Thread: question

Hello- i am american of mixed russian and ukrainian origin, i have a question. i understand that russia and ukraine are two separate countries with two separate identities with two separate cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups. ukrainians dont consider themselves russians, and vice versa. if you say a ukrainian is russian he will kill you- and vice versa well here goes my question. why is it- that practically every person in america who says that they are russian, are actually from ukraine?!?! this is why i cant stand ultranationalist ukrainians who hate russians! because alot of ukrainians- at least in america pretend to be russians, and than get mad when outsiders think "ukraine... russia, its the same isnt it?" well you are asking for it ukrainians! by calling yourself russians and than saying your from ukraine, people are going to assume ukrainians and russians are the same thing! hell- even the great fedor emilianenko despite being a great russian hero is actually ukrainian!!! his name is ukrainian, and he originally hails from ukraine! what do you have to say for yourselves ukrainians and russians! (Especially you ukrainians!)

Originally Posted by Tamerlane

by calling yourself russians and than saying your from ukraine, people are going to assume ukrainians and russians are the same thing!

What they SHOULD assume is that there are more than one ethnic group in Ukraine, and by calling themselves Russians these people refer to their ethnicity (which is called "nationality"/"национальность"/"національність" in Russian & Ukrainian), not to their former country of residence.
So most people differentiate being a Ukrainian (ethnically) and being a citizen of Ukraine.

The other reason is that it's sometimes easier just to say "Russian" (even for some ethnic Ukrainians) than to explain every time where Ukraine is situated.

Originally Posted by Tamerlane

why is it- that practically every person in america who says that they are russian, are actually from ukraine?!?!

Perhaps, when they're saying they're Russians what they really mean is that they speak Russian. They also assume (and I think most of the time correctly) that most Americans won't really know the difference. Most Americans would associate the former USSR with the modern Russia and wouldn't know that the USSR consisted of 15 different countries ("republics") and all the citizens of the former USSR spoke Russian.

Originally Posted by Tamerlane

well here goes my question. why is it- that practically every person in america who says that they are russian, are actually from ukraine?!?!

In spite of your use of hyperbole, not every "russian" in the US is actually from Ukraine. However, with regard to why it's so common for you to meet people who label themselves as "russian" and then turn out to be from Ukraine, a few important things come to my mind...

The first thing to take note of is that the fall of the Soviet Union left a few bumps in the road for Russia, but they ultimately found themselves in a rather strong position in the world economy. Unfortunately, the same was not the case for Ukraine, where typical economic conditions are not somewhat less pleasant.

Second, Ukraine east of the river is a very different country from Ukraine west of the river. The majority of eastern Ukraine is ethnically Russian, not Ukrainian.

And third, anyone over the age of 25 probably grew up learning Russian, not Ukrainian. They grew up in the Soviet Union, not Ukraine. They grew up in a world that doesn't exist any more. To call themselves Ukrainian would be dishonest.

My girlfriend, for instance, is from Dnipropetrovsk, and she returns once a year to visit family and what-not. But she hates it there. The radio doesn't play Russian music any more. The television programs are all in Ukrainian language now. And while DNK has been a little slower to change, Kiev has been whitewashed... so imagine what it might be like for people who grew up in Soviet Kiev, only to see it change into modern day Kyiv. These people are Russian. They didn't stop being Russian... their country did.

And so while life has been pretty good for a lot of people in Russia (New Russians), it hasn't been the same for many people who grew up in Soviet Ukraine. There's very little stopping them from taking a chance. Moving on. Maybe ending up in America, where they tell people they're Russian. And why not -- we Americans are too stupid to tell the difference anyway.

It's simpler for Ukrainians in the USA to say they are Russian. But I've met many that will say they are Ukrainian also.

I had a few interesting experiences when I traveled to Kiev (been there twice). After my first trip, my American friends and relatives would ask about my trip to Russia. I would correct them by saying that I was in Ukraine and they would still think it was the same. Or they'd ask me why I just didn't go to Russian instead of Ukraine (as if they viewed Ukraine as a carbon copy of Russia). After a few discussions like this, I grew tired of it. Many Americans view Ukraine and Russia being the same country for a long time. For a while, it actually was. It seems that only in the past few years with Ukraine's interest in joining NATO and EU, that Americans are realizing that they are two different countries. Ukrainians living in the US would stick to the simple answer instead of trying to explain the geopolitical realities of that area of the world.

But this doesn't mean that they are any less nationalistic. All of Europe seems to be intensely nationalistic in general. It doesn't surprise me that two world wars were fought on that continent with such sentiments. I had met a Russian girlfriend in Kiev on one of my visits and we went to the Pecherska Lavra museum. The signs at the exibits were written in Ukrainian and English BUT NOT Russian. When my girlfriend asked about why Russian isn't used, the curator said simply, "Because you are in Ukraine." Clearly Ukraine is trying to differentiate themselves in the eyes of Russia and the rest of Europe. But they may also realize that Americans don't care as much about this. Saying that they are Russian is a safer answer when socializing with Americans.

Isn't it a bit insulting to assume Americans are too stupid to know where the largest country fully within Europe is?

Originally Posted by Tamerlane

Hello- i am american of mixed russian and ukrainian origin, i have a question. i understand that russia and ukraine are two separate countries with two separate identities with two separate cultural, linguistic and ethnic groups. ukrainians dont consider themselves russians, and vice versa. if you say a ukrainian is russian he will kill you- and vice versa well here goes my question. why is it- that practically every person in america who says that they are russian, are actually from ukraine?!?! this is why i cant stand ultranationalist ukrainians who hate russians! because alot of ukrainians- at least in america pretend to be russians, and than get mad when outsiders think "ukraine... russia, its the same isnt it?" well you are asking for it ukrainians! by calling yourself russians and than saying your from ukraine, people are going to assume ukrainians and russians are the same thing! hell- even the great fedor emilianenko despite being a great russian hero is actually ukrainian!!! his name is ukrainian, and he originally hails from ukraine! what do you have to say for yourselves ukrainians and russians! (Especially you ukrainians!)

The problem is that the only way to tell a Russian person from a Ukrainian reliably is to use Визатор:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0% ... 0%BE%D1%80

and only very few people carry it around with them.

Originally Posted by Pcloadletter

The problem is that the only way to tell a Russian person from a Ukrainian reliably is to use Визатор

Originally Posted by basurero

Isn't it a bit insulting to assume Americans are too stupid to know where the largest country fully within Europe is?

Why would it be insulting to recognize and acknowledge the truth?

Nobody is "too stupid" to know something, but Westerners (not just Americans) are notoriously uneducated WRT Ukraine and the ex-USSR in general. Add to that the notorious disinterest in World Geography, and I'd be very, very surprised if even 5% of Americans could point to Ukraine on an unmarked map.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by Pcloadletter

The problem is that the only way to tell a Russian person from a Ukrainian reliably is to use Визатор

Hey, I actually understand this one thanks to you all having me watch Kin-Dza-Dza!!!

Originally Posted by Matroskin Kot

Originally Posted by basurero

Isn't it a bit insulting to assume Americans are too stupid to know where the largest country fully within Europe is?

Why would it be insulting to recognize and acknowledge the truth?

Nobody is "too stupid" to know something, but Westerners (not just Americans) are notoriously uneducated WRT Ukraine and the ex-USSR in general. Add to that the notorious disinterest in World Geography, and I'd be very, very surprised if even 5% of Americans could point to Ukraine on an unmarked map.

basurero... Matroskin Kot is right. I have shamefully admitted previously on other threads that as a child in school I only passed my geography tests by knowing that the biggest land mass was USSR! Now, I am clueless as what happened to and what the places are called as I have not had a need to study this in WAY too many years. When I started dating my husband from El Salvador, I did not even know where that was on the map and none of my friends did either.

On the other hand, Matroskin Kot, who many former USSRs, Russians, Ukraines and so on can correctly place all the 50 states on a U.S. map or name their capitals or the longest river in the U.S.?

If it is not something that directly impacts your daily life, your sort of ignore it. Just like me HAVING to learn the metric system in 5th grade because the U.S. was going to go metric! And that was HOW many years ago?? Now, my girls had to learn it in 5th grade and we STILL are not metric. :fool"

Originally Posted by rockzmom

On the other hand, Matroskin Kot, who many former USSRs, Russians, Ukraines and so on can correctly place all the 50 states on a U.S. map or name their capitals or the longest river in the U.S.?

Come on, American states are not countries. We don't ask you to name Russian "oblasts" (regions), do we? And many of them are much bigger than American states.

But I know what you mean. Many people here would be unable to point MOST of the world countries on the unmarked map. Especially small American and African ones.
Actually it was more like memorising the capitals (not the whereabouts) in our geography class. )))

Originally Posted by gRomoZeka

Come on, American states are not countries. We don't ask you to name Russian "oblasts" (regions), do we? And many of them are much bigger than American states.

But I know what you mean. Many people here would be unable to point MOST of the world countries on the unmarked map. Especially small American and African ones.
Actually it was more like memorising the capitals (not the whereabouts) in our geography class. )))

Yes, but what always amazes me, are the people who come to visit want to go to Disney World in Florida the morning, Times Square in NY in the afternoon and then Niagara Falls on the Canadian border for sunset. This actually happened to us with a family from Belgium, no joke!

Oh, and basurero, not certain if you are U.S. or not; but, try taking a look at the Civics (History and Government) Questions for the Naturalization Test! http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/100q.pdf

I think if current U.S. born citizens were required to take this, a number of them would fail!

Once again, it is not that we are "too stupid" it is just that we are taught these things in grade school and then if our jobs or daily lives do not require us use this knowledge, or if it is not of interest to us, well isn't it a bit like a foreign language, you lose it?

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Once again, it is not that we are "too stupid"

Yeah ... you see, there's sometimes a difference between how Russians and Americans express themselves. For some reason unknown, in Russian we think (and express ourselves) very categorically (i.e. unconditionally). Just a cultural difference. I find that Americans are very specific about the words they're saying, and that can't really directly apply to Russians.

So, here's my brief Russian-English dictionary:

too stupid = wouldn't always know

Americans don't know anything about ... = Not all Americans are experts in ...

We know a lot about America, but Americans don't know anything about the other countries. = People in general tend to only focus on their immediate needs and therefore are inclined to free their minds of the facts which aren't really relevant at the moment. Americans seem to be very practical that way.

And so forth...

i am american (Russian american) and my geography skills are almost perfect, if you gave me an unmarked map, i could name the MAJORITY of countries in the world, and even alot of regions to boot. i am somewhat of a savant at geography, and it really irks me when people are ignorant of other cultures and geography.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Once again, it is not that we are "too stupid"

Yeah ... you see, there's sometimes a difference between how Russians and Americans express themselves. For some reason unknown, in Russian we think (and express ourselves) very categorically (i.e. unconditionally). Just a cultural difference. I find that Americans are very specific about the words they're saying, and that can't really directly apply to Russians.

So, here's my brief Russian-English dictionary:

too stupid = wouldn't always know

Americans don't know anything about ... = Not all Americans are experts in ...

We know a lot about America, but Americans don't know anything about the other countries. = People in general tend to only focus on their immediate needs and therefore are inclined to free their minds of the facts which aren't really relevant at the moment. Americans seem to be very practical that way.

And so forth...

Crocodile, I agree with you "almost" 1,000%. I take things at face value and because of that, when things are written to me on this board by "Russians," I tend to get my feelings hurt very easily. Just one or two words expressed very casually, can come across to me as harsh.

Also, I had a future employer say to me in during an interview, "You seem like the type of person who could learn anything they choose to learn." It is a very acurate statement I believe not just about me; however, about many people.

Americans choose not to learn things that they feel will not have an impact on their lives. "Why do I need to know how electricity works? I turn on the switch and the light comes on." "I put gas in the car, it works." On the whole... we simply do not care WHY.

It is the same with learning about "you people" in other countries. Americans "in general" have always had this philosophy of...Why do I need to know about you? You are a world away from me. Are you going to help put food on my table tonight? Why should I care if there is infighting going on in your part of the world, my favorite TV show is on right now. Do you care about us?

I know many people who have never left their home state and never plan to. They see no need to learn about the rest of the world. It is beyond their reasoning to think of any need to know anything other then the roads they travel everyday.

However, I am not certain that this is practical.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

However, I am not certain that this is practical.

You see, I used the word "practical" in its very strict meaning. As often, it's challenging to adequately attribute a sentiment. It's neither really positive nor negative. What you were saying was "there's no need to" and that's what I earlier called "impractical".

Having said that, I personally like to learn something just for the sake of it, just because it's "interesting". But I wouldn't judge a person who'd think it's impractical, because that really is.

Originally Posted by rockzmom

Americans choose not to learn things that they feel will not have an impact on their lives. "Why do I need to know how electricity works? I turn on the switch and the light comes on." "I put gas in the car, it works." On the whole... we simply do not care WHY.

It is the same with learning about "you people" in other countries. Americans "in general" have always had this philosophy of...Why do I need to know about you? You are a world away from me. Are you going to help put food on my table tonight? Why should I care if there is infighting going on in your part of the world, my favorite TV show is on right now. Do you care about us?

I know many people who have never left their home state and never plan to. They see no need to learn about the rest of the world. It is beyond their reasoning to think of any need to know anything other then the roads they travel everyday.

However, I am not certain that this is practical.

There are terms for this condition. Some call it isolationism. I prefer to think of it as willful ignorance.

At risk of veering off-topic, I ask you to consider this: How many Americans would be unable to point to Iraq on a world map? And how many MORE fit that description prior to the past 7 years? So when some cowboy from Texas told us that Iraq had been seeking missiles, all the willfully ignorant isolationists here thought "OH NOES! SADDAM GONNA ATTACK ME!" and we all agreed to rush into a pointless war that caused more harm to the world than good. If, however, people had taken the time to learn about something more important than the ordering protocol at Starbucks, or the rules for Texas Hold 'Em, we might have been able to understand that a missle capable of traveling a few hundred miles was not a threat to the United States. (Regardless of whether or not it actually exists!)

How different would US policy be if American students were taught a second language (Spanish, anyone?) alongside English, the way that most other schools and countries teach a second language (English) alongside their own.

How different would bi-partisanship look to people if they actually know what words like "communism", "socialism", and "fascism" actually meant? Perhaps if Americans weren't so willfully ignorant of history in the rest of the world, they (we) would realize how stupid they look, and how much they (we) are hurting themselves with ridiculous culture wars instead of leading the world out of this economic mess.

I'm not going to take sides in any political debate here on this site. I don't want to get political, or take this topic further away from the point... I only want to call attention to the damaging consequences of the attitude you describe. You say that people think it doesn't affect them, or their lives, or their ability to put food on their table... but it does. This is a world economy now, and we need to understand how the entire world works, in order to effectively take part in the democracy we have here.

Originally Posted by randem

So when some cowboy from Texas told us that Iraq had been seeking missiles, all the willfully ignorant isolationists here thought "OH NOES! SADDAM GONNA ATTACK ME!" and we all agreed to rush into a pointless war that caused more harm to the world than good.

Let's not plunge into that though. Your guess is as good as mine on the reasons of war. That's why people think they have experts. However, if as you say you agreed based on that ("and we all agreed to rush into a pointless war"), that's another matter.

Originally Posted by randem

... we might have been able to understand that a missle capable of traveling a few hundred miles was not a threat to the United States. (Regardless of whether or not it actually exists!)

You're a strange person ... A missile (more specifically a warhead) is just a means of delivering the WMD. The proponents of war were claiming they should deprive Iraq of producing the WMD. There are potentially other means to deliver WMD. (Don't take me for a proponent of that war, though. I was against it, but let's not look stupid in other peoples eyes providing that type of reason, alright?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

You're a strange person ... A missile (more specifically a warhead) is just a means of delivering the WMD. The proponents of war were claiming they should deprive Iraq of producing the WMD. There are potentially other means to deliver WMD. (Don't take me for a proponent of that war, though. I was against it, but let's not look stupid in other peoples eyes providing that type of reason, alright?

Look I really didn't want to get dragged down the path of nit-picking details here, because all that does is distract people from the point being made. However, since you went there, let me spell out more detail for you.

Regardless of the delivery method (missile, rocket, whatever) there is, to date, no known weapon of mass destruction in existence which could be launched from anywhere in Iraq, then travel a few hundred miles before detonating, and then be expected to kill people in the United States. Come on, let's get real. Even if something could, in fact, explode in the Middle East but be so powerful as to also kill Americans, the blast area would include the complete destruction of the country that launched it!

Calling me a strange person does not negate the laws of physics... nor those of logic.

Originally Posted by randem

Calling me a strange person does not negate the laws of physics... nor those of logic.

I agree with you on that I too do not want to be dragged into the details, simply because so much has already been said and done. I also really don't want to come harsh in any way, so if I offended you by calling you a strange person, I apologize. It was meant to be a joke. Simply because politics as a topic is so offending the language used when discussing the politics is at time too emotional as well.

Also, I realize that the reason of invading Iraq to prevent them from developing the WMD was just an excuse. Having said that I'm still convinced that by simply stating that Iraq at that time didn't possess the ballistic missiles to attack the US is not a valid reason of NOT starting the war. Simply put, the tactical (short-range) WMD can also be used to harm the US or the US interests. And YES unfortunately sometimes a war starts just because the interests could be damaged, not just the civilians in their homes. The recent example of the war between Georgia and Russia is a good example. Neither Georgia nor Russia bombed each others' civilians. So, according to your logic, the war wasn't supposed to start, correct?