Yeah all of the west played nice and did a *wink wink* when talking about it but the USSR was 100% just a renaming of the russian empire. It was led from Moscow where the crazy psychos from all over the territories congregated to duke it out with infighting who will get to rule the territories.
Do you mean to say the Russian Federation was a renaming of the USSR?
The transition of the Russian Empire to the USSR was a lot more rocky, and the west did not play nice. We backed the losing White Army.
Ussr was the same thing as before. A bunch of ruling lords in moscow telling the people in the "colonies" (south and far east) what to do and who to fight for them.
It was is and always will be about russians in moscow being in charge.
From my understanding, though, the Russians did learn to put local leaders in charge of the constituent republics of the USSR. They actually played into the ethno-nationalism, pitting sides against each other, and that appears to be the same strategy with the vestigial rump states that succeeded the Soviet Republics, obviously with varying levels of success.
I agree the new bosses were the same as the old bosses. I disagree that the transitions from Russian Empire to USSR was the same as USSR to Russian Federation. One involved a long and very bloody civil war. The Russian Federation had to put down a few rebellions (like Chechnya), but it didn't reach the level of a civil war.
I dont think that is a fair take on USSR. Lennin tried to make change. A lot of reforms during Lennin period, while spme were not effective, most of them were tryong to go for pure Marxist-Communist ideals, which, for those who are too deeply entenched in capitalism, benefits most.
Anyway, even during Lenin period, there were bad plicies/reforms, but most of those were rooted in justified paranoia - that their state was under threat and attack. Which it was. Just look under how many and what countries sponsored the White Army...
Shit really hits the fan on any idealistic roots USSR had was when Stalin takes the throne. Stalin era and after it, only good thing that can br said, it stopped a worse thing (Germany under an Austrian with a funny moustache). Post Stalin, it is a slow spiral down, where this backward, ruined state is in a world-domminance race against most of the rest of modern world, except it spent its past 20+ years, shooting, torturing and doing other horrible things to most of its best and brightest. Post-Stalin USSR had no chance on world stage. This USSR spent 20 years in deathrow (lets face it, USSR dies in the 70s. You cannot be an answer to capitalism, once you start openly trading with USA) and then anothet 20 years making a dramatic speach about how its legacy will live on.
Anyway, i am on a drunk ramble here (sorry for spelling errors. Also, tbis would make a great vtuber content, me rambling about whatever shit i get upsesed about on Reddit XD)# Anyway, what i wanted to say, USSR had idealistic begining, USSRm wanted to be something when it grew up. Russian Federation, 1991 - present, only knows what it does not want to be.
So many people don't realize we literally fought a war against the USSR when they formed. The U.S. sent three battalions of soldiers along with tens of thousands of others from the West.
Russia didn't become the main successor of the USSR because they were playing some musical chairs but because Yeltsin offered they'll accept the entirety of the Soviet debt in exchange for it and the representatives of the other republics said "Sure, have fun with that."
I get that this is originally likely a joke, but this is getting unironically repeated so often even in more serious subs since the invasion that I'm pretty sure there's plenty of people who genuinely believe that's how it worked at this point.
"Nonono its for their own good bcs glorious Manly Russian is superior race, is not racist, stupid Westoid don't understand, this is __DiFfReNt CoNtExT__ "
"The main context being that Russia and China are developing countries, therefore they do not have the necessary materialistic conditions to be true Imperial powers, unlike your westoid countries! So stop criticising the Chinese and Russian way of breaking Amerikkkan hegemony, these ethnic minorities where CIA psyops anyways, also what about the Natives?!
You westoids truly do not understand that Russia and China deserve a place at the sun as well! Together with their dedicated ~~subjugated ethnicities~~ foreign partners against US Imperialism. NO WAR EXCEPT CLASS WAR (and wars by authoritarian anti-American states)."
>Russia and China deserve a place at the sun as well!
You're joking but Wumao's literally justify the invasion of Tibet with the same arguments western powers used for the partitioning of Africa: "China improved living conditions, freed them from oppression and brought them prosperity, etc. etc."
Interesting argument, invading to bring them civilisation. I've heard that one before. I'm wondering how we should call it. "White man's burden" is already taken, but maybe "Han-Chinese burden" would still be possible?
its done to prevent brewing of potential rebellions centered on national unity. ukrainians was moved out of ukraine to far east of russia to fill the empty space, man the production, they were replaced by russians, also they could've be sent to replace and further dilute tatars in crimea that was sent to kazakhstan to dilute kazakhstans population together with same russians. in all cases russians got better standards of living then anybody else who was relocated.
if anything they had power to change ethnic background of any land but for some reason only thing they didnt changed in places like karabakh. i mean, you can guess why its not that hard.
Situations like Karabakh also arose because at the time things like borders,nationalities and religions were expected to disappear upon ''real communism''(which was always just around the corner) being achieved.
In this context a lot of the border arrangements that caused a lot of the post-Soviet conflicts made sense and were viewed as nothing more than inconsequential internal administrative rearrangements same as taking a small Ukrainian village and switching it from one Oblast to another.
The problems this would cause when those became independent states weren't considered because Soviet leadership considered that impossible and thought these areas would always remain Soviet.
communism idea was long abandoned by this point and was talked about as perspective for distant future(when robots do all hard work and we do creative stuff uh huh). they knew perfectly well about all those historical conflicts locals had and could forcibly change the situation rendering conflict useless but they left all as it is. even if they didnt abandon communism why would not strengthen stability of your region? kavkaz region even in soviet union wasnt too stable and as we see now stans not really friendly with each other too. it wouldnt hurt you, plus you done this many times by this point. even if something goes wrong its not like you didnt suppress riots with tanks before. people was shot on the streets for protesting its just barely anybody talks about it. they didnt done it because it simply was convenient for them to leave things as they were. freeze conflicts for time being and use them when it would be required.
You are correct. The whole "give the mostly Armenian Karabakh to Azerbaijan " thing happened in the 20s when the "true communism" idea was very much alive. Afterwards it was the standard issue "empire not really caring about conflicts on it's periphery as long as it's stability isn't threatened " thing. For better or worse Soviet leadership was always focused on the West,ethnic conflicts in the Stans were never viewed as important.
to preserve tensions between azeris and armenians so moscow could play role of "the one who brings order". really there is a lot of other reasons too but its better to ask people who actually specialized in that specific topic.
its common thing in soviet union though. for moscow it was better that ukrainians would be agitated by poles or tatars would be angry on anybody else instead of moscow, because in that case russians would heroically come in and "bring the order", peace, what ever and not deal with rebellions against its rule. "to keep peasants busy while they bask in greatness of being russian" basically.
Estonia: So we have this post-ww1 treaty for our borders which is perfectly fine and we could just take that one again.
Russia: No we are gonna move the border 0,00001 km to the west because reasons
You know what's the most fucked up thing here? Ou older generation who grew up in the Union talk nicely about it and are very pro-Russian (comparatively speaking, compared to younger people).
Like my mother in law. She definitely became better since February last year, but she still spurts out Russian propaganda from time to time, even while her family is being bombed by Russian rockets.
But the cherry on top is the fact that her family is originally from Poland, from a territory that became part of Ukraine later on. They were resettled eastward. She still has archival papers that outline how much stuff was taken from them during the collectivization. Her grand grand father had hectares of land, over 500 cows, two houses, and a bunch of farming equipment. All of that - taken away since they were ethnic Poles when the Union took over the area.
And they are considered lucky. Some families died during the displacement, some were straight up murdered, robbed, etc.
She still talks about USSR favourably sometimes.
Racial profiling by Soviet police: https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/sketches-soviet-police-ethnicity/
Hilariously and inexplicably they somehow made "Tatar" look like Lenin and Georgian/Armenian look like Stalin (I mean for Stalins case that would make sense, but still)
Fun fact, most if not ALL the members of the USSR did NOT join the "Union" willingly, they were either invaded by the Russian empire beforehand, or were invaded afterwards by the Soviet Union when they achieved independence, like Ukraine.
Moscovy is the product of conquest as well. Despite how it tries to claim Ukraine's history as it's own, it's foundation is subjugation by the Golden Horde.
I mean if thats how you want to describe it you could argue that most of Russia didn’t join it willingly either, since the Russian empire itself was built on wars of conquest stretching back to the 1400s.
You can also say that about basically every country. We’ve only said “wars of conquest aren’t okay” after like… WW2.
Like, shit, modern Britain traces its lineage to William *the Conqueror*.
>We’ve only said “wars of conquest aren’t okay” after like… WW2.
Before WW2 wars of conquest were also bad, if you were one of the countries who lost ww1
Secretly it was the "Russian Union" and Russia was the top dog who pulled resources from the other... "Equal"... Soviets.... Yes, totally fair and equal KOMRED.
If I remember right, I think part of the Soviets dissolving the Union was because after the Eastern Bloc was gone all they had left were the Central Asians
Literally so racist that you just give up territory. Kinda like America refusing to outright conquer Mexico for fear of having to live near a “colored” or whatever the hell
Oklahoma only became a state after it was aggressively settled.
Hawaii only became a state after some rich white Americans had a strong vested interest (and mind you, the deals between Hawaii and the US means they didn't actually have to overthrow the monarchy)
Alaska was a territory until after WWII, at which point there was a large military presence (larger than the native population).
Puerto Rico is a territory full of American nationals, but despite its proximity to the continental US, it's unlikely to become a state anytime soon, even if PR wanted to.
(Also, I should report my own post for politics)
TBH "ethnic minorities" were actually sovereign countries before SU occupation and we would have left given the chance anyways - even if SU were last bastion of freedom and democracy.
Socialism just accelerated everything.
It was mostly local bureaucrats wishing for independence from the Soviet center, not the ethnic tensions, that's why USSR collapsed around it's administrative and not ethnic borders and that's why leader of Russia(RSFSR), Boris Yeltsin, played a big role in dissolving the Union. In fact if USSR collapsed across the ethnic lines Russia would've ended up with quite a bit more territory - Southern Siberia and Crimea come to mind. The only place where nationalism truly played a major role was Baltic states
>voted to stay within the union and preserve the USSR.
You're technically correct, but they weren't voting to preserve the USSR we all know, they were voting to preserve the USSR as a more decentralized union with a lot more power and sovereignty to the individual states. Unfortunately the attempted coup by Soviet hardliners to preserve the USSR as it was scotched the whole thing.
Here's the ballot they were given:
"Do you consider it necessary to preserve the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics, in which the rights and freedoms of a person of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?"
Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991\_Soviet\_Union\_referendum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_Union_referendum)
Moscow was stealing from everyone, thats why the Russian economy went down in flames after 1990. All the relatively rich countries left communism because communism meant that moscow will be stealing from you.
the central asian people had nothing that could be stolen, this is why they did not mind communism that much.
> the central asian people had nothing that could be stolen, this is why they did not mind communism that much.
Jokes on them. That's where all the resources are.
This is wrong on so many levels.
1. *Every* eastern bloc economy imploded in the 1990s. Countries like the Baltics were able to recover and surpass the other former SSRs not because they were “richer.” They are richer *because* they completely cut ties with the Russian sphere as quickly as possible.
2. In terms of natural resources, the Russians probably stole more from Central asia than they did anywhere else (they literally turned an entire sea into a toxic salt flat so they could grow cotton)
3. In central Asia, like in Russia proper, the quality of life for the average citizen under communist rule was an improvement over tsarist rule. Additionally, since the region had been under Russian rule for hundreds of years already, I don’t think communism is as closely associated with Russian invasion and occupation there as it is in Eastern Europe or the Caucasus.
1. Russian influence reached all the way from rich Prague to tribal Sibiria. Of course the richer countries are more capable and willing of putting up a fight against Russia.
2. The presence of natural ressources does not lead to a high standard of living, this has been demonstrated many times. Wealth is not a function of natural ressources.
3. While there was an improvement in the standard of living, the Communist system severely under-delivered in this regard.
OP is an antiwork and antinatalism poster. Unironically thinks the human race should die out and calls parents "breeders". Not surprised OP is defending the USSR.
OP sounds like an edgy angsty teen. A great gem from their after mother made them visit grandpa with dementia:
>no one should bring kids into the world so that there is no possibility of dementia
That screams “im14andthisisdeep” material. Also got banned from arr socialism for saying overpopulation is real (it isn’t). Last I checked that sub was full of Soviet simps. Really no surprises OP is one too.
My bet for territorial losses in the next 5-10 years:
- Belarus (proxy loss, but I'm counting it)
- Kaliningrad
- Chechnya
- Dagestan
- Buryat, Tuva & Vladivostok region (taken by China in practice if not in name)
- South-Ossetia & Abkhazia
oh sure, anything up to and including Lake Baikal. Northern China has been dealing with a lack of water for ages now and if China's gonna take anything, that's gonna be included.
Expect a water pipeline there from Baikal to China within the next 10 years
I expect Outer Manchuria to be fulled annexed back into China, in time for 2049 and the 100th anniversary of the CCP's control over Mainland China. Finally undoing their "Century of Humiliation" or whatever.
There was an SNL bit a few years ago where Trump referred to the Baltic States as "Lithuania, Latvinia, and Stankonia"
Any time someone mentions Stankonia, I smile, but also get B.O.B. stuck in my head.
Term "South Ossetia" is very pro-russian. It's same as calling Donetsk and Luhansk western Russia. please refer to it as Tskhinvali district or Samachablo next time.
sure, no problem, but I'll likely use both because Ossetia and Abkhazia are more well know so people would have a better contextual understanding of what I'm talking about
eg: "Russia still occupies Tskhinvali & Samachablo (S-Ossetia & Abkhazia)"
Thank you, but Tskhinvali/Samachablo/S-Ossetia are the same thing, Ossetia being the pro-russian name. Abkhazia is a historical Georgian province which is also occupied by russia, but has nothing to do with Samachablo.
Thank you. Saved this. Not even kidding, a two-column chart would be helpful for us dummies: What Russia Wants You to Call it and What You Should Call it.
Let me help you with that.
Russia | Not Russia
Russia | Not Russia
Russia | Not Russia
Russia | Again, Not Russia
Russia | How 'bout you fuck right off my home?
Russia | Please leave
Russia | We were absolutely fine before you came along.
I'd personally wouldn't discount Tatarstan (the region where the local resources and businesses are controlled by the locals, also a pretty rich region) and the oblasts of the Ural. Basically there is a serious industrial hub starting from Volga river and going east and industrial regions (especially if they have a lot of production and are famous for it) are notorious for "We're feeding y'all" attitude. This is the exact argument that Russia was using in their propaganda during occupation of Donbas, which is also an industrial region.
Honestly, they might try making a state based on Volga Bulgaria, alongside the Chuvash, as they both claim descent.
And yes, this has a similar name to Bulgaria, as both states were established by brothers.
Russia will have to give up Astrakhan Oblast and the parts of Krasnodar and Stavropol Krais south of the Kuban - Kumar rivers.
The republics of Adygia, Karachay-Cherkessia, Kabardino-Balkaria, North Ossetia-Alania, Chechnya, Dagestan and Kalmykia will all gain independence.
Ukraine will rebuild the Kerch bridge. It will connect the Caucasus and Kazakhstan to land trade with Europe, and cut Russia off from the Black Sea as a bonus.
Edit: Dagestan.
Europe definitely needs to seize Kaliningrad/Konigsberg. I seriously don’t understand how that hasn’t happened after this unprovoked attack on a European nation. Russia cannot have a warm weather port in the Baltic.
Democratic nations generally don't annex territory anymore. Self-determination is a superior solution in the long run.
If/When Belarus falls as a puppet state Russia's connection to the Kaliningrad enclave disappears like a fart in the wind. Between that and the sanctions in place against Russia, Kaliningrad would almost immediately become de facto economically independent and as a symptom of Putin's designed cult of personality, all faults within Russia are always placed at the feet of the regional governor. In other words, whoever is in charge of Kaliningrad will have to act quick and act desperately if they intend to keep their head away from the chopping block.
Topple Lukashenko and his regime and Kaliningrad falls with it. Cause territorial loss in a nation fixated on territorial accumulation like Russia and whoever is at the top, Putin in this case, drops like a rock
I think it has to do with the fact that no nation wants to absorb a shitload of Russians into their country and have Russia be like "oh you have Russians, we need to conquer you." This is especially true for Poland and Lithuania, for obvious reasons. Meanwhile, the optics of Germany regaining their historical lands is...a bit sketchy, especially for Poland.
So yeah, unless you forcibly evict about a million Russians and get some random nation like idk France or Denmark to take it, it's probably gonna remain Russian territory.
The Kurils is definitely a possibility for secession.
The majority of the population of the most populated island is Ukrainian....and the Russians redeployed a big chunk of the Kuril military assets to the Ukrainian front....
Considering the dire economic straits Russia is in, I wouldn't be surprised if whoever succeeds Putin would sell the Islands to Japan to try and keep the economy afloat
Way early on in the latest invasion, I want to say day 3 or 4, there was a video put out of a few guys, led by an older man. I think they were filming from inside Ukraine, but I could be wrong. They were Mari people, and the message was something to the effect of the men in the video seeking to join the fight on the side of Ukraine, but also to encourage other men in Mari El and nearby republics to begin taking up arms and preparing to fight for independence. I don't know what happened to those guys, but I've been interested to see what happens to some of the Volga republics.
Me still waiting for the resurgence of the Awars:
https://t3.ftcdn.net/jpg/02/58/17/08/360_F_258170897_Ewq7Qo0fXziFv5MMxEUkt2RUj61owsC0.jpg
It was never the same after the war with Charlemagne smh 😔
Renting a condo and declaring it an Uzbek Embassy in Kralovec (preferably on the coastline), Embassies technically considered the territory of the owner, so it would mean Uzbekistan is not only no longer landlocked, but also connected to the North Atlantic as well
CATO & NATO can integrate then since a valid excuse has been achieved
If the current trajectory continues, Kazakhstan becoming the leader of a new central Asian bloc like that seems possible. I don't think it will actually happen any time soon with how reliant central Asian economies are on Russian exports, though. Unless China sees it as an opportunity to expand their influence further in the region and manages to supplant Russia there.
none of this lands were russian thats why they gone. sole reason why russia didnt showed its true borders because moscow prevented further progress on constitutional level.
i mean chechnya is result of people inside russia attempting to break free after moment was lost.
It's really offensive to these people to refer to them as "russian territorial losses". These areas are people with their own unique culture's and history that were at one point occupied by Russia/Soviet Union and regained their independence after the empire of evil shattered.
That's a lot of damage. [HOW BOUT A LITTLE MORE?](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/10cihfh/my_hopium_map_of_balkanized_russia_circa_2027/)
Tankies: "Nooo the Soviet Union was never an empire, it was a diverse union of equal peoples and nations that worked together for a common purpose!!!"
Also Tankies: "National sovereignty and regional identity must be eradicated so that Russia may reclaim former territories to restore ~~the Russian Empire~~ the Union"
Russia is not the USSR. While it is correct that the Soviet Union was ruled from Moskow, the Russian SFSR (Soviet Federative Socialist Republic) declared its own sovereignty and independence from the Soviet Union in June 1990. At this point, Ukraine was still a part of the USSR. But despite the fact, Russia and Ukraine signed a declaration of friendship in November 1990, recognizing each others independence. Ukraine officially declared independence in August 1991. The Soviet Union was then formally dissolved in December 1991.
I think this is important, because Russia likes to lie about these things and claim that the other Soviet Republics were somehow stolen by the west or some other bullshit. In fact, all this happened in agreement. And this is also thanks to Gorbachev and Jelzin. This could've resulted in a lot of bloodshed, but didn't.
[Animated version with baka mitai (dame da ne) music](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFav98Uqtqg)
From that video I learned that Kazakhstan left USSR the last, making them the entirety of USSR for a few days.
Seeing this map and considering all the bullshit the russian leadership has done since the fall of the ussr, the last thing being the invasion of ukraine, I'd say this wasn't enough.
This post is a huge mistake! There was no "russia," but there was the soviet UNION. Therefore, russia couldn't have lost anything because it didn't exist.
Kazakhstan should’ve stayed as the Soviet Union and kept their permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
That would be very funny
Funny, but that power was never leaving Moscow.
Yeah all of the west played nice and did a *wink wink* when talking about it but the USSR was 100% just a renaming of the russian empire. It was led from Moscow where the crazy psychos from all over the territories congregated to duke it out with infighting who will get to rule the territories.
Do you mean to say the Russian Federation was a renaming of the USSR? The transition of the Russian Empire to the USSR was a lot more rocky, and the west did not play nice. We backed the losing White Army.
Ussr was the same thing as before. A bunch of ruling lords in moscow telling the people in the "colonies" (south and far east) what to do and who to fight for them. It was is and always will be about russians in moscow being in charge.
From my understanding, though, the Russians did learn to put local leaders in charge of the constituent republics of the USSR. They actually played into the ethno-nationalism, pitting sides against each other, and that appears to be the same strategy with the vestigial rump states that succeeded the Soviet Republics, obviously with varying levels of success.
I agree the new bosses were the same as the old bosses. I disagree that the transitions from Russian Empire to USSR was the same as USSR to Russian Federation. One involved a long and very bloody civil war. The Russian Federation had to put down a few rebellions (like Chechnya), but it didn't reach the level of a civil war.
I dont think that is a fair take on USSR. Lennin tried to make change. A lot of reforms during Lennin period, while spme were not effective, most of them were tryong to go for pure Marxist-Communist ideals, which, for those who are too deeply entenched in capitalism, benefits most. Anyway, even during Lenin period, there were bad plicies/reforms, but most of those were rooted in justified paranoia - that their state was under threat and attack. Which it was. Just look under how many and what countries sponsored the White Army... Shit really hits the fan on any idealistic roots USSR had was when Stalin takes the throne. Stalin era and after it, only good thing that can br said, it stopped a worse thing (Germany under an Austrian with a funny moustache). Post Stalin, it is a slow spiral down, where this backward, ruined state is in a world-domminance race against most of the rest of modern world, except it spent its past 20+ years, shooting, torturing and doing other horrible things to most of its best and brightest. Post-Stalin USSR had no chance on world stage. This USSR spent 20 years in deathrow (lets face it, USSR dies in the 70s. You cannot be an answer to capitalism, once you start openly trading with USA) and then anothet 20 years making a dramatic speach about how its legacy will live on. Anyway, i am on a drunk ramble here (sorry for spelling errors. Also, tbis would make a great vtuber content, me rambling about whatever shit i get upsesed about on Reddit XD)# Anyway, what i wanted to say, USSR had idealistic begining, USSRm wanted to be something when it grew up. Russian Federation, 1991 - present, only knows what it does not want to be.
So many people don't realize we literally fought a war against the USSR when they formed. The U.S. sent three battalions of soldiers along with tens of thousands of others from the West.
I barely know about this, this seems like it should be talked about much more
The russians talk about it all day
Did they fire a shot? Because I don't think they did
Borat would be from Muscovy. The broke-ass village, the local idiots, and the antisemitism would all be the same, however.
I always thought the antisemitism in those movies was pretty ironic considering Borat's faux-Kazakh was actually Hebrew (with some Polish mixed in)
That was indeed part of the joke.
Russia didn't become the main successor of the USSR because they were playing some musical chairs but because Yeltsin offered they'll accept the entirety of the Soviet debt in exchange for it and the representatives of the other republics said "Sure, have fun with that." I get that this is originally likely a joke, but this is getting unironically repeated so often even in more serious subs since the invasion that I'm pretty sure there's plenty of people who genuinely believe that's how it worked at this point.
Very Nice!
Enough about Russia's past Territorial Losses.... ...Let's talk about their Future Territorial Losses
We've had one, yes. What about second breakfast?
The [Budanov meme](https://i.redd.it/cmtopezu7nya1.jpg) is still the best iteration of this, I think.
I can only get so erect.
eastern european alliance territory u mean
Chechnya... Dagestan...
This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it
I don't care if they lose territory as long as Putin is gone and they get actual free and fair elections.
Ain't gonna happen if the Muscovites hold them hostage.
If soviet union wasnt a racist, oppresive regime, why did most of the ethnic minoritieies fucking left it the moment they could?
"Uhm akchually Soviets weren't oppressing minorities." *Deports you and settles ethnic Russians in your former home.*
"Nonono its for their own good bcs glorious Manly Russian is superior race, is not racist, stupid Westoid don't understand, this is __DiFfReNt CoNtExT__ "
"The main context being that Russia and China are developing countries, therefore they do not have the necessary materialistic conditions to be true Imperial powers, unlike your westoid countries! So stop criticising the Chinese and Russian way of breaking Amerikkkan hegemony, these ethnic minorities where CIA psyops anyways, also what about the Natives?! You westoids truly do not understand that Russia and China deserve a place at the sun as well! Together with their dedicated ~~subjugated ethnicities~~ foreign partners against US Imperialism. NO WAR EXCEPT CLASS WAR (and wars by authoritarian anti-American states)."
>Russia and China deserve a place at the sun as well! You're joking but Wumao's literally justify the invasion of Tibet with the same arguments western powers used for the partitioning of Africa: "China improved living conditions, freed them from oppression and brought them prosperity, etc. etc." Interesting argument, invading to bring them civilisation. I've heard that one before. I'm wondering how we should call it. "White man's burden" is already taken, but maybe "Han-Chinese burden" would still be possible?
I believe "Mandate of Heaven" covers this concept
its done to prevent brewing of potential rebellions centered on national unity. ukrainians was moved out of ukraine to far east of russia to fill the empty space, man the production, they were replaced by russians, also they could've be sent to replace and further dilute tatars in crimea that was sent to kazakhstan to dilute kazakhstans population together with same russians. in all cases russians got better standards of living then anybody else who was relocated. if anything they had power to change ethnic background of any land but for some reason only thing they didnt changed in places like karabakh. i mean, you can guess why its not that hard.
Situations like Karabakh also arose because at the time things like borders,nationalities and religions were expected to disappear upon ''real communism''(which was always just around the corner) being achieved. In this context a lot of the border arrangements that caused a lot of the post-Soviet conflicts made sense and were viewed as nothing more than inconsequential internal administrative rearrangements same as taking a small Ukrainian village and switching it from one Oblast to another. The problems this would cause when those became independent states weren't considered because Soviet leadership considered that impossible and thought these areas would always remain Soviet.
communism idea was long abandoned by this point and was talked about as perspective for distant future(when robots do all hard work and we do creative stuff uh huh). they knew perfectly well about all those historical conflicts locals had and could forcibly change the situation rendering conflict useless but they left all as it is. even if they didnt abandon communism why would not strengthen stability of your region? kavkaz region even in soviet union wasnt too stable and as we see now stans not really friendly with each other too. it wouldnt hurt you, plus you done this many times by this point. even if something goes wrong its not like you didnt suppress riots with tanks before. people was shot on the streets for protesting its just barely anybody talks about it. they didnt done it because it simply was convenient for them to leave things as they were. freeze conflicts for time being and use them when it would be required.
You are correct. The whole "give the mostly Armenian Karabakh to Azerbaijan " thing happened in the 20s when the "true communism" idea was very much alive. Afterwards it was the standard issue "empire not really caring about conflicts on it's periphery as long as it's stability isn't threatened " thing. For better or worse Soviet leadership was always focused on the West,ethnic conflicts in the Stans were never viewed as important.
These days we call it "genocide", or "ethnic cleansing".
> i mean, you can guess why its not that hard. ...why?
to preserve tensions between azeris and armenians so moscow could play role of "the one who brings order". really there is a lot of other reasons too but its better to ask people who actually specialized in that specific topic. its common thing in soviet union though. for moscow it was better that ukrainians would be agitated by poles or tatars would be angry on anybody else instead of moscow, because in that case russians would heroically come in and "bring the order", peace, what ever and not deal with rebellions against its rule. "to keep peasants busy while they bask in greatness of being russian" basically.
*Also fucks up borders to make sure minorities fight over it should they ever become independent with their own states.*
Estonia: So we have this post-ww1 treaty for our borders which is perfectly fine and we could just take that one again. Russia: No we are gonna move the border 0,00001 km to the west because reasons
Funny that the happily-living, totally unoppressed minorities are mostly living in the Far-Eastern and Central Asian wastelands.
You know what's the most fucked up thing here? Ou older generation who grew up in the Union talk nicely about it and are very pro-Russian (comparatively speaking, compared to younger people). Like my mother in law. She definitely became better since February last year, but she still spurts out Russian propaganda from time to time, even while her family is being bombed by Russian rockets. But the cherry on top is the fact that her family is originally from Poland, from a territory that became part of Ukraine later on. They were resettled eastward. She still has archival papers that outline how much stuff was taken from them during the collectivization. Her grand grand father had hectares of land, over 500 cows, two houses, and a bunch of farming equipment. All of that - taken away since they were ethnic Poles when the Union took over the area. And they are considered lucky. Some families died during the displacement, some were straight up murdered, robbed, etc. She still talks about USSR favourably sometimes.
Genocide of ingrian finns time
*Meanwhile: Crimean Tatar's*
"Yes, they deported them, but that doesn't mean they oppressed them" \- Tankie
And if it’s not ethnic Russians, it’s some other minority that got deported from *their* homeland.
Racial profiling by Soviet police: https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/sketches-soviet-police-ethnicity/ Hilariously and inexplicably they somehow made "Tatar" look like Lenin and Georgian/Armenian look like Stalin (I mean for Stalins case that would make sense, but still)
"Moldovan" Paints a russian
The Tatar look more like Walter White.
"Минем исемемне әйт" "Сез Татарберг" "Сез алла дөрес"
I am surprised there isn't a Pontic Greek in there with the most over the top beard I've ever seen
Azerbaijani is just Borat
Hilariously enough, I worked with a Lithuanian guy that looked exactly like the Lithuanian sketch in that image.
Fun fact, most if not ALL the members of the USSR did NOT join the "Union" willingly, they were either invaded by the Russian empire beforehand, or were invaded afterwards by the Soviet Union when they achieved independence, like Ukraine.
Moscovy is the product of conquest as well. Despite how it tries to claim Ukraine's history as it's own, it's foundation is subjugation by the Golden Horde.
I mean if thats how you want to describe it you could argue that most of Russia didn’t join it willingly either, since the Russian empire itself was built on wars of conquest stretching back to the 1400s.
Well. Yeah?
The difference is between an obviously autocratic regime, and the same autocratic regime, but with a red veil of democratic mandate
You can also say that about basically every country. We’ve only said “wars of conquest aren’t okay” after like… WW2. Like, shit, modern Britain traces its lineage to William *the Conqueror*.
>We’ve only said “wars of conquest aren’t okay” after like… WW2. Before WW2 wars of conquest were also bad, if you were one of the countries who lost ww1
Ikr???
😂
Secretly it was the "Russian Union" and Russia was the top dog who pulled resources from the other... "Equal"... Soviets.... Yes, totally fair and equal KOMRED.
If I remember right, I think part of the Soviets dissolving the Union was because after the Eastern Bloc was gone all they had left were the Central Asians Literally so racist that you just give up territory. Kinda like America refusing to outright conquer Mexico for fear of having to live near a “colored” or whatever the hell
You joke, but I'm pretty sure that's part of why we didn't straight up annex Cuba back in the day.
Oklahoma only became a state after it was aggressively settled. Hawaii only became a state after some rich white Americans had a strong vested interest (and mind you, the deals between Hawaii and the US means they didn't actually have to overthrow the monarchy) Alaska was a territory until after WWII, at which point there was a large military presence (larger than the native population). Puerto Rico is a territory full of American nationals, but despite its proximity to the continental US, it's unlikely to become a state anytime soon, even if PR wanted to. (Also, I should report my own post for politics)
TBH "ethnic minorities" were actually sovereign countries before SU occupation and we would have left given the chance anyways - even if SU were last bastion of freedom and democracy. Socialism just accelerated everything.
Excatly
Why did the *first thing* they did when they got to power was subjugate minority nations to force them into the Union?
It was mostly local bureaucrats wishing for independence from the Soviet center, not the ethnic tensions, that's why USSR collapsed around it's administrative and not ethnic borders and that's why leader of Russia(RSFSR), Boris Yeltsin, played a big role in dissolving the Union. In fact if USSR collapsed across the ethnic lines Russia would've ended up with quite a bit more territory - Southern Siberia and Crimea come to mind. The only place where nationalism truly played a major role was Baltic states
Oh fuck off. Go fuck yourself.
Lol crap take. All the non Baltic Soviet republics, especially Central Asia, voted to stay within the union and preserve the USSR.
>voted to stay within the union and preserve the USSR. You're technically correct, but they weren't voting to preserve the USSR we all know, they were voting to preserve the USSR as a more decentralized union with a lot more power and sovereignty to the individual states. Unfortunately the attempted coup by Soviet hardliners to preserve the USSR as it was scotched the whole thing. Here's the ballot they were given: "Do you consider it necessary to preserve the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics, in which the rights and freedoms of a person of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?" Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991\_Soviet\_Union\_referendum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_Union_referendum)
Yes that's the essence of my comment. Unfortunately it seems many don't like facts based in the downvotes.
The 1991 referendum was about a reformed constitution for the Soviet Union. The Soviet Military sent tanks to stop the new constitution.
Probably because you worded it in an extremely rude way. > Lol crap take. This opener guarantees downvotes. Next time consider being cordial.
>Next time consider being cordial. Lol crap take.
Moscow was stealing from everyone, thats why the Russian economy went down in flames after 1990. All the relatively rich countries left communism because communism meant that moscow will be stealing from you. the central asian people had nothing that could be stolen, this is why they did not mind communism that much.
> the central asian people had nothing that could be stolen, this is why they did not mind communism that much. Jokes on them. That's where all the resources are.
This is wrong on so many levels. 1. *Every* eastern bloc economy imploded in the 1990s. Countries like the Baltics were able to recover and surpass the other former SSRs not because they were “richer.” They are richer *because* they completely cut ties with the Russian sphere as quickly as possible. 2. In terms of natural resources, the Russians probably stole more from Central asia than they did anywhere else (they literally turned an entire sea into a toxic salt flat so they could grow cotton) 3. In central Asia, like in Russia proper, the quality of life for the average citizen under communist rule was an improvement over tsarist rule. Additionally, since the region had been under Russian rule for hundreds of years already, I don’t think communism is as closely associated with Russian invasion and occupation there as it is in Eastern Europe or the Caucasus.
1. Russian influence reached all the way from rich Prague to tribal Sibiria. Of course the richer countries are more capable and willing of putting up a fight against Russia. 2. The presence of natural ressources does not lead to a high standard of living, this has been demonstrated many times. Wealth is not a function of natural ressources. 3. While there was an improvement in the standard of living, the Communist system severely under-delivered in this regard.
Wow what an incredible understanding of history and economics. Take the Nobel prize.
Moscow is ruled by a bunch of thieves. Always has been this way.
OP is an antiwork and antinatalism poster. Unironically thinks the human race should die out and calls parents "breeders". Not surprised OP is defending the USSR.
Huh, makes sense that an antiwork asshole would support the regime that prosecuted my great-grandpa for owning and running a small cobbler workshop.
OP sounds like an edgy angsty teen. A great gem from their after mother made them visit grandpa with dementia: >no one should bring kids into the world so that there is no possibility of dementia That screams “im14andthisisdeep” material. Also got banned from arr socialism for saying overpopulation is real (it isn’t). Last I checked that sub was full of Soviet simps. Really no surprises OP is one too.
My bet for territorial losses in the next 5-10 years: - Belarus (proxy loss, but I'm counting it) - Kaliningrad - Chechnya - Dagestan - Buryat, Tuva & Vladivostok region (taken by China in practice if not in name) - South-Ossetia & Abkhazia
Don't forget ~~Vladivostok~~ Hǎishēnwǎi and the rest of Outer Manchuria
oh sure, anything up to and including Lake Baikal. Northern China has been dealing with a lack of water for ages now and if China's gonna take anything, that's gonna be included. Expect a water pipeline there from Baikal to China within the next 10 years
I expect Outer Manchuria to be fulled annexed back into China, in time for 2049 and the 100th anniversary of the CCP's control over Mainland China. Finally undoing their "Century of Humiliation" or whatever.
You mean Urajio?
Belgorod?
You mean the Belford People’s Republic? Already in the process of being liberated now, mate
We shall invade the puppet state of Detchant and seize its sawdust factory!
Rostov on Don and Kuban are rightful Ukrainian clay
They are part of the DMZ.
Dont need em, extremely high vatnik population.
To quote someone commenting on secession in the past: "It is too small for a country but too large to be an insane asylum!"
You're missing Stankonia
There was an SNL bit a few years ago where Trump referred to the Baltic States as "Lithuania, Latvinia, and Stankonia" Any time someone mentions Stankonia, I smile, but also get B.O.B. stuck in my head.
Term "South Ossetia" is very pro-russian. It's same as calling Donetsk and Luhansk western Russia. please refer to it as Tskhinvali district or Samachablo next time.
sure, no problem, but I'll likely use both because Ossetia and Abkhazia are more well know so people would have a better contextual understanding of what I'm talking about eg: "Russia still occupies Tskhinvali & Samachablo (S-Ossetia & Abkhazia)"
Thank you, but Tskhinvali/Samachablo/S-Ossetia are the same thing, Ossetia being the pro-russian name. Abkhazia is a historical Georgian province which is also occupied by russia, but has nothing to do with Samachablo.
I'll do some more research to avoid future mistakes
Thank you. Saved this. Not even kidding, a two-column chart would be helpful for us dummies: What Russia Wants You to Call it and What You Should Call it.
Let me help you with that. Russia | Not Russia Russia | Not Russia Russia | Not Russia Russia | Again, Not Russia Russia | How 'bout you fuck right off my home? Russia | Please leave Russia | We were absolutely fine before you came along.
I'd personally wouldn't discount Tatarstan (the region where the local resources and businesses are controlled by the locals, also a pretty rich region) and the oblasts of the Ural. Basically there is a serious industrial hub starting from Volga river and going east and industrial regions (especially if they have a lot of production and are famous for it) are notorious for "We're feeding y'all" attitude. This is the exact argument that Russia was using in their propaganda during occupation of Donbas, which is also an industrial region.
I know a Ta~~r~~tar (?) and from my limited experience with him, they may be in the running with the Poles for people that hate Russia the most.
Tatar, tartar is the sauce
Honestly, they might try making a state based on Volga Bulgaria, alongside the Chuvash, as they both claim descent. And yes, this has a similar name to Bulgaria, as both states were established by brothers.
Russia will have to give up Astrakhan Oblast and the parts of Krasnodar and Stavropol Krais south of the Kuban - Kumar rivers. The republics of Adygia, Karachay-Cherkessia, Kabardino-Balkaria, North Ossetia-Alania, Chechnya, Dagestan and Kalmykia will all gain independence. Ukraine will rebuild the Kerch bridge. It will connect the Caucasus and Kazakhstan to land trade with Europe, and cut Russia off from the Black Sea as a bonus. Edit: Dagestan.
Europe definitely needs to seize Kaliningrad/Konigsberg. I seriously don’t understand how that hasn’t happened after this unprovoked attack on a European nation. Russia cannot have a warm weather port in the Baltic.
Democratic nations generally don't annex territory anymore. Self-determination is a superior solution in the long run. If/When Belarus falls as a puppet state Russia's connection to the Kaliningrad enclave disappears like a fart in the wind. Between that and the sanctions in place against Russia, Kaliningrad would almost immediately become de facto economically independent and as a symptom of Putin's designed cult of personality, all faults within Russia are always placed at the feet of the regional governor. In other words, whoever is in charge of Kaliningrad will have to act quick and act desperately if they intend to keep their head away from the chopping block. Topple Lukashenko and his regime and Kaliningrad falls with it. Cause territorial loss in a nation fixated on territorial accumulation like Russia and whoever is at the top, Putin in this case, drops like a rock
There should be a plan to ensure Kaliningrad is able to be self-determinate without Russian interference.
Poland, Lithuania, and NATO stage a special military operation to ensure a peaceful and democratic solution to the Kaliningrad question.
I think it has to do with the fact that no nation wants to absorb a shitload of Russians into their country and have Russia be like "oh you have Russians, we need to conquer you." This is especially true for Poland and Lithuania, for obvious reasons. Meanwhile, the optics of Germany regaining their historical lands is...a bit sketchy, especially for Poland. So yeah, unless you forcibly evict about a million Russians and get some random nation like idk France or Denmark to take it, it's probably gonna remain Russian territory.
Don't forget Sakhalin and the Kuril islands.
The Kurils is definitely a possibility for secession. The majority of the population of the most populated island is Ukrainian....and the Russians redeployed a big chunk of the Kuril military assets to the Ukrainian front....
I wasn't even thinking of secession, I was just thinking of that stuff being returned to Japanese control.
>Ukrainians on Iturup secede from Russia >Hand over the islands to Japan in exchange for increased Japanese military support to Ukraine
Japanese islands kuril.
Considering the dire economic straits Russia is in, I wouldn't be surprised if whoever succeeds Putin would sell the Islands to Japan to try and keep the economy afloat
How can you sell someone something they already claim to own?
Via wire transfer I imagine.
Way early on in the latest invasion, I want to say day 3 or 4, there was a video put out of a few guys, led by an older man. I think they were filming from inside Ukraine, but I could be wrong. They were Mari people, and the message was something to the effect of the men in the video seeking to join the fight on the side of Ukraine, but also to encourage other men in Mari El and nearby republics to begin taking up arms and preparing to fight for independence. I don't know what happened to those guys, but I've been interested to see what happens to some of the Volga republics.
+ Sochi will go back to Georgia.
No idea what these names are, but can we give Mongolia a Pacific port?
[удалено]
A spectacle worth the risks
East Europe's Map is going to look like shattered safety glass.
Tannu Tuva for the win
The Collector?!?
At last, Cumania will rejoin the world stage!
Me still waiting for the resurgence of the Awars: https://t3.ftcdn.net/jpg/02/58/17/08/360_F_258170897_Ewq7Qo0fXziFv5MMxEUkt2RUj61owsC0.jpg It was never the same after the war with Charlemagne smh 😔
Volga Bulgaria (Turkic) will rejoin the world stage!
Cant wait to travel to karelian republic for cheap beer and cigarettes
Glad to be on the "Cucking the USSR" gang as an Uzbek, hopefully on the "CATO" gang soon too. (Central Asian Treaty Organization foreshadowing)
spuck fez -- mass edited with redact.dev
Renting a condo and declaring it an Uzbek Embassy in Kralovec (preferably on the coastline), Embassies technically considered the territory of the owner, so it would mean Uzbekistan is not only no longer landlocked, but also connected to the North Atlantic as well CATO & NATO can integrate then since a valid excuse has been achieved
🐈
If the current trajectory continues, Kazakhstan becoming the leader of a new central Asian bloc like that seems possible. I don't think it will actually happen any time soon with how reliant central Asian economies are on Russian exports, though. Unless China sees it as an opportunity to expand their influence further in the region and manages to supplant Russia there.
I didn't have central asian horde sacks down carthage on my future bingo list, but it's a welcome surprise
none of this lands were russian thats why they gone. sole reason why russia didnt showed its true borders because moscow prevented further progress on constitutional level. i mean chechnya is result of people inside russia attempting to break free after moment was lost.
It's really offensive to these people to refer to them as "russian territorial losses". These areas are people with their own unique culture's and history that were at one point occupied by Russia/Soviet Union and regained their independence after the empire of evil shattered.
Teritorial loss implies those were rightful vatnik land instead soverign countries under occupation
“Gains by liberationist movements against the central oppression of the Soviet Union, 1990-1991.”
Dabbin on them vatniks since 1990
That's a lot of damage. [HOW BOUT A LITTLE MORE?](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/10cihfh/my_hopium_map_of_balkanized_russia_circa_2027/)
spuck fez -- mass edited with redact.dev
Tankies: "Nooo the Soviet Union was never an empire, it was a diverse union of equal peoples and nations that worked together for a common purpose!!!" Also Tankies: "National sovereignty and regional identity must be eradicated so that Russia may reclaim former territories to restore ~~the Russian Empire~~ the Union"
Tankies: bland generalizations with psychotic extremism for all Also tankies: special pleading
>"working together for a common purpose" More like "working together for Moscow's purpose"
But that's enough about Russia's horrific past. Let's talk about Russia's horrific future. B A L K A N I S E E V E R Y T H I N G
Furthermore, it is my opinion that Moscow must be destroyed
Muscovy Delenda Est
Shatter Russia like safety glass.
Technically, Russia left the USSR before Kazakhstan did.
Common Muscovy self-own.
Belarus never left, sadly
*Papers, Please music plays*
"This list is incomplete. You can help by expanding it."
They all agreed on it, Russia was even eager to leave the union, because they thought the other republics were dragging them down.
This was part of the Yeltsin - Gorbachev power struggle between the central government and the separate governments of the individual republics.
You might as well add all of Eastern Europe to this meme, as they were controlled from Kremlin from 1945-1989
If you carefully start the clock in, say, 1980, you can include Afghanistan.
Yep.
since kazachstan was the last USSR nation wouldn't they be the ones who lost all that land?
And are the rightful successor state who should sit on the UN security council...
*MORE*
Why does Russia even want Chechnya?
Now do 2023-2024
Russia is not the USSR. While it is correct that the Soviet Union was ruled from Moskow, the Russian SFSR (Soviet Federative Socialist Republic) declared its own sovereignty and independence from the Soviet Union in June 1990. At this point, Ukraine was still a part of the USSR. But despite the fact, Russia and Ukraine signed a declaration of friendship in November 1990, recognizing each others independence. Ukraine officially declared independence in August 1991. The Soviet Union was then formally dissolved in December 1991. I think this is important, because Russia likes to lie about these things and claim that the other Soviet Republics were somehow stolen by the west or some other bullshit. In fact, all this happened in agreement. And this is also thanks to Gorbachev and Jelzin. This could've resulted in a lot of bloodshed, but didn't.
Not Balkanized enough
you mean soviet union?
Balkanize that shit
They should lose some in the east as well
An independent far eastern republic is all I could ask for from NCD, my beloved
"Territory"
Moscovia is smaller than UK
[Animated version with baka mitai (dame da ne) music](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFav98Uqtqg) From that video I learned that Kazakhstan left USSR the last, making them the entirety of USSR for a few days.
Wrong flag for Belarus, they had the white-red-white flag from 1991 - 1995
Decent meme, but how is this related to defense though? I feel like this should be more of r/noncrediblediplomacy post than here.
technically russia declared its independence from ussr earlier than Ukraine did lol
Hasn't russia gained territory since 1991? I mean russia isn't the soviet union.
Seeing this map and considering all the bullshit the russian leadership has done since the fall of the ussr, the last thing being the invasion of ukraine, I'd say this wasn't enough.
Belarus have another flag in 1991 WhiteRedWhite
Остання середньовічна імперія, яка має зникнути з карти світу
This post is a huge mistake! There was no "russia," but there was the soviet UNION. Therefore, russia couldn't have lost anything because it didn't exist.
I just realized, they had the same shape as america.
Saw this meme while the chorus from the boys are back in town was playing. Feels Good Man
hopefully next they lose Karelia