Thread: Members of Ukrainian parliament fight over Russian language

Originally Posted by LXNDR

every nation which comes to another land and start dictating rules will be perceived as threat and phobia is nothing else than fear, fear of threat in this case, so russophobia is just a manifestation of self-preservation instinct of a nation which feels threatened by Russia

and I just agree that Russian state and Russian citizens insofar as they agree with their government policies pose threat to neighboring countries, or at least unfriendly towards them, especially if those countries are oriented towards European values, which are by and large incongruent with the values Russian state currently adheres to

its aggressiveness Russian state has demonstrated in a recent armed conflict with Georgia

I can certainly agree with that.

Of course MANY Ukrainian's speak Russian language "ethnically" - yet some speak such because they were FORCED to do such by the Soviet boot on their necks.

The same can be said for many of the "Warsaw pact" nations that were FORCED to study the "Ruski Yazik". They HATE Russian language - and possibly Russian people as well - because of the 40 years of oppression and repression that their country endured at the hands of the Soviet.

Of course the contemporary Russian citizen can no more be held accountable for the sins of the Soviet than the contemporary German citizen for the sins of the Nazi - but many people do not understand that.

Государственные и официальные языки в субъектах
Список официальных языков России

Originally Posted by LXNDR

Finland luckily escaped the grim prospect of becoming another republic of the USSR through annexation, therefore with different background they can afford a more relaxed attitude

So that's how you justify the complete disregard of wishes and rights of at least 1/3 of Ukrainians? A so called "background" that gives someone right to treat people like second-grade citizens now since their mothers taught them the "wrong" language?

That's no way to build a democratic society. And since apparently EU silently approves it it's no wonder that many Ukrainians are very skeptical about democracy in general (too many double standards).

Originally Posted by KLAPA

The same can be said for many of the "Warsaw pact" nations that were FORCED to study the "Ruski Yazik".

Being forced to learn a language is not the worst thing possible - after all we were all "forced" to learn all kinds of languages at school without an opportunity to refuse. In the USSR we were "forced" to learn Ukrainian which I do not regret at all even if I do not feel any particular fondness for it.

At least Poles were not forced to accept it as their native language and to use it instead of Polish in courts, movie theaters, etc.

Originally Posted by Marcus

The alnguage policy is very tough in France as far as I know. They have practically destroyed other languages and dialects.

No, no - it's just English that the French hate (not all, but many). They just want to protect their language against English, so there are quotas about how much English songs can be played on the radio etc. Most young people totally ignore all this and absolutely nothing happens.

They have some LOCAL languages there, like Occitane and Basque. These are given plenty of support. There are also some people in France that actually have German as their mother tongue (Alsace - belonged to Germany earlier). This is no problem for France either. I know a person from this area and he is bilingual which means he was able to get a great job in Zurich.

That's the main fault of Russia. We just had to abandon the federation...

This almost deserves a separate thread, to hear your views on this.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

So that's how you justify the complete disregard of wishes and rights of at least 1/3 of Ukrainians? A so called "background" that gives someone right to treat people like second-grade citizens now since their mothers taught them the "wrong" language?

i believe with this statement you're taking it too far

as i already pointed out my mother tongue is Russian, i'm not treated as a second grade citizen, if I am it's not because I speak Russian, but because this is how normally ALL citizens are treated by the corrupt system, no matter what language they speak (and many to be honest can't speak properly neither)

so far I've submitted quite a few petitions written in Russian to different organizations and local government bodies, not a single one was rejected, they were responded to in Ukrainian as the law orders
if they were rejected that would constitute law violation

normally i don't listen to radio, if i happen to hear it it's only in the public transportation playing at the driver, almost all music playing on the radio when i hear it is in Russian, there's even a nation wide radiostation called Русское радио, which exclusively plays music in Russian
when the 'oranges' came to power lots of Ukrainian music started being played on the radio, but those days are long gone.

now ARE YOU treated as a second grade citizen because you speak Russian? please describe the incidents illustrating that statement

Originally Posted by KLAPA

The same can be said for many of the "Warsaw pact" nations that were FORCED to study the "Ruski Yazik". They HATE Russian language - and possibly Russian people as well - because of the 40 years of oppression and repression that their country endured at the hands of the Soviet.

I think this is true for some people, maybe the majority. But I have personally met many Eastern Europeans who don't feel this way at all. A Polish person not so long ago, a Bulgarian guy who was running a very successful IT business in London and a German technician that I knew through work. A girl from Lithuania who is in the same book club as me and countless CVs where Eastern Europeans claim to speak fluent Russian.
All of them practically brag about their skills in Russian as a second language.

Many people in France blatantly despise English, some in Germany too. They feel their own language is quite sufficient and do not want to feel like fools expressing themselves in English just because of the current dominance of the USA or whatever they see as the explanation.

Those of us who speak smaller European languages as our mother tongues (like me) appreciate that knowing English makes all of the internet and endless more literature and culture available. I'd say that Russian would fill a similar type of role for some people even if it is a smaller language than English, it is a "world" language. For Polish, Czech etc people it is considerably easier to learn Russian than English, that's got to count for something. So I wouldn't take their complaints too seriously - it will be forgotten with time. Everyone has to learn English now, and if you don't, certain careers are not available. I don't see the big difference.

Originally Posted by Hanna

The main example of this is the Baltic States where native Russian speakers are treated in a way that is totally unworthy of the EU, and nobody seems to care.
If you compare the situation there with the situation in Finland which is very close to the Baltic States, is a farily "new" country and has not really had an easy ride either.... yet they are handling the situation tremendously much better than the Baltics. In Finland, the bilingual situation is mostly considered to be something positive.

There are two sides to this story as you well know.

Yes and ONE OTHER side of the story might be that Russia/Soviet never managed to conquer/occupy/rape Finland like they did almost all of those "other"Baltic states.

Those people have a VERY GOOD reason to treat "ethnic Russian speakers" differently - they are a legacy of illegal occupation of the Soviet.

When are you Russian's gonna get it? People do not forget the occupation and systematic raping of their country by the Soviet - and the imposition of the Russian language along with the commie dogma. Not for a long time to come.

The "Allies" (read that USA, UK, Canada, et al) left Europe after four years - the Russian's left after 50 years!

Why is it not a surprise for you that Baltic states like Lithuania, Estonia not only flock to the EU but treat their "indigenous Russian speakers" ill? It is because there were NO or very few"indigenous" Russian speakers until Stalin and Russia invaded and raped their country!

Of course - perhaps you have a different version of the "history"?

Was the Soviet occupation the responsibility of the Russian speakers who live in those countries today? Is it OK to oppress a minority just because they speak the same language as people who oppressed your parents and grandparents?

Linguistic chauvinism really is the most idiotic form of nationalism. Personally, I think the Baltic states should have had their membership of the EU suspended years ago.

I just can't agree with a principle that says:

"it's wrong to discriminate linguistic minorities*"
*Except if the minority happen to be Russians, then it's ok, because it's ok to discriminate against them since we did not like the USSR.

That seems to be what some of you are saying!

Or are you saying that it is ok in general, to discriminate against linguistic minorities?
I.e.

Forget the Welsh, the Frisians, the Basque, the German speakers in Italy, the Swedish speakers in Finland etc... and force them to speak the majority language using any means possible!

Because that seems to be what you are proposing in the case of the Baltic Russians, in particular.

I don't think even the USSR - which you say you dislike - would have supported such a policy, at least not post Stalin.

So as for the Baltics: Now they are in the European UNION instead, where they have to learn English instead of Russian... Many cannot get a job and emigrate, many live in poverty and they had a currency crisis and big unemployment. Their countries are used as a location for cheap manufacturing within the borders of the EU.

It's nice that they are happy with the current situation, I hope things will improve fast and I am glad to have them in the EU, but if you look at it objectively there are some big parallells between then and now.. The Baltic states were definitely not rolling in any wealth prior to the War and Soviet annexation - it was a similar situation to Finland. With this I am not saying I approve of the Soviet annexation, I don't. But there are two sides to this and I always disliked a one sided super-biaised view of things.

In the case of Finland - they had an absolute crap time of it until about 1980s. I wouldn't say it was much better than the Baltics. Whole villages and large parts of society were forced to emigrate to support themselves, this never happened in the Baltics, until recently. The situation in Finland had nothing to do with the USSR, they were just poor, with no major natural resources etc in a neglected and unglamorous part of Europe. Luckily things have improved a lot during the last 25 years.

I know this sounds terrible but I wish the Baltic people would stop their victim mentality and look to the future. If they want to be Europeans in the EU, then behave like it! Leave the past where it belongs and move on! What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Being bilingual with Russian will eventually turn out to be a huge advantage - if they don't take it someone else will.

Originally Posted by Hanna

It's nice that they are happy with the current situation, I hope things will improve fast and I am glad to have them in the EU, but if you look at it objectively there are some big parallells between then and now.. The Baltic states were definitely not rolling in any wealth prior to the War and Soviet annexation - it was a similar situation to Finland. With this I am not saying I approve of the Soviet annexation, I don't. But there are two sides to this and I always disliked a one sided super-biaised view of things.

In the case of Finland - they had an absolute crap time of it until about 1980s. I wouldn't say it was much better than the Baltics. Whole villages and large parts of society were forced to emigrate to support themselves, this never happened in the Baltics. The situation in Finland had nothing to do with the USSR, they were just poor, with no major natural resources etc in a neglected and unglamorous part of Europe. Luckily things have improved a lot during the last 25 years.

you cannot know how it would pan out for them economically and progress wise in general had they not been annexed by the USSR, and your example of Finland only goes to show that they could have been better off staying independent, plus their national pride wouldn't have been hurt which is an important thing to consider evaluating relative happiness

Originally Posted by Hanna

Leave the past where it belongs and move on! What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Being bilingual with Russian will eventually turn out to be a huge advantage - if they don't take it someone else will.

they can't leave the past behind them while former occupants and their descendants stir up language controversy looking up to their metropole which is Russia
why not just learn the local language?

Let me be blatant on this one, the idea of multi-culti is bollocks, we're witnessing what this policy has brought about in Western European countries with large Muslim immigrant population. Maybe you like the tendencies, i don't
It doesn't mean that ethnic minorities should be oppressed, but at the same time they should not dictate national policy or try to sway it in their favor, that's treacherous, they MUST integrate if they like to be integral part of society, that in particular means knowing local language
In Latvia one of the goals of the referendum was making Russian another language used in the sessions of the Seim. Why on earth is this important if the members of the parliament have to know the official language in the first place?

as far as Russian speaking population is concerned, i think that unfortunately its large part represents mentality alien and at times hostile to the Western world, therefore for a society which associates itself with this world it poses considerable hindrance.

I think the language talks are nothing but the pure political games. What does it mean 'to re-establish itself' or 'save the language' in that context? If you take the history a little further than 300 or so years, I'm pretty sure you'll find that each dialect of Ukrainian initially belonged to a group of people which physically prevailed another group. So, come to think of it, any language might actually be 'a language of an occupant' for the most people in the world. But after two generations the 'occupied' people would know the language of the 'occupant' and dump their native language. So, those who fight for the so-called 'their Ukrainian' with heat, would actually fight for the language of the 'occupant' of their ancestors. Their ancestors fought and died and the Ukrainian occupants killed them and wiped out their original language. Is that really something worth to hold onto despite the convenience?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Is that really something worth to hold onto despite the convenience?

yes it is, for the sake of cultural diversity

but what kind of convenience you mean i don't understand

there's large Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and Chinese as well, do you think their languages should receive the same status as English and French?

Originally Posted by KLAPA

The "Allies" (read that USA, UK, Canada, et al) left Europe after four years

Really?!
American troups are still in Europe, their geographic distribution has broadened for the last 20 years. They even conduct wars in Europe (recall Yugoslavia) against those who refuse to place their troops on their land.

as far as Russian speaking population is concerned, i think that unfortunately its large part represents mentality alien and at times hostile to the Western world, therefore for a society which associates itself with this world it poses considerable hindrance

I was recently in the Baltics and noticed no such mentality among the Russian speakers. In most cases (except the market in Riga) it was very hard to tell who was ethnically Russian vs Latvian. They are not very warm people, like Ukrainians for example - but both groups were about equally well or poorly behaved. There were crooks and rude people from either nationality, nice and friendly people from either. The Russians are somewhat the underdog though, the native Latvians are a little bit better off economically I think.

And no, I do not support any of the pro-immigration nonsense, but that is a completely different question. The current generation moved there. They are first generation immigrants who consciously moved to Europe and have been well taken care of. As far as the Russians in the Baltics and Ukraine knew, they were moving within an existing nation and had not done anything wrong. I am not saying that the Russians in the Baltics should not try to learn the local language. I absolutely think they should. But the Balts are practically being fascist about it - that is what I oppose.
And I support the EU's acceptance of minority languages - it works well, everyone wins, everyone is happy.

And if you do not like immigration from Non-european countries, then you can thank your lucky star that your country was in the USSR! Otherwise you would have as many non-Europeans as we have in the EU, looking different, speaking differently and with different culture. The Baltic states are essentially culturally and ethnically homogenous from an outside perspective, which is more than what can be said for any country in Northern Europe for example. In Belarus were only Belarussians and Russians, in the Ukraine I was not able to determine, but there certainly were no Africans or Arabs there at any rate. In Latvia too, were only white people, Europeans.

Originally Posted by LXNDR

yes it is, for the sake of cultural diversity

but what kind of convenience you mean i don't understand

there's large Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and Chinese as well, do you think their languages should receive the same status as English and French?

Well, I know that certain areas in Canada maintain their Ukrainian identity and hold on their language. For more than 100 years. That being said, the Ukrainian Canadians are only making the 10th or so in overall population so making Ukrainian official language is more of an inconvenience than there would be a convenience.

But, it's good that you mentioned French as a second official language in Canada. So, the francophones are a minority, but since it's very widely spoken language in Canada, it is official. That is a convenience as well as the political unity. The descendants of French settlers had a concern that English as a more dominant culture in the region would obsolete French. Making French an official language solved the issue. Nowdays, both English and French are mandatory languages in all schools in Canada. And even though Canadian French is still under strong influence of English, nobody I think is afraid French would be obsolete. What's wrong with that solution and why couldn't that be implemented in Ukraine?

That being said, there are a number of organizations which would employ the Ukrainian origin. For example, https://www.ukrainiancu.com/UCU/ which offices are all over Canada would only accept members of the Ukrainian origin. E.g. I cannot become a member and get a credit from that union. Ukrainians are very proud of their origin I guess..

...they are a legacy of illegal occupation of the Soviet.

All this talk about "occupants" is just rhetorics for biased or ignorant. Most of these "occupants" lived there for generations without having any specific rights or privileges over "natives". They worked usual jobs, including unglamorous ones, such as janitors or nurses, they lived at the same types of flats, they were no richer or more powerful. Basically it was just natural working migration.

So now you are gleefully punishing their children and grandchildren for that, acting all wounded and self-righteous? Kind of petty mentality. Especially considering that some of Baltic states probably would not have been independent now without said annexations.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

That being said, there are a number of organizations which would employ the Ukrainian origin. For example, https://www.ukrainiancu.com/UCU/ which offices are all over Canada would only accept members of the Ukrainian origin. E.g. I cannot become a member and get a credit from that union. Ukrainians are very proud of their origin I guess..

Any diaspora in any country is usually very serious about their traditions and their origin, sometimes more that those who were left behind in their native country. It's a natural desire to preserve what's left in a new and unfamiliar world. Ukrainian diaspora is well known for cherishing Ukrainian traditions and being as "Ukrainian" as possible (as well as Jews, for example).

Sometimes they try too hard, though. There was an incident last year or so. Some Canadian organization invited sick and orphaned children from Carpathian region of Ukraine for medical treatment and/or recreation, which was great and very generous of them. Except that there was one condition - no Russian speaking children. I guess they were in their right, but this kind of segregation still looked kind of bad.

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Any diaspora in any country is usually very serious about their traditions and their origin, sometimes more that those who were left behind in their native country. It's a natural desire to preserve what's left in a new and unfamiliar world. Ukrainian diaspora is well known for cherishing Ukrainian traditions and being as "Ukrainian" as possible (as well as Jews, for example).

Sometimes they try too hard, though. There was an incident last year or so. Some Canadian organization invited sick and orphaned children from Carpathian region of Ukraine for medical treatment and/or recreation, which was great and very generous of them. Except that there was one condition - no Russian speaking children. I guess they were in their right, but this kind of segregation still looked kind of bad.

Exactly, that's what I was talking about. Based on my experience of communicating with the second and third generations of Ukrainian origin, they have nothing against Russians and Russian culture, but they know nothing of it and they obviously can't speak or understand Russian (as much as I can't speak and understand Ukrainian). The Ukrainian organizations seem pretty tough on that matter though..

Originally Posted by Marcus

Really?!
American troups are still in Europe, their geographic distribution has broadened for the last 20 years. They even conduct wars in Europe (recall Yugoslavia) against those who refuse to place their troops on their land.

Yep - yet they are still there at the behest of the "host country" - and they do not arbitrarily - and with military force - IMPOSE a government on those countries such as the Russian's did. They do not take things from those counties - they guard the countries against the CONTINUED threat of the Russian's.

Stalin (and thus Russia) even went so far as to OUTLAW letters of the Ukrainian alphabet!

It is difficult for me to understand how Russian's cannot understand the "hard feelings" these people have.

It is also difficult for me to understand WHY Russian's - being the smart and articulate people that they are - continually seem to need to be "led" - by despots like Putin.

Here in the USA - and all over Europe - we don't have a $1000 penalty for protest marches such as has been recently implemented by the "rubber stamp" Duma for CZAR Putin and his KGB cronies.

Also here and in Europe - the "state" does not "own" the media like they do in Russia - or should I say "Gazpromia". Yes - you might say America or Europe is "owned" by corporations - but it is not just one single corporation like it is in Russia. When any corporation would challenge Putin and Gazprom - well - they just change the laws (think LukOil here) and the "state" simply steals the assets of the "lawbreaker".

Nobody trusts you - and for good reason! So why would they trust their "indigenous Russian speakers" that were installed by the Soviet invader?