but it was part of a deeper "Sovietization" that often had other areas (collective farming) that were more of a sticking point.
Kazakhstan and Ukraine also share modern nationalisms that have a strong foundation in the mismanagement mentioned in the video: the Virgin Lands, Aral Sea, space and nuclear testing waste (KZ), Chernobyl, and the famines. Whereas they were more closely tied to the Soviet Union and enjoyed closer and more powerful positions in Moscow than the other republics generally.
5)The Far East: A lot of territory shifted in the 1930s-40s, with things like the creation of Mongolia, the Chinese Civil war, Uighurstan at one point being part of the USSR, and the battles between Russia and Japan just before WWII. Definitely these parts of Russia today are very different from Moscow, and may feel neglected at times, but haven't seen very much nationalism and seem to be an intergral part of Russia. Tatarstan and other places not so far east or south may or may not be painted with the same brush, I don't really know enough.
Xinjiang did not become part of the cccp.
@@可爱包-c4v: You are correct...I saw some maps that made me think so, but I think it was just the East Turkestan republic. Xinjiang was often disputed territory for much of 1920-1949, and the government was often more loyal to the USSR than to the Chinese Republic, but never formally annexed. The closest was the East Turkestan republic from 1944-1949, which was a Soviet satellite state in North Xinjiang.
Thanks for posting it. I've been waiting for that video for a while. Keep up the good work.
All people are equal, except some people are more equal then others
Fascinating as always, guys. Thank you. D.A., NYC
First RUclips ad for an app that I’m actually going to download. Cheers for that.
The worst part of creating "Soviet people" where the attempt of Russification , and russian "superiority" propoganda (what growed in kind of Russian showinism). I think that where the main problem the USSR regime did, and that's what exactly did not liked to other nations in Soviet Union and eastern block. The false "soviet nationality" (meaning "russian"). This is the reason many soviet nations broke independent. Then and even now, the Russian people (as large nation) do not understand this, because did not feel the pressure of Russification.
Grossly wrong. Moreover - stupidly wrong. 1) There were no Russian "superiority" propaganda. 2) Enormous amounts of books and periodicals in great many languages of the nations that lived in the USSR were published.
3) There were no such thing as "Soviet nationality"; there was the notion of the Soviet Person (советский человек), plus the idea of equality of all ethnicyties and races. 4) The Russian language was taught in all schools around the USSR, but that fact had nothing to do with any sort of "russification"; Russian was the official language, plus it was the actual lingua franca among the counrty.
@@dmitryskvortsov7021 Ты скорее всего жыл в русской среде, тебе не понять.
That is a gross over-simplification. I grew up in what is now Turkmenistan and everyone (including those who did not speak the turkmen language at home) were required to learn Turkmen at school. There were also schools in each city that ONLY taught in Turkmen. Also, all official documents have always been made in two languages.
In some republics, particularly East of the Caspian Sea, many those who lived outside of major cities either did not speak Russian or their knowledge of Russian was very very poor.
The Russian was the official language of the state, which is no different to any other nation that picks the language spoken by the majority.
@lati long Never heard the term "Sovistani".
If you're talking about the Kazakh/Kirghiz/Turkmen and Uzbeks, their languages do indeed belong to Turkick group.
Tajiks are not "Irani", but closely related to Afghans, but both Iranians and Tajiks speak a dialect of Farsi.
The relationship between all has not changed much over the past 100 years.
@lati long If you listen to Russian nationalists, you will find out that the USSR was a machine of oppression for Russians, who were used to develop and support other republics and countries of the socialist camp to the detriment of Russia. And Russia itself was turned by the 90s into degrading regions with a population of alcoholics. They destroyed Russian culture and self-consciousness, fought against Christianity. Instead, they planted a false concept of the Soviet people, international friendship and communism. Russian history was banned except for 2-3 generals, 3-4 scientists, 10-20 writers, musicians and artists who were instilled with patriotism and false grandeur.
And I'm not even talking about the times of Lenin and Stalin
Now Russia is ruled by the Soviet boomer Putin, who is doing the same and risking repeating the same mistakes.
The most amazing thing is that some of their claims will have quite convincing evidence.
So it seems to me that all parties are right in this dispute.The Soviet authorities balanced in the national question and tried to please everyone, at the same time they tried to suppress dangerous phenomena and as a result earned the hatred of all sides, including the Russians.
One of the great ironies of Marx rejecting nationalism is that it was apart of several of left-socialist, left wing independence movements/governments along with left-socialist equivalent and quasi-socialist governments and movements. Tito's Yugoslavia, Ho Chi Min's Vietnam, Mugabe's Zimbabwe (if not the majority of anti-colonial movements in Africa), Castro's Cuba, Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, Ortega's first stint in Nicaragua, Nasserism, Syrian and Iraqi Baathism and Libyan Jamahiriya. So it's kinda funny when people say that nationalism is a right wing concept (originally it was branded a secular concept) when in fact like populism, nationalism has both a left and right
Ho Chi Minh and other Vietnamese nationalist groups were just wanting to reestablish a Vietnam based on 1887 borders. They were "nationalists" came from many backgrounds just wanted to recreate a shared nation, not based on ethnically boundaries. Not ethnic tribalism. Its similar to many African and Southeast Asian countries. Different with ethnonationalism in Europe (nation in Europe=ethnic group, while nation in Asia =/= ethnic group). Ho Chi Minh didn't care about ethnic Vietnamese Kinh splinters in Laos, Cambodia, China, Thailand.
@lati long lol "Han Chinese" subgroup pseudo hoax 💩 Genetic research found the Vietnamese Kinh have majority Austroasiatic O1b1 M95 Y-chromosome Halogroup and are closest on the genetic chart with the Muong ( Mwai) people.
@lati long One of the reasons why I like channels like this is because it doesn't paint the Cold War as in black and white terms as it's unfortunately taught
@lati long Yue or Baiyue peoples are not the same as Vietnamese, and ancestors of modern day Vietnamese were probably one tribe among 100 Yue tribes. No one ever call these tribes "Viet" or BaiViet tribes.
And the Baiyue were not Chinese or Sinitic.
More over, "Vietnamese people" 's true meaning should be "citizens of Vietnam regardless of ethnic groups" while specific ethnic Vietnamese that people often regarding, are called Kinh, Kinh people, not really "Vietnamese people".
Meanwhile, everybody in the world must learn English. The United Nations speaks English. In order to get anywhere in the world, you need to learn English.
I remembered otherwise and surely enough: "There are six official languages of the UN. These are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish."
In EU parliament we have 24 and they're translated simultaneously.
But yep, English is the main gateway to the world, at least for smaller nations.
English is the current lingua franca primarily due to international business and commerce, and everything tied to them.
The difference between Russia and the UK is that the uk doesn't make "disputed territories"
Outstanding job. Thanks
It would be interesting to have a segment on the recruitment of other Soviet citizens to too replace those who had been pushed out of their traditional homelands by the government.
AHHH this is my fav channel
While during the Cold War the non-russian minorities had to learn russian and the russian culture now some are frustrating that the russian minority is no longer in charge of the former republics.
The big problem is that the Bolsheviks inherited the Russian empire and needed an excuse to keep it together. Originally, there seemed to be an honest effort to encourage the different ethnic groups to be part of the union willingly. But as with just about everything Stalin did, all that was cast aside in favor of Russian supremacy, the way it was in imperial times.
Perestroika tried to bring the country back to where it started post-Revolution, but the ethnic peoples had been so badly abused by the Stalinists that there was no going back. They bolted first chance they got. The Soviet Union fell apart because there was no reason for it to stay together.
Maybe Stalin realized that earlier and decided the only way to hold the country together was by force. Just like Tito and even Saddam Hussein.
The same thing is happening with Putin. He wants to restore Russia to its former glory and again nobody wants to play along. So he tries to do it with force.
When speaking of Stalin's urge to impose Russian supremacy, it is worth pointing out that Stalin and Beria were Georgians and both spoke with heavy accent. If the whole idea of "russian supremacy" is true, it most definitely didn't come out of Stalin himself.
@@trizvanov that’s what makes it all the more confusing. But Stalin was pragmatic to a fault. No way he was going to build a Georgian-centric nation, so he went with the largest, most predominant group. By doing so, he just re-created Imperial Russia.
@@msquaretheoriginal I don't think it is confusing at all.
The Russian language was the most widely used in the country, so it made sense to use that as an official language. This isn't any different to English (Not French or Dutch or German) getting picked up as an official language in the United States.
I grew up in Soviet Union but I am not an ethnic Russian.
To suggest that Russian language or culture was somehow forced on all of the ethnic groups is a gross over-simplifaction.
@@trizvanov it certainly was in imperial times to the extent that education and publishing in the local languages were suppressed. My grandfather spoke better Russian than Polish as a result.
@@msquaretheoriginal In the Imperial times, maybe.
Poland however was never a Soviet republic and as a result, Russian was never an official language in that country.
This is a great RUclips Channel great! 👍
The Baltic states had the luck because of the fact that those countries had managed to became members of NATO and the EU.
@lati long If they hat Stalin so much, than they must return it to its rightful owner of Poland. Otherwise it is hypocrisy
Not really, many EU policies are reverse or are close to the Soviet ones, just as bad for the countries. And being in the sphere of USA is bad.
Don't give Luck or Brussels the credit. Hungary also managed to member of both and look at how they are going. The Blatics states had integrity. Simply being part of the club doesn't do that.
Patriotism is what we do
Nationalism is what they do
Imperialism is what they do revolution is what we do
United States putting down democracy in latin America in the name of democracy and USSR putting down revolutions in eastern europe in the name of the revolution.
@@SHAHIDKC The USA is putting down democracy in the USA while claiming to spread it around the world.
@@SHAHIDKC During the cold war in Latin America, America's priority wasn't spreading democracy. It was stopping communism.
Democracy and human rights weren't really a priority until after the Cold War.
@@papapo50 Federalism is free as long as there is an Imperialist rival. Once Imperialism is defeated Federalism becomes the new Imperialism.
Stalin was Georgian. The only leader of the ussr that was born in soviet union was Gorbachev
What about Nikita Khrushchev? He was born in Russia, not far from Kursk. They were all born in the Soviet Union, I think you meant Russia?
@@scottkrater2131 no I meant what I said. Khruschev was born in Russia before it was in soviet union.
@@skyking6989 I gotta admit you got me there. I oversimplified, calling Russian territory the Soviet Union. My mistake.
@Scott Krater no worries common mistake
Nice video, except that the footage covering Lithuania and Estonia actually shows Latvia. P.s. greetings from Latvia! A
So basically it can be summarised with "things were somewhat fine... until Stalin took over".
We know Soviet Nationalism is popping off in Crimea right now.
That is why there are three official languages in Crimea:tatar, ukrainian and russian?
Well done and fascinating, thank you!
Thanks
Funny how when speaking about Lithuania and Estonia footage from Latvia was mostly used, but Latvia was never mentioned.
I recently visited the young Armenian republic. I was struck by how deeply the Soviet influence had penetrated, smothered and displaced the local language, architecture and lifestyle. It was sad to see and sadder to think how hard it will be for the Armenians to recover.
в армении при СССР на русском могло изъясняться 20 - 30% от силы и то на плохом
и то в последние годы СССР 1986 скажем
какое еще влияние проникло в армянскую (арабскую) культуру ?
армения была первая республика СССР вышедшая из СССР после референдума о независимости
It's an open question whether Armenia would still exist without Russian (Imperial and Soviet) protection. It's not for nothing that 'Putin's Propagandist', Margarita Simyonan, is completely Armenia by blood and upbringing and self-identifies as Armenian.
Interesting is the similarity of the names Russia and Prussia. Note the word "Russification" refers to the policy of resettling Russians into non-Russian areas of the Soviet Union to begin subverting their cultures. The word “Prussification”, likewise, means the act of making something Prussian in similar ways - ironically though, the original Prussians (called the Brus/Prusai) were mostly exterminated by the Teutonic Order.
Thus, it seems that Stalin’s methods and the beliefs of Hitler’s predecessors were well aligned when it came to the subjugation of other cultures. Note that Hitler and his adulation of all things Prussian, also, had ‘the Ukraine’ in his sights (where Russification had already been started by Stalin).
where can i get the background score behind this video? its top notch!
Can you make video about soviet republic of kazakhstan .
Props to Ronald Suny! 👍
Really good and informative video.
This video is very timely to what is going on at this very moment in 2022. Thank you for today's post.
Good to see an objective analysis of history.
can someone give me the music name they use in their video😢?
Having been a Cold war soldier 1975 to 1985 mainly in Germany i was able to follow many of the events you speak of i was working for (M I ) at the time both in Fulda and Berlin it was very interesting to see these things develope this is why i enjoy your channel so much it brings it in to focus. Thank you for sharing this Important era of history that so many have forgotten .
CCCP (USSR) sometimes uses nationalism as a weapon. Some Kazakhs live on the border between China and CCCP. CCCP publicizes nationalism to Chinese Kazakhs in order to make them independent and join CCCP. But CCCP became too poor, so the Soviet Kazaks beat the Russians (they heard the nationalism publicized by the Soviet Union, so they thought they were better than the Russians, Russians made them poor). did the Soviet Union use this method to get Armenia or Azerbaijan from Iran?
@lati long:Thank you.
Actually it was really simple - they rebranded it as "Internationalism" - it is a nationalism without political component, only cultural.
internationalism has always been part of Marxism, Leninists support the nationalism of the oppressed and oppose the nationalism of the oppressor, all Marxists are internationalists but Marxists part of an oppressed nation are proletarian nationalists
It has always been the same with Imperial systems in which everything falls under one of two categories, Imperial or Other.
In a way Federalism with no other challengers evolve the same way with everything falling under Federal or other.
Kazakhstan had only about 30% of Kazakhs in 1959. Kazakh population suffered famine of 1920-1922, artificial famine caused by collectivisation in 1930-1933, where half of Kazakh population died as a result. Turned out that lands were now empty and Soviet government sent Russian colonists to repopulate them, turning Kazakhs into second-class citizens.
And now Kazakhs are 70% of the population and increasing while Russians are are dying off and leaving the country. May the womb of every Kazakh mother be blessed and fertile- you guys need to increase in number and strength as much as you can. I wish the same for every Turkic and Muslim nation in Eurasia, Russia, China, The Balkans, Middle East and Caucasus . It is time for us to take our revenge and again get on top like we used to be for thousands of years.
@@lokumftw2621 Thanks bro
@@lokumftw2621 You mean a new famine?
в 1959 небыло казахстана )
русские на землях нынешнего северного казахстана жили за столетия до 1920 ых годов по тому как то были именно русские земли а не казахские
и в состав каз сср те земли были включены сталиным с целью разбавить в республике национальный состав русским населением
думаю стоит заметить что в современном казахстане казахи именно казахи не основали не одного города и даже не одного аула или деревни
все населенные пункты современного казахстана основаны русскими и построены русскими
уже в советское время начинается компания перевоза казахов из земель граничащих с узбекистаном на север в русские земли Актюбинска Уральска Усть Каменогорска Семипалатинска Петропавловска Павлодара и прочих городов и их областей
не нужно здесь расказывать сказок про
*земли обезлюдели и на них начали завозить русское население*
те земли и были русскими минимум с *1600* годов то есть с 17 века и жили там русские за 300 лет до появления такой нации как казахи
которой если быть полностью честным до СТАЛИНА её создавшего вообще не существовало а по територии граничащей с современным узбекистаном кочевало несколько племен не одно из которых не называлось казахи
Can anyone tell me want the music is that plays in the backgorund at the end of each video?
That forced Russian education "for their own good" sounds a lot like the motives of the residential schools in Canada that are drawing so much attention these days in the West. Would you say it is fair to compare these two systems in terms of motives? If so, is it fair to use that new "cultural genocide" buzzword for these policies?
Because it is cultural genocide, if you want to pull the strings and form some dumbass naratives, both are INDEED the same exact thing
@lati long "tended to pester" is a strong competitor for 2022 under statement of the year awards.
Waiting for “housing in the USSR” video
You see the nationalism in China and N Korea today. This is achieved with decades of propaganda and schooling.
And in the USA too
мы видим национализм в сша и австралии и в юар и в израиле )
There’s a Georgian Orthodox Church outside Philadelphia and most of the parish can’t speak English. But almost all of them can speak Russian
Hopefully in next month you do video on operation masterdom
Russian language is full to the brims of the ethnic slur, English language is grossly underpowered in that regard. Majority of ethnic Russians fully embraced Imperial ideology of domination and assimilation and sorta derive their national identity from that. In their mind they carry the torch of civilization to the savages, nevermind Russian civilization is thoroughly second or third rate if not for the Siberia tsars stole from the nomadic tribes and China a few centuries ago.
Russian culture is inherited from Mongolia and Eastern Rome. China and Mongolia had lived together for a long time, but the exchanges between the Han nationality (China's main ethnic group) and Mongolia are mainly religion (Buddhism), food, clothing and military technology (ancient era). Personally, Russia is the son of Eastern Rome and the Russian Empire and was raised by Mongolia.
I like Russian culture very much, but in Russia, there are only dumplings and tea from China. Russian food is influenced by the Caucasus, Russian art is like eastern Rome , and soul of Russian is like Mongolia.
@@可爱包-c4v What the hell are you high on to write such retarded nonsense? The Russian Empire has its origins in Rus and has nothing in common with stone age mongolia (which never even existed until it was established by Russians). The mongolians were always millions of years behind superior Russians. Look at all of the achievements of the Russian Empire. What has mongolia ever achieved other than poverty, yurts and stone age nomadism?
The one thing I'm interested in about the Cold War is the people who defected both to the Soviet Union and the United States another subject I would love to see a video made about is about the reality check in the game Call of Duty Cold War there's a mission where you in basically where you play as first a Russian spy the next thing you know you're going on a rampage inside the most secure building of a Soviet Union the kvg....
I've heard that the reason some Americans defected to the USSR is because they believed their living conditions would be better, many were down on their luck folks and even a few African Americans (though the latter never really got big). Tragically, at least some of them died in Stalin's purges, showing they had bought into a cruel and deadly lie.
Defections to America by Soviet folks was probably much more common. Some of them were wanting out of the tyranny, while others were spies and diplomats who had their eyes opened upon seeing America and the West for themselves (one talked about seeing more food then ever before in their lives). Economic opportunities were also a factor in defections. It's astonishingly similar to the reasons many North Koreans try to defect in the current era.
16:08 even Lenin himself attended
Yes, of course.
Are we forgetting to mention that Stalin is a Georgian and Brezhnev is a Ukrainian?
A question. Of the 32,000 - 35, 000 Russian soldiers killed in the war with the Ukrain, how many were from the "minority" states as opposed to the Russians of Moscow and simular areas. Will these Russians only care when their children become casualties? Unfortunately, I am beginning to understand the reason for the degree of unnecessary destruction of civilian areas in Ukraine and the sending of the remaining Ukrainians to Russia. Do they even see the Russian minorities as humans worthy of life? I hope I am wrong . But, I want to be clear in my understanding.
Probably a disproportionate number were from ethnic minorities like Buryats and Tatars. But the overwhelming majority are from 'country' Russian oblasts. This mirrors the dead in recent US conflicts where a disproportionate number of Pacific Islanders (including from territories that aren't states) and Indians, but the majority are young white men from rural and exurban America. They die for a US regime that hates them.
@@mitchyoung93 Sorry dude but I was in the military and I am black. Units are not formulated based on race or region. They are deployed based on the needs of the mission. It is not the same,. My unit had every racial, ethnic, or regional representation you could imagine. We all were deployed to the same place. As the saying goes... bullets don't care who your mama is.
Almost all of the soldiers in Ukraine are professionals or they are volunteers. As for mobilization policies. All oblasts and republics within the RF are required to meet a quota based on their population. Naturally, Westerners want to use anything they can to drive Russians apart. Whether you are Tatar, Chechen, or Slavic, we are all Russian citizens and call Russia our motherland.
The facts are these. Currently, there have been 420,000 Russian casualties. The overwhelming majority have come from regions out of Moscow and St. Petersburg, Putin's base. These regions are already showing discontent due to the losses. The next mobilization will require the mobilization within Putin's base. What will be the result? Putin's only hope is that the West stops supporting Ukraine. That will not happen.@@sacWeapons
Amazing work as always, your essays are thorough and well researched…. And I disagree with de Gaulle’s definition of nationalism
It wasn't said by him but by Romain Gary
Ok... I've pressed the bell button 🤦♂️😂
Either RUclips is a god and can read my mind since I have to make an essay about nationalism (and I was planning on using the Soviet Union's case as a thesis) or the algorithms are extremely good.
I found this video to be quite informative! If there is one sentence from here I can summarize the answer with, it's your sentence at the end (but replace the Bell Button with the national minorities):
"...please make sure you [...] have granted the Bell Button independent rights, only to then take them away and have them restored at a later time, but by then, too much anger and resentment has built up and the Bell Button really doesn't want anything to do with you anymore."
Thanks for the video! Also, nice pronunciation of those Russian words! Even Khrushchev's name was pronounced correctly at 13:04. Finally, thanks for the Ground News sponsorship! Were it not for me already having that, I would have taken it up!
Be honest folks; who here also watches to the end to hear what to do with the Bell Button this week?
I was first in the USSR in 1967. I traveled through 7 republics for a month with Ron Suny as a guide for a group of students. I made friends in Armenia and visited them 3 more times in the Soviet era as well as twice after Armenian independence. Ron fairly recently blamed (seen in this video) Lenin for allowing the different nationalities to continue their national development as described in the first part of this video. I found people in the Soviet era in Armenia to hold negative views of Russians. They continue to speak Russian as well as Armenian and are very welcoming to Russian visitors..
армяне (арабы) практически не говорят по русски и во времена СССР армения была республикой в которой русским владело самое маленькое количество населения и владело очень плохо
возможно это объяснимо тем что СССР переселял в армению арабов из ирана и ближнего востока в 30 - 40 годы
@@TinTaBraSS777 I do not think that that is true
12:50 the tragedy of Crimeean Tatars continues until today. Hope one day soon will see russia break apart.
Russia won’t be breaking up anytime
@@blugaledoh2669 you cant know that
@@edenender I do
@@blugaledoh2669 cause putin says so?
@@edenender no
I had no idea that so many protest and resistance movements existed in the Soviet Union.
In my language nationalism and patriotism are the same 🤔
The quote about patriotism and nationalism doesnt come from Charles de Gaulle, but from Romain Gary
I've been interested in cold war era military gear for a while, I found that east german stuff is my type of thing since most of my cousins are from Munich and have been there for generations. I'd love to see a video on the east german army/border guard/ stasi uniforms. I also have a east german military winter jacket simular to the afghanka winter jacket and I was wondering where this came from in terms of how it came about. It's in strichtarn and had german tags all over. But no info on it as the grenztruppen used great coats and the ddr did something simular. Anyway, love the videos and I've been binging them a lot. Thanks!
Amazing video. I hope to see future video about UPA raids (to Czechoslovakia) after the WW2.
but "nationalism" if you are a small nation like Wales, Estonia, Ireland, Latvia, Armenia etc is about reversing the polities and ideologies which the (usually) larger nation has implemented to make you more like them.
DeGaul's incorrect definition of 'nationalism' is bizarre. I have never heard such a definition.
short answer: yes. (And they do the same in crimea, disgusting).
Tatars aren’t native to crimea
I don’t mean to say that the USSR was a utopia or lived up to all of its ideals. But taken in a contemporary view, the Soviet Union was far less oppressive and discriminatory than say America
Great (historian) author Norman Davies have a very very sane and wise definition of "nationalism".
Kazym rebellion video when
To say that the soviet republics have the right to succeed if they want and then after 1991 to be frustrated that the republics actually did so it's also hypocrisy. I'm referring to you Mr. Putin.
Did the Putin himself gave to the republics these rights? I see no hypocrisy there.
@@Admin-gm3lc He relies on this sense of Russia during the Soviet Union, as a “sphere of influence.”
One day Moscow and all the land around it will burn to ash
the seeds that were planted grew well on dagestan soil. sadly...
It derussify.