# Forum About Russia Politics  Ukraine Elections 2010 + various political off-topics

## Hanna

Apparently the Ukraine is Europe's second biggest country, after Russia..  ::  (!) _-- what about Germany? I thought that was bigger... Maybe not._  
But with this in mind, the Ukranian elections are important for everyone in Europe! I follow a Finnish/Swedish blog about the Russian-speaking world (kniivila.net). Here is what it says (sorry, it is a bit blunt/rude, but it is a blog, not a paper...)   

> Gas queen Julia Tymosjenko or ex youth criminal Viktor Janukovytj? Does it matter in light of the fact that the country is close to national bankrupcy? On Sunday disappointed Ukrainians will be voting in the first election after the "orange revolution".

 Youth criminal?  And what in particular are people disappointed about?   

> Both candidates' mother tongue is Russian, but they speak only Ukrainian in official functions (...)

  Huh? Why does this matter if everyone speaks both languages?     

> Viktor Janukovytj has promised to organise a referendum about giving Russian official status. He has also hinted that Ukraine might acknowledge the Georgian breakaway republics Abchazia och South Ossetia.

 Good.    

> ...neither of the candidates have been bringing up any crucial questions, or matters of principles, therefore it does not matter much who wins, says political journalist Vitalij Portnikov: (...) Whichever candidate wins it is likely that the other does whatever he/she can to plot against the president. We will have the same chaos as before, just without Jusjtjenko. 
> The other option is that Tymosjenko and Janukovytj make peace after the election and lead together with one as prime minister and the other as president. But that too would mean no change.  
> In contrast with Russia and Belarus, Ukraina has real elections where the outcome is not known beforehand.[!?!] None of the eighteen candidates are expected to get a majority on Sunday. There will be a second vote on 21 February to determine which one of the two leaders from Sunday's election is the winner.  
> Ex treasury manager, bank owner and manager of "Swedbank",  Serhij Tihipko's support has been below ten percent, however last week the offical Russian opinion poll institute  VTsIOM published a survey that surprisingly put Tihipko ahead of Julia Tymosjenko. 
> However most Ukrainian observers are sceptical about his possibilties of knocking Julia Tymosjenko out of her seat and getting to the second round of voting. It has been suggested that the Russian figures were a veiled attempt to affect the outcome of the election. 
> Participation is expected to be over 70%

 Respect at the high level of participation! In the UK it's more like 60% I think!  Just as a comparison.
If you are Ukrainian, are you going to vote?   *Do you agree with this representation of politics in Ukraine or is it exaggerating the negative sides?*

----------


## it-ogo

> Apparently the Ukraine is Europe's second biggest country, after Russia..  (!)

 Nope. It is the third biggest in territory European country. Guess three times which country is the second? 
Spoiler:                                   Denmark. 
And why? 
Spoiler:                                     It owns Greenland.   ::     

> If you are Ukrainian, are you going to vote?

 I am not going to vote. Ukrainian politics is crazy and I do not see the effective way it can be improved.

----------


## Hanna

I totally understand Iti-ogo... It looks a bit dark... 
But you know, you should vote... Either that, or start plotting a revolution....!   ::   ::   
Another important thing about Ukraine is where it's going to direct itself in the future: East towards Russia in some kind of union... or West, to join the EU..... Or is both possible? 
Right now Ukraine seems a bit "lonely" while facing some serious problem. Not a great situation.... 
It's such a big country that this stalemate can't last for long..  
I am sure Ukraine would be an asset to the EU in the long run.... Personally I would absolutely support its inclusion if Ukrainians were interested. But on the other hand there are so many historical and cultural ties to Russia. Not to mention the language. So perhaps some kind of co-operation with Russia makes more sense.
I wonder what regular people in Ukraine prefer?

----------


## Ramil

> And why? 
> Spoiler:                                     It owns Greenland.

 For now, probably, but I've heard they have plans for secession.

----------


## it-ogo

> I totally understand Iti-ogo... It looks a bit dark... 
> But you know, you should vote... Either that, or start plotting a revolution....!

 We tried both of these but the result is as usual.  ::

----------


## starrysky

First of all, why are the names spelled so strangely in this blog?   ::  It should be Timo*sh*enko and Yanukovi*ch* -- at least that's how they're written in Russian -- Тимо*ш*енко, Янукови*ч*. 
I too was surprised recently after looking at the map and finding Ukraine bigger than Germany.   

> It is the largest whole-Europe country and the second largest country in Europe (after the European part of Russia, before metropolitan France).[3]

  (wiki)   

> I am sure Ukraine would be an asset to the EU in the long run.... Personally I would absolutely support its inclusion if Ukrainians were interested. But on the other hand there are so many historical and cultural ties to Russia. Not to mention the language. So perhaps some kind of co-operation with Russia makes more sense.
> I wonder what regular people in Ukraine prefer?

 I wish Russia could join the EU and NATO so that all the idiocy and confrontation over Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO and so on would stop...   ::

----------


## sperk

> I wish Russia could join the EU

 I was wondering the other day why isn't Russia in the EU? Is it like Turkey, they're not invited because some EU countries are for and some against? Or do they not want to join?

----------


## Hanna

> Originally Posted by starrysky  I wish Russia could join the EU   I was wondering the other day why isn't Russia in the EU?

 1) Any country which is fully or partially located on the European continent can apply for membership. Ukraine, Russia, Caucasus and even Kazakhstan meet this criteria.  
2) EU puts requirements on membership states. It requires a *stable economy*, reasonably *solid democracy* and full respect for *human rights* in member states. Member states must not be in conflict with any of its neighbours regarding the countrys' *borders*. All this must be fixed BEFORE the country can join.  
3) Countries are represented based on the size of their population and a few other factors. But the representation of the smallest countries is inflated a bit to ensure that their interests are represented despite their small size. 
Turkey does not fully meet the human rights criteria. Albania and several others do not meed the economical requirements. The countries on the Balkan have not fully resolved all of their border conflicts and war legacy issues. 
The thing about Russia is that it is a country that is a continent... It is almost like the EU within its own borders.  *It would shift the power balance in the EU.* Moscow would be the biggest city in the EU. Right now it's London or Paris.  Germany, France, UK etc would be facing a member that is as big as all of them put together. Plus a few EU member states have a suspicious view of Russia right now. They might try to sabotage EU negotiations with Russia. Greece is doing that right now, for Macedonia.  
I am pretty sure that the EU would have some reservations about democracy and human rights in Russia.  
Another point is whether it would interest the population of Russia and the leadership to be in the EU?  I don't know... Perhaps they'd rather remain fully independent. A country gives up some of its sovereignity when it joins.  
If Russia was to join the EU in the future the EU would become a superpower unlike anything the world has ever seen. stretching from the Pacific to the Atlantic from the Arctic down to the Meditteranean.  
IF EU expands further Eastwards,* I think the Ukraine or Moldova are the first possible candidates.* It's unlikely to happen in the near future though, but perhaps within ten years.  
I think the EU and Russia ought to drop visa requirements and enter a customs union as a start.

----------


## Ramil

Russia disputes borders with Japan, Georgia, Ukraine (though I might be wrong about this one), Lithuania and probably China. Technically we're still at war with Japan (since 1945)  ::  
There are many 'human rights' issues in Russia, but many of them are invented by human-rights activists to get grants for their continued doing nothing. 
And finally, I don't think Russia will benefit from joining the EU. I see more drawbacks than benefits in this. I would be perfectly content with merely a treaty regarding simplified transit of people and merchandise across borders.

----------


## BappaBa

> Or do they not want to join?

 *71% россиян не считает себя европейцами. Только 20% считают, что Россия относится к европейской культуре.*  http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/rus...00/6340165.stm

----------


## Hanna

> Originally Posted by sperk  Or do they not want to join?   *71% россиян не считает себя европейцами. Только 20% считают, что Россия относится к европейской культуре.*  http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/rus...00/6340165.stm

 *I think this survey is suspect*, and I see that they have no commenting enabled. I bet, if they had, lots of people would comment and say that they felt European! 
Remember, remember with surveys: Who paid for it and what are their interests/agenda, what are they trying to prove? You can prove "anything" with statistics, you just have to ask questions in a certain way, select the right statistics and present it in a certain way.  
Perhaps they asked these people "What do you feel more like: Russian or European? People would then probably say "Russian" and you could say "A majority of those questioned "do not feel European!" 
Who here is a Russian person that does NOT feel European? If so, what do you feel like? Asian? People who live on the European continent, are white and/or Christian are considered to be European by most other Europeans! I'd be a lot more sceptical towards Turkey as a European country than about Russia.  *
But the problem remains that Russia is "too big" in every sense of the word to fit very well in the EU*. I think it only would work if the EU became a federation (which is quite possible). Then the Russian federation could join republic-by-republic.  
Plus, Russia might think: We do not need the EU and are not interested in adapting to EU rules.. Switzerland and Norway have opted out - they do not want the EUs influence on their internal affairs, and they are rich enough to manage without.     

> Approximately 65% of respondents were unable to explain what the phrase "liberal democracy" means.

 They would get the same answer if they asked that anywhere in the EU! People know what a democracy is, but what is liberal democracy?

----------


## Ramil

Александр Блок
СКИФЫ 
Панмонголизм! Хоть имя дико, 
        Но нам ласкает слух оно...
Владимир Соловьев 
.Мильоны — вас. Нас — тьмы, и тьмы, и тьмы. 
.        Попробуйте, сразитесь с нами! 
.Да, Скифы — мы! Да, азиаты — мы, — 
.        С раскосыми и жадными очами!
.Для вас — века, для нас — единый час. 
.        Мы, как послушные холопы, 
.Держали щит меж двух враждебных рас — 
.        Монголов и Европы!
.Века, века ваш старый горн ковал 
.        И заглушал грома лавины, 
.И дикой сказкой был для вас провал 
.        И Лиссабона и Мессины!
.Вы сотни лет глядели на Восток, 
.        Копя и плавя наши перлы, 
.И вы, глумясь, считали только срок, 
.        Когда наставить пушек жерла!
.Вот — срок настал. Крылами бьет беда, 
.        И каждый день обиды множит, 
.И день придет — не будет и следа 
.        От ваших Пестумов, быть может!
.О, старый мир! Пока ты не погиб, 
.        Пока томишься мукой сладкой, 
.Остановись, премудрый, как Эдип, 
.        Пред Сфинксом с древнею загадкой!..
.Россия — Сфинкс. Ликуя и скорбя, 
.        И обливаясь черной кровью, 
.Она глядит, глядит, глядит в тебя, 
.        И с ненавистью, и с любовью!..
.Да, так любить, как любит наша кровь, 
.        Никто из вас давно не любит! 
.Забыли вы, что в мире есть любовь, 
.        Которая и жжет, и губит!
.Мы любим все — и жар холодных числ, 
.        И дар божественных видений, 
.Нам внятно все — и острый галльский смысл, 
.        И сумрачный германский гений...
.Мы помним все — парижских улиц ад, 
.        И венецьянские прохлады, 
.Лимонных рощ далекий аромат, 
.        И Кельна дымные громады...
.Мы любим плоть — и вкус ее, и цвет, 
.        И душный, смертный плоти запах... 
.Виновны ль мы, коль хрустнет ваш скелет 
.        В тяжелых, нежных наших лапах?
.Привыкли мы, хватая под уздцы 
.        Играющих коней ретивых, 
.Ломать коням тяжелые крестцы, 
.        И усмирять рабынь строптивых...
.Придите к нам! От ужасов войны 
.        Придите в мирные объятья! 
.Пока не поздно — старый меч в ножны, 
.        Товарищи! Мы станем — братья!
.А если нет, — нам нечего терять, 
.        И нам доступно вероломство! 
.Века, века — вас будет проклинать 
.        Больное, позднее потомство!
.Мы широко по дебрям и лесам 
.        Перед Европою пригожей 
.Расступимся! Мы обернемся к вам 
.        Своею азиатской рожей!
.Идите все, идите на Урал! 
.        Мы очищаем место бою 
.Стальных машин, где дышит интеграл, 
.        С монгольской дикою ордою!
.Но сами мы — отныне — вам — не щит, 
.        Отныне в бой не вступим сами! 
.Мы поглядим, как смертный бой кипит, 
.        Своими узкими глазами!
.Не сдвинемся, когда свирепый Гунн 
.        В карманах трупов будет шарить, 
.Жечь города, и в церковь гнать табун, 
.        И мясо белых братьев жарить!..
.В последний раз — опомнись, старый мир! 
.        На братский пир труда и мира, 
.В последний раз — на светлый братский пир 
.        Сзывает варварская лира! 
30 января 1918 
The majority of Russian territory is in Asia  ::

----------


## gRomoZeka

> The majority of Russian territory is in Asia

 Yes, but this areas were appended during 1000 years of existence. The tribes that formed Russia (Rus) lived in Europe, and its center & capitals were in a European part of the continent too.
Just a stray fact: total area of British empire clononies was about 37 000 000 km², Britain's was only 245 000 km² (about 150 times less). Funny, but I don't remember anyone thinking that Britain was an Asian country because of that. I think it's weird, that in modern atlases they list Russia as an Asian country. I remember that I could not find it once because of that.  ::  There's less connections with Asia (different language system, for example), than with Europe, don't you think?

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  The majority of Russian territory is in Asia    Yes, but this areas were appended during 1000 years of existence. The tribes that formed Russia (Rus) lived in Europe, and its center & capitals were in a European part of the continent too.
> Just a stray fact: total area of British empire clononies was about 37 000 000 km², Britain's was only 245 000 km² (about 150 times less). Funny, but I don't remember anyone thinking that Britain was an Asian country because of that. I think it's weird, that in modern atlases they list Russia as an Asian country. I remember that I could not find it once because of that.  There's less connections with Asia (different language system, for example), than with Europe, don't you think?

 Language is not everything. They speak English in Australia, remember? Besides, there are many words in Russian that came from the Turkic languages. We're partly Scythians (who were Asians and here Alexander Blok is right). Russia spent 300 years under the Mongol occupation so Russians are not pure Europeans by all means.
Well, personally, I've never considered Russia a strictly European or  Asian country. Russia is unique because its geography and it has always been a bridge between the East and the West. Russia is just Russia and I don't think it requires any further classification.

----------


## Hanna

So Ramil, how would you answer this question?  
Please select one option:  
a) I am European
b) I am Asian
c) I consider myself to be both Asian and European (Eurasian)
d) I do not consider myself to be either of the above.
e) Decline to respond.   _Anyone else please answer too if you want! 
Obviously my answer is "a"_

----------


## Ramil

> So Ramil, how would you answer this question?  
> c) I consider myself to be both Asian and European (Eurasian)
> d) I do not consider myself to be either of the above.

 I am torn between c) and d).  ::

----------


## starrysky

> Please select one option:  
> a) I am European
> b) I am Asian
> c) I consider myself to be both Asian and European (Eurasian)
> d) I do not consider myself to be either of the above.
> e) Decline to respond.

 I'd choose either a) or c). I do love Asian cultures -- was re-watching my favourite Indian film just yesterday *nuts about Shahrukh Khan*   ::  But if I were to choose where to live -- in Iran or, say, France, I'd definitely choose France. I'm sorry but I think this stuff about Russians being "Asian" is bunk, for the most part. We are Europeoids in terms of race.   ::  We don't have slanted eyes. Russian character, or soul, if you will, is different from the European one due to the severity of climate and centuries of suffering. Suffering elevates your soul, as Buddha taught, that's why Russians and Western people make an ado about "mysterious Russian Soul" and that's why Russians may be hard to understand.  
I used to think I was half English, half Russian, actually, because I love English lit and when you immerse into the language and culture of another country, you unwittingly assume some of its traits. Russia always aspired to be more European -- from Peter I to the Russian aristocrats who spoke French among themselves and knew it better than their native language.   ::  I don't presume to say that the European culture is *better* than the Asian ones. I think we _are_ special, just like any other culture and we would do better to adopt and absorb all the good traits of different cultures. I def wouldn't want Russia to become completely like the US, say. I'm sorry but the extreme competitiveness and chase after money and wealth aren't very appealing as a national identity but some ideas are worth borrowing, that's for sure.   ::

----------


## Оля

> Please select one option:  
> a) I am European
> b) I am Asian
> c) I consider myself to be both Asian and European (Eurasian)
> d) I do not consider myself to be either of the above.
> e) Decline to respond.   _Anyone else please answer too if you want!_

 It's an interesting pool. My first intention was to choose the answer "a"; but it would be not actually true, I think. Well, of course, the _closest_ culture for us Russians is the European one. Also, I don't think we are as close to Asia _culturally_ as it's usually considered. I'd rather agree with Ramil's statement that "Russia is just Russia and I don't think it requires any further classification." I think that we  and Europeans, although we have close cultures, have many differences in our everyday life, way of life, psychology. I think a European is more predictable in his psychology than a Russian. He's also more... erm... "calm"; and I think things are more clearly "black-and-white" to him. But a Russian can strogly love and at once hate the same thing. As someone said, "only a Russian can be arguing to a foreigner that Russia is a bad country, and give him a box on the mug when he agrees".

----------


## gRomoZeka

For me, it's a) and d). I definitely don't have any ties to Asia, so b) is out of the question. I feel more like I don't belong anywhere, and it's partially because of this 'nationality confusion' you discussed in another topic (you can call it identity crisis, if you want). 
I'm usually vague about my country of residence (often I say something like "I'm from Eastern Europe", if I feel that I can go away with it). If not, then I tell people that I'm from Ukraine. Though I prefer to avoid it, because it often cause people to jump to the wrong assumptions, for example that I'm Ukrainian (which I'm not), or that I don't like Russia (which is not true), etc. It's getting ridiculous sometimes. I told one person that I'm from Ukraine, and he started badmouthing Russians right away. I'm sure he didn't feel strongly on the subject, it looked more like he tried to be pleasant. Then I said "I'm Russian, actually". And he was like "Oh". Yeah.. Awkward. 
I can say that I'm from Europe only if I talk to a person who lives outside of Europe and CIS (like Latin America or Africa), because I suppose that for many of them Europe is a distant clump of similar countries, and it saves time. 
And sometimes I respond (quite illogically, but truthfully nonetheless) to "Where are you from?" with "I'm Russian", and let them fill the blanks.   ::

----------


## Ramil

I think that the difference between East and West is the difference between collectivism and individualism. This is what concerns mentality. Considering this, Russian curture is not European since we're not such individualists as the Europeans, but certainly it's not of the Asian type also. As I said, our culture and mentality is a fusion of the Asian collectivism and Western individualism.

----------


## starrysky

> I think that the difference between East and West is the difference between collectivism and individualism. This is what concerns mentality. Considering this, Russian curture is not European since we're not such individualists as the Europeans, but certainly it's not of the Asian type also. As I said, our culture and mentality is a fusion of the Asian collectivism and Western individualism.

 Yes, you are right, Ramil, we are somewhere in the middle when it comes to collectivism and individualism. We are nowehere near the Japanese in terms of collectivism, it would seem, but not individualistic enough either.

----------


## Hanna

The East-West / Individualism-collectivism argument is interesting.  
Well I think the Russian people here are fairly individualistic...???
But maybe you are not representative of Russians in general?  
Also, Russian people I have met in the UK and Sweden have definitely been individualistic and independent. But then, they were people who moved abroad etc. Again, maybe not representative.  
I guess things were a bit more "collectivist" during the Soviet era? Is that what you are referring to? But you kicked out that system, lol!! Probably partly because many people thought it was too regimented? 
Actually thinking about it, I don't come from a massively individualistic country either... People tend to prefer consensus and not sticking out TOO much (just a little bit).  
People of certain nationalities (none mentioned) can seem "too much" and "in your face" to us... Agree about Asians, they are too collectivistic for my taste.

----------


## Ramil

> The East-West / Individualism-collectivism argument is interesting.  
> Well I think the Russian people here are fairly individualistic...???

 Yes, and that makes us non-Asians, but we're not individualistic enough and that makes us non-Europeans.   

> Also, Russian people I have met in the UK and Sweden have definitely been individualistic and independent. But then, they were people who moved abroad etc. Again, maybe not representative.

 Of course, that's why they've left.    

> I guess things were a bit more "collectivist" during the Soviet era?

 They were. But some things remain even now. Untill all of us, born in the USSR die out.  :: 
I'm not saying that we're collectivists to the bone, but still we were brought up in the times when people were throwing around 'we' pronoun for too often.   

> Is that what you are referring to? But you kicked out that system, lol!! Probably partly because many people thought it was too regimented?

 Not that system. To clarify a bit - maybe not all ex-Soviets will share my thought but the thing people were kicking out was the CPSU, not the USSR in general. People just didn't anticipate that once the CPSU domination had ended USSR would collapse as well. Nobody objected to the ideology it was the methods it was pushed in our heads with that angried people and also the corruption.   

> Actually thinking about it, I don't come from a massively individualistic country either... People tend to prefer consensus and not sticking out TOO much (just a little bit).

 I'm not talking about consensus, I'm talking about using 'we' instead of 'I'. We were taught this way. As a 9 y.o. kid I was required to take an oath that I would always put the interests of the socium above my personal interests. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solemn_Pro ... g_Pioneers

----------


## gRomoZeka

> I'm not talking about consensus, I'm talking about using 'we' instead of 'I'. We were taught this way.

 I agree, it was a part of culture, and kids were raised to respect or even to bend to the wishes of the majority.  _"Я" is the last letter of the alphabet"_ ("Я" - последняя буква в алфавите) was a common saying, used to berated young (or not so young) children for being too focused on their own persona.   ::  
A person who insisted on his own desires that went against the wishes of people who surrounded him was not percieved in a positive light (individualistic, initiative, etc.), he was considered stuck up and selfish.

----------


## sperk

> I'm not talking about consensus, I'm talking about using 'we' instead of 'I'. We were taught this way.

  One notable difference between the US and Russia "наша." You usually don't "our" in the US, it's all 3rd person, "the American team won, American troops were killed, etc."  It's interesting that at least part of "наша" stems from indoctrination and training.

----------


## Basil77

> Please select one option:  
> a) I am European
> b) I am Asian
> c) I consider myself to be both Asian and European (Eurasian)
> d) I do not consider myself to be either of the above.
> e) Decline to respond.

     I was always fascinated with European culture, I grew up with Alexandre Dumas', Conan Doyle's, Walter Scott's, Robert Stevenson's and Jules Verne's novels and I think that Russian culture without doubts has European origin, but of course it has it's own unique features due to geographic, religion and ethnic profiles. Asian culture is great, but I always feel like it's kind of alien and exotic for me. Also as far as I know all my ancestors were of Slavic origin (mostly ethnic Russians), who lived in European part of Russian Empire (particulary in Nizhny Novgorod, Vyatka, Vladimir and Ryazan provinces). The only exception I know of, well, may be one of them was French. There is some kind of legend in my family (my father's line) that the founder of the family was a Napoleonic soldier, who was captured by Russians in 1812, and later adopted Orthodoxy, married a Russian girl and changed his surname Savigny to Сав*И*нов.  ::  
   But aside from my humble person, I wonder if we compare percentage of people who belongs to European race in such without doubts European cities as Paris or London and in Russian cities located in Asian continent such as Novosibirsk or Krasnoyarsk? I guess they (the Siberian cities) wouldn't look more Asian from this point.
   Well, considering the above, my answer is mostly a) and maybe a little d)  (at least that's the way I feel like).

----------


## gRomoZeka

> It's interesting that at least part of "наша" stems from indoctrination and training.

 It's an interesting thought.. Though I don't think that this is the best explanation. "Наша страна" and similar expressions have more to do with traditions and language than some kind of deliberate training.  
There's one more "мы" vs. "я" example in Russian, you must have been seen: "*Мы* с Петей пошли в кино" (Petya and I went to the cinema). "Я и Петя пошли в кино" is also possible, but "мы" sounds more natural. Again, it's not the result of some training  or forcing people to use "мы" instead of "я". It's a part of culture, Russians have been talking this way for centuries, they got used to this, so "мы" does sound better style-wise in this case.

----------


## Оля

It's an interesting point, indeed... "У _меня_ в доме", "у _меня_ в подъезде", "у _меня_ на этаже" do sound a bit off... Well, the house is not only mine, after all; it's a big block of flats. But I noticed that I really prefer to use "мы" instead of "я" in many cases, even if it's really only "я".
I think it's a part of the language, first of all; gRomoZeka is absolutely right.
And still, I must admit that I am very, very individualistic, and, I hope, independent, too.   ::   
To me, one of the main distinctive features of Russian people is indiscipline. I'd even say that's our Russian form of independence. I don't mean that a Russian can't discipline himself, although it's open to question, too. I mean he can't be disciplined by someone else (and that's the thing I can definitely say about myself). You can't make bus drivers open the front door if they don't want to. You can't make clerical people and shop assistants smile and be polite if they don't feel to smile and to be nice with this particular person. You can't make a man go to work if he wants to go on a drinking bout. You have no power over souls and wishes of Russian people.
The European independence is reasonable and rational; the Russian one is turbulent and has no limits. 
Probably I sound too apocalyptical, but that's how I really see it.  ::

----------


## Ramil

> I think it's a part of the language, first of all; gRomoZeka is absolutely right.

 Nothing in this world happens without a reason. And if this phenomenon has become part of the language then there is a reason for it.   

> And still, I must admit that I am very, very individualistic, and, I hope, independent, too.

 Good for you, but this is different. We (again 'we') still try to find some common features, traits, etc in people that surrounds us. We can judge for the whole country or haven't you noticed?    

> To me, one of the main distinctive features of Russian people is indiscipline.

 Well, I don't think we have the monopoly for that. Quite the opposite - Asians are very disciplined because the lack of discipline (something that is common to a large group of people) is a sign of individual approach. We're more Europeans in this regard.   

> The European independence is reasonable and rational; the Russian one is turbulent and has no limits.

 ... бессмысленная и беспощадная.   :: 
(не удержался).

----------


## Оля

> To me, one of the main distinctive features of Russian people is indiscipline.
> 			
> 		  Well, I don't think we have the monopoly for that. Quite the opposite - Asians are very disciplined because the lack of discipline (something that is common to a large group of people) is a sign of individual approach. We're more Europeans in this regard.

 Ну в таком случае мы еще более "индивидуалистичны", чем европейцы. Потому что я не думаю, что в Европе есть какие-то трудности с объяснением людям их обязанностей и их выполнением. С этой точки зрения европейцы как раз очень дисциплинированы. Оговорюсь - если судить по тому, что я о них знаю и слышала, потому что в Европе я не была, в магазины там не заходила, на автобусах не каталась.  ::  Но говорят, что персонал там везде вежливый, клиентам улыбается. Это ведь тоже дисциплина. Им просто один раз объяснили, вот и всё. А русский человек, извиняюсь... кладет на то, что ему указывают и объясняют. Он по форме-то сделает, а вот душу вложит только если сам решит, что это нужно, и решать будет только он сам в каждом конкретном случае. А для русского человека улыбнуться - это тоже значит душу вложить. Не может он просто так, просто потому что надо. Даже за деньги не может. Когда его не контролируют, не стоят над душой и не стучат по голове, он будет таким, каким ему удобно быть. И ничего ты с ним не поделаешь.

----------


## gRomoZeka

> if this phenomenon has become part of the language then there is a reason for it.

 Well, yes, mentality affects the language, and language affects the mentality. It's like a chicken or the egg paradox.
In other words, grammar constructions we use without thinking reflect the history of the nation,and they still influence us on some level. For example, Russian language is famous for its lack of 'initiative' in grammar.  :: 
e.g. "Мне холодно"~"Something is making me cold" vs "Я замерз"~"I'm feeling cold" (the latter is quite fine, but the former is used more often)
or "У меня есть сестра"~"There's a sister by me" (?) vs. "I have a sister"="Я имею сестру" (the latter is unacceptable)
Some people draw all kinds of conclusions from that (a fatalistic outlook, passive nature, etc.). You can decide for yourself if it means anything.  ::

----------


## Ramil

> Ну в таком случае мы еще более "индивидуалистичны", чем европейцы. Потому что я не думаю, что в Европе есть какие-то трудности с объяснением людям их обязанностей и их выполнением. С этой точки зрения европейцы как раз очень дисциплинированы.

 Сфера обслуживания - да, да и то... раз на раз не приходится. Если брать Германию, то там да - alles in Ordnung, но это Германия и это, быть может, единственная страна в Европе, где так (может быть ещё Скандинавия, хотя я там не был). А взять, к примеру, Францию или Италию - то там нахамить могут на раз, и вообще отношение весьма пофигическое. Да и работать из-под палки тоже могут не только россияне. По большей части все так и работают. Шевеление начинается только, когда пахнет деньгами. Это уже из моего опыта работы со шейцарскими коллегами.    

> Им просто один раз объяснили, вот и всё.

 Да, роботизированный персонал. Должностные инструкции разрабатываются для дебилов (т.е. дебил вполне сможет работать по такой инструкции). Между прочим, такая практика активно внедряется и у нас в стране. От человека не требуется вообще никакой инициативы: "Лопата - Копать - Здесь - Кидать - Туда - До 6 вечера."   

> А русский человек, извиняюсь... кладет на то, что ему указывают и объясняют. Он по форме-то сделает, а вот душу вложит только если сам решит, что это нужно, и решать будет только он сам в каждом конкретном случае.

 Ага, а европейцы душу вкладывают. Как же, жди! Они вообще только по форме и могут делать. Разница в том, что у европейцев форма индивидуальная, а у азиатов - для целого коллектива.   

> А для русского человека улыбнуться - это тоже значит душу вложить. Не может он просто так, просто потому что надо. Даже за деньги не может.

 Ещё как может. Ты в какой-нибудь дорогой магазин зайди - улыбнутся, поднесут, унесут, кофе/чай, иногда шампанское. В общем-то разницы никакой, за деньги - улыбнётся, а за твои 300 рэ. - пошлёт куда подальше. Между прочим, обслуживание по ценовой категории, скажем, "выше среднего" в Европе зачастую гораздо хуже, чем у нас. У нас, конечно, цены бешенные, но зато клиента буквально "облизывают" со всех сторон.   

> Когда его не контролируют, не стоят над душой и не стучат по голове, он будет таким, каким ему удобно быть. И ничего ты с ним не поделаешь.

 Это любой человек в любом уголке земного шара. И европеец, и американец, и азиат, и африканец. И, мне кажется, даже пингвин в Антарктиде.

----------


## starrysky

> Well, yes, mentality affects the language, and language affects the mentality. It's like a chicken or the egg paradox.

 Uh-huh. And mentality is formed by life conditions. And life in Russia is hard because it's cold, I suppose. Lack of sunlight is notorious for making people depressed and gloomy --> problems with alcohol... I've heard of a lot of people who went to extreme North, like Norilsk, and became really mentally ill there and committed suicide. Thankfully, we have a lot of sunshine here in Novosib... A climate that is too hot doesn't seem to be conducive to progress, either, though. It's interesting that Northern European countries, like Sweden adopted socialism, isn't it? So Russia and Sweden must really have something in common, when it comes to national character, Johanna!   ::   
And it's very interesting indeed, about the language. How are you supposed to adequately translate "наши" into English? As in ecstatic exclamations, like "Наши победили!" or something of that sort? Part of meaning will be lost...   

> Но говорят, что персонал там везде вежливый, клиентам улыбается. Это ведь тоже дисциплина. Им просто один раз объяснили, вот и всё.

 Да, только им еще платят по-человечески. А у нас некоторые работодатели требуют по-европейски, а платят... Если бы мне платили $1000 как нормальному европейскому продавцу, а не 7000 рэ, то я, так и быть, подумала бы о том, чтобы получше эти требования соблюдать.   ::  Это не значит, что я буду хамить покупателям, а просто именно так -- улыбаться, если покупатель тоже вежлив и не очень-то держаться за это место. А так я эти 7000 зарабатываю с гораздо меньшими усилиями, сидя дома и занимаясь переводами. Тепло, светло и мухи не кусают.   ::  Все-таки работа по специальности и есть перспективы... 
Ну и в ментальности дело тоже, конечно. Наверно, русский человек привык, чтобы ему сильно на мозги не капали. У нас тут недавно скандал был -- в местную школу пришла новая директриса, вся такая требовательная -- у нас в универе она 4 года преподавала французский, так что я её знаю. Начала наводить в школе "порядки", заставлять учителей делать какие-то вещи, которых раньше не было или на которые смотрели сквозь пальцы. Чтоб всё по букве закона, по бумажке. Они, как люди другой закалки взбунтовались, естес-но. 
С другой стороны, немцы перед второй мировой тоже старательно изучали русский характер -- читали "Обломова", диссертации защищали... Типа, ленив русский. Ха-ха. Лучше бы про 1812 читали.

----------


## it-ogo

> Между прочим, обслуживание по ценовой категории, скажем, "выше среднего" в Европе зачастую гораздо хуже, чем у нас. У нас, конечно, цены бешенные, но зато клиента буквально "облизывают" со всех сторон.

 Может быть потому, что европейские богатеи не приравнивают холуйство персонала к качеству обслуживания?

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil   Между прочим, обслуживание по ценовой категории, скажем, "выше среднего" в Европе зачастую гораздо хуже, чем у нас. У нас, конечно, цены бешенные, но зато клиента буквально "облизывают" со всех сторон.   Может быть потому, что европейские богатеи не приравнивают холуйство персонала к качеству обслуживания?

 Приравнивают, даже более требовательны в этом плане, чем наши нувориши, которые во многом ещё не избавились от советского стереотипа обслуживания. Потом, они там именно для того, чтобы холуйствовать, это часть "добавленной стоимости" товаров, выставляемых в подобных торговых точках.

----------


## starrysky

> А для русского человека улыбнуться - это тоже значит душу вложить.

 Вот именно, что у нас "смех без причины -- признак дурачины." Американцы пущай улыбаются своими дежурными улыбками, если им надо... А так, какой в этом смысл? Мне всегда казалось, что доброжелательного тона голоса, который показывает, что я хочу помочь человеку и сделаю "всё от меня зависящее", вполне достаточно. Потом, среди покупателей тоже каждый день есть хоть одна такая заноза и неадекват, что на весь день может настроение испортить. С такими уж извините -- нас как бы учили, что в нашей стране все равны и никто его "вылизывать" не будет ни за какие деньги. Терпеть и молчать в тряпочку приходилось, это да.

----------


## Hanna

It's interesting to see* how harshly many of you judge your own country/people.* I have read that Putin is trying to improve national self esteem.  
Compare your harsh view of your own country with the Chinese! Or the Americans and their positive view of their country and themselves, despite many, many faults and wrongdoings. Ask a French person for example what's wrong with America vs Russia. *I think you'd be surprised how favourably you'd come out! *   In Scandinavia, the view of Russians is:
-Lots of people are serious intellectuals and very smart. 
-Lots of people are heavy drinkers of alcohol (same as us but booze is cheaper and easier to buy.) 
-"Intensive" people, passionate and with a temper. "Arctic Italians"
-Guys are quite macho and girls quite feminine compared with us. 
-Lots of "urban myths" about extreme stuff: - Have you heard that in Russia..... [something extreme] 
Personally I wouldn't have said "collectivistic" and I can't remember having heard anything about that.  
I am aware of the socialist principle of putting society's needs before ones own. But it doesn't seem like people in Russia are doing that at the moment. _Haha Ramil, listen to the "pioneer" inside you! Do a good deed!_   
It must be doing very strange things with a nations "soul" to go from viewing itself as the spearbearer of a righteous ideology, to "the bad guy" of the 20th century (essentially the US view). First trying to turn people into collectivist solidarity minded communists, and then suddenly being hit by the nastiest sort of capitalism (oligarchs and gangsters), denouncing the past and tearing down what socialism created.  
If Russia was a person, it might be suffering from "post traumatic shock" and maybe schizophrenia!"  
I see LOTS of parallels between Russia and the Britain where I live right now. I mean the loss of an "empire" if you don't mind the word.... Followed by the need to "reinvent" itself in a new incarnation, which takes some time. 
 Example:  
Britons can be SO hard on themselves when they speak about the country, the climate, language skills, the stupidity of many Brits and the imperial past. It seems that there is no national pride at all. "Multiculturalism" is a big theme and the culture of the large immigrant groups is treated with almost as much respect as British culture. Being pro-British is seen as almost the same as being racist.  
But suddenly Brits can change 360 degrees and start implying that in fact, they brought "civilisation" to the colonies, built most of their current infrastructure, hospitals etc. Not to mention their view that they saved Europe from Nazism and suffered tremendously during the war etc.   
Then there is the situation whereby people in the ex-colonies idealise Britain and even its past rule enormously. Millions try to get to Britain to live there... Despite the fact that Britain was a colonial imperialistic exploiter and seriously discriminated against them! (I don't think that can be said about the USSR).  
After the loss of the empire Britain went through hard economic times for two decades, and allied itself really closely with the US and its "ideology".  
Am I right to think that most people in Russia aren't terribly interested in a Western style democracy...?  I get the feeling people are more interested in law and order plus increased living standards, and that they aren't convinced anymore, that democracy is the best way to achieve that.    *If so that would be a BIG difference with Europe,* since all countries in the EU believe that democracy is the only good form of government. (BTW, the EU is not democratic at all, it's largely an illusion. But that's a different story)

----------


## Crocodile

> I'm talking about using 'we' instead of 'I'. We were taught this way.

 The "positive" aspect was that "we" implied less individual responsibility...   ::   
Having said that, I'm somewhat curious about that notorious "individualistic" European culture. I'd like to dispute that. It's true that the language is full of I's and the sayings such as "think for yourself", "you want the best for yourself", and so on. However, all I can hear around is the choir singing slogans praising "team work", "approach as a team", "solve as a team", "give back to the community", etc. The Team seems to be a holy cow. If you're not a "team-payer" you won't get a job.   ::   
I think the difference between Russian and European culture has vastly been stretched out. Russian traits are much more European than Japanese. No one in Russia would even slightly entertain the idea of cutting off their limbs out of shame.   ::

----------


## Ramil

> It's interesting to see* how harshly many of you judge your own country/people.* I have read that Putin is trying to improve national self esteem.

 Yes, but we reserve the right to do so only for ourselves. Foreigners are not allowed to be hash on our 'beloved Russia'  ::    

> I am aware of the socialist principle of putting society's needs before ones own. But it doesn't seem like people in Russia are doing that at the moment. _Haha Ramil, listen to the "pioneer" inside you! Do a good deed!_

 That's the point. In our childhood everyone was talking about that but when we'd finally grown up everything turned upside down. This was the reason of 'inner conflict' in many Russians (especially of older age). The young adapted faster. The ideas that had been planted into your head in your earliest childhood haunt you from time to time.   

> If Russia was a person, it might be suffering from "post traumatic shock" and maybe schizophrenia!"

 Well said. Schizophrenia it is!  ::    

> I see LOTS of parallels between Russia and the Britain where I live right now. I mean the loss of an "empire" if you don't mind the word.... Followed by the need to "reinvent" itself in a new incarnation, which takes some time.

 Yep, but Britain got 'lucky' and has lost the 'superpower' title during the WW2. It didn't happen overnight and nobody had noticed the change right at first.   

> But suddenly Brits can change 360 degrees...

  ::  Perhaps you wanted to say 180 degrees...   ::     

> Am I right to think that most people in Russia aren't terribly interested in a Western style democracy...?

 It's hard to say for all. Judging by the people I know personally, the answer is yes. But there is a strong brain-washing about 'democratic values', etc and I really don't know. Most probably, there are very few has left who does care about political organization of our country. There has always been someone higher up who decided everything (during more than 1000 years of Russian history it has always been so, by the way). Who cares? Monarchy, oligarchy, socialism, democracy - there have always been those in power and common folks. Nothing really changes in Russia in this field.   

> I get the feeling people are more interested in law and order plus increased living standards, and that they aren't convinced anymore, that democracy is the best way to achieve that.

 I think that whoever gives all this to people would have universal popularity, even if this peson is a cannibal with sadistic instincts.   

> *If so that would be a BIG difference with Europe,* since all countries in the EU believe that democracy is the only good form of government. (BTW, the EU is not democratic at all, it's largely an illusion. But that's a different story)

 Yes, but europeans are biased. They've been told that there are no good alternatives. And they keep hearing this even now.
To change something, as Lenin wrote, one need a revolutionary situation in the country. Content people don't revolt. So if I keep my population well fed (as it is the case with Europeans) I can do anything I want. I can even give these people the illusion of choice (and by doing so I will transfer the responsibility for my actions to them - after all, it was them who 'elected' me).

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  I'm talking about using 'we' instead of 'I'. We were taught this way.   The "positive" aspect was that "we" implied less individual responsibility...

 This too. It's a part of the overal scheme. That's why I don't like democracy. There's always noone to blame.   

> Having said that, I'm somewhat curious about that notorious "individualistic" European culture. I'd like to dispute that. It's true that the language is full of I's and the sayings such as "think for yourself", "you want the best for yourself", and so on. However, all I can hear around is the choir singing slogans praising "team work", "approach as a team", "solve as a team", "give back to the community", etc. The Team seems to be a holy cow. If you're not a "team-payer" you won't get a job.

 But they remain just that - slogans. Nobody really cares if your teammate suddenly gets fired.  ::    

> I think the difference between Russian and European culture has vastly been stretched out. Russian traits are much more European than Japanese. No one in Russia would even slightly entertain the idea of cutting off their limbs out of shame.

 From our point of view, perhaps, but if you look at Russia with the eyes of an average European you'll see the bottomless abyss that divide our cultures. 
I'm not trying to say that Russia is typically asian, I only try to say that it's more Asian than France, for example. And from the other hand it's more European than Turkey (or Georgia for that matter). The correct term will be 'Eurasian'. This word reflects the real position of Russia among the world's cultures.  
We're not Asians by all means, but we're not Europeans either.

----------


## Crocodile

> Having said that, I'm somewhat curious about that notorious "individualistic" European culture. I'd like to dispute that. It's true that the language is full of I's and the sayings such as "think for yourself", "you want the best for yourself", and so on. However, all I can hear around is the choir singing slogans praising "team work", "approach as a team", "solve as a team", "give back to the community", etc. The Team seems to be a holy cow. If you're not a "team-payer" you won't get a job.     But they remain just that - slogans. Nobody really cares if your teammate suddenly gets fired.

 Neither would Russians.  ::  
The fact that Europeans typically are more reserved and less outward emotional is only a bit wider gap of the same type that St.Peterers and Moscovites exhibit. I fail to notice the "bottomless abyss that divide our cultures". Location-wise Russia is between Europe and Asia and as such has adopted some of each culture. However, the "managing top" has been pan European for a couple of recent centuries, and so, as starrysky has mentioned, the European culture (especially French and German) was considered the high-class/educated.  
Having said that, not all Europeans were high-class/educated themselves. The word "villain" means "villager" in French.   ::

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  But they remain just that - slogans. Nobody really cares if your teammate suddenly gets fired.    Neither would Russians.

 Agreed. But you were pointing out that Europeans are not so individualistic as it might appear.    

> I fail to notice the "bottomless abyss that divide our cultures".

 Yes, because you have Russian background. But imagine you were a rural Portugese guy. What would you know of Russia and its culture?

----------


## Crocodile

> Agreed. But you were pointing out that Europeans are not so individualistic as it might appear.

 Exactly. So, the "fired team mate" example wasn't able to demonstrate that Russians are less individualistic for that matter.    

> I fail to notice the "bottomless abyss that divide our cultures".
> 			
> 		  Yes, because you have Russian background. But imagine you were a rural Portugese guy. What would you know of Russia and its culture?

 Being a rural Portuguese guy I would probably not know much about the high-class Russian culture as much as a rural Russian guy would not know a lot about Portuguese high-class culture.

----------


## Оля

> It's interesting to see* how harshly many of you judge your own country/people.*

 Johanna, I think it would be an important and interesting point for you if I say that we, or at least one of us who speak so "harshly" about our country - I mean myself - don't actually find that view a harsh one, and don't see anything that terrible in all I've described. To me, personally, an undisciplined person are nicer than a disciplined one. I can't explain it. Probably because I myself can't be disciplined by anybody else; although it can be and is unreasonable, sometimes. Probably because my own idea about freedom is turbulent. Also, I prefer someone not to smile to me just because it's supposed to smile. I don't need exorbitant courtesy from a clerk or a salesperson; just a neutral tone and minimal politeness (like "hello", "thank you" and "good bye") is quite enough for me. I wouldn't like everyone around me to smile and to be extra-nice; it looks like idiocy. I prefer to think that a rude shop assistant has a kind heart somewhere deeply inside, and I believe in many cases that's how it really is. I could say more, but it would sound very stilted and stupid.   

> Am I right to think that most people in Russia aren't terribly interested in a Western style democracy...?

 I'd say *definitely yes*.
In fact, democracy is a _slogan_. Like "Да здравствует Ленин" or "Слава КПСС". Been there, done that. It's no longer interesting. For western people, slogan games are something of a novelty. Let them play with slogans and democracy then. But we have something more serious to do.  :: 
To me, personally, a true valuable slogan could be love, kindness, friendship, fidelity, and so on, and so on. What is called "вечные ценности". And I am really amazed how western people can change these valuables (which are not invented and discovered just yesterday) for that stupid word, "democracy".

----------


## Crocodile

> For western people, slogan games are something of a novelty.

 And may I ask for the source, please?

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  Agreed. But you were pointing out that Europeans are not so individualistic as it might appear.   Exactly. So, the "fired team mate" example wasn't able to demonstrate that Russians are less individualistic for that matter.

 I didn't indend to illustrate this point, I simply was objecting using 'slogans' for illustrating the collectivism of Europeans.     

> [quote:1k1vif6a]I fail to notice the "bottomless abyss that divide our cultures".

 Being a rural Portuguese guy I would probably not know much about the high-class Russian culture as much as a rural Russian guy would not know a lot about Portuguese high-class culture.[/quote:1k1vif6a] 
Come on, don't say you didn't hear all those stereotypes that surround Russia and the Russians in the minds of Europeans (or Americans)? Bears, vodka, balalayka, that sort of cr@p.

----------


## Оля

> Originally Posted by Оля  For western people, slogan games are something of a novelty.   And may I ask for the source, please?

 Я не очень поняла твой вопрос. Я имела в виду *лозунги*. Типа "Слава советскому народу" и "Да здравствует КПСС" на каждом доме. Типа "догоним и перегоним", "даешь пятилетку" и т.д. На Западе вроде ни под одним лозунгом не жили 70 лет.

----------


## Crocodile

> I didn't indend to illustrate this point, I simply was objecting using 'slogans' for illustrating the collectivism of Europeans.

 I can share your point of view. I used the certain "collective" slogans to balance the other "individualistic" slogans as they are usually referred to as a proof of the individualistic nature of Europeans. Rarely are there other proofs provided.    

> Come on, don't say you didn't hear all those stereotypes that surround Russia and the Russians in the minds of Europeans (or Americans)? Bears, vodka, balalayka, that sort of cr@p.

 That crap is well-known. As much as the other sort of crap like cowboys, whisky, and banjo. Crap, in general, doesn't prove anything. Judging by crap, the "bottomless abyss that divide our cultures" is defined as follows:   ::   
vodka = whisky
bears = cows
balalayka = banjo

----------


## Crocodile

[quote=Оля] 

> Originally Posted by "Оля":gxhop5rc  For western people, slogan games are something of a novelty.   And may I ask for the source, please?

 Я не очень поняла твой вопрос. Я имела в виду *лозунги*. Типа "Слава советскому народу" и "Да здравствует КПСС" на каждом доме. Типа "догоним и перегоним", "даешь пятилетку" и т.д. На Западе вроде ни под одним лозунгом не жили 70 лет.[/quote:gxhop5rc]
Ну здрасти! А чем, по твоему, дядя Сэм убеждал сам себя в своей правоте в период холодной войны? Всё той же демократией, свободой, и т.д. Нет ничего нового под солнцем. Лозунги - они лозунги и есть. И в современной России они просто другие. "Не ляжем под Америку!", "У нас свой, особенный путь!", и т.д.   ::

----------


## Ramil

> vodka = whisky
> bears = cows
> balalayka = banjo

 Abyss indeed!  ::  
So you don't agree that Europeans are more individualistic than the Russians in general?

----------


## Crocodile

> So you don't agree that Europeans are more individualistic than the Russians in general?

 Here's the thing. Before I agree or disagree, I would like you to somehow quantify the "more" in the "more individualistic". And the quantification is relative, as you know. So, what is your scale? I strongly disagree about the "abyss" though.  
As a side word to you, Ramil, I know you're leaning towards the "cryptocracy", so ask yourself, who would benefit from the aforementioned "abyss"? I mean, let's get real here. You know some of European culture, and Europeans know some of yours. Would you know Japanese culture better than European? What culture more influenced you personally European or Japanese? What name rings the bells better for you: Walter Scott or Chikamatsu Monzaemon?

----------


## Оля

> Ну здрасти! А чем, по твоему, дядя Сэм убеждал сам себя в своей правоте в период холодной войны? Всё той же демократией, свободой, и т.д. Нет ничего нового под солнцем. Лозунги - они лозунги и есть. И в современной России они просто другие. "Не ляжем под Америку!", "У нас свой, особенный путь!", и т.д.

 Я не согласна, что в современной России есть лозунги. Люди больше заняты собой, своей частной жизнью. Даже то, что ты назвал - если и есть, то не в форме лозунгов. На западе же демократия - это именно лозунг, красная тряпка, библия, святая святых. У нас сейчас ничего такого нет.

----------


## Crocodile

> Originally Posted by Crocodile  Ну здрасти! А чем, по твоему, дядя Сэм убеждал сам себя в своей правоте в период холодной войны? Всё той же демократией, свободой, и т.д. Нет ничего нового под солнцем. Лозунги - они лозунги и есть. И в современной России они просто другие. "Не ляжем под Америку!", "У нас свой, особенный путь!", и т.д.     Я не согласна, что в современной России есть лозунги. Люди больше заняты собой, своей частной жизнью. Даже то, что ты назвал - если и есть, то не в форме лозунгов. На западе же демократия - это именно лозунг, красная тряпка, библия, святая святых. У нас сейчас ничего такого нет.

 Ну, вот видишь, у нас с тобой есть разногласие на эту тему. Я как включаю русское телевидение, то только и слышу, что про "особый путь" и про "соблюдение национальных интересов". А если на Западе остановить человека и спросить про жизнь, то он тоже ничего про демократию и свободу рассказывать не станет. Больше про что купил и где отдыхал.

----------


## Crocodile

> И, мне кажется, даже пингвин в Антарктиде.

 Whoa! Are you into the Antarctic penguins too?   ::   ::

----------


## Crocodile

> And it's very interesting indeed, about the language. How are you supposed to adequately translate "наши" into English? As in ecstatic exclamations, like "Наши победили!" or something of that sort? Part of meaning will be lost...

 "Yes *we* can?"    ::

----------


## Оля

> Я как включаю русское телевидение, то только и слышу, что про "особый путь" и про "соблюдение национальных интересов".

 "Соблюдение национальных интересов" - это клише и стандартное политическое бла-бла-бла любого правительства любой страны. Что касается "особого пути" - ну а что в этом нового? Это вообще банальность. Про особый путь России в России говорят не первое столетие. Не знаю, кто начал. Может, Достоевский. И что в этом плохого, кстати? И повторяю, никто это не воспринимает здесь как лозунг. Лично для меня это скорее прописная истина.   ::  (в этом есть доля шутки, но поверь, даже если бы это было 100% серьезно, то "вдолблено" мне это никак не телевидением, а скорее, тем же Достоевским).

----------


## Basil77

> Я как включаю русское телевидение, то только и слышу, что про "особый путь" и про "соблюдение национальных интересов". А если на Западе остановить человека и спросить про жизнь, то он тоже ничего про демократию и свободу рассказывать не станет. Больше про что купил и где отдыхал.

 Наверное, сейчас новости по общефедеральным каналам смотрят только бабушки в деревнях и иностранцы (включая эмигрантов).  ::   НИКТО из моих знакомых, с кем я общался на эту нему, не смотрит эту хрень, разве что иногда, ради прикола, что там, мол, ещё весёлого порасскажут. Ой, я забыл ещё мемберов ЕдРа   ::  . Это новости о них, для них и ради них, и только.

----------


## Crocodile

> "Соблюдение национальных интересов" - это клише и стандартное политическое бла-бла-бла любого правительства любой страны. Что касается "особого пути" - ну а что в этом нового? Это вообще банальность. Про особый путь России в России говорят не первое столетие. Не знаю, кто начал. Может, Достоевский. И что в этом плохого, кстати? И повторяю, никто это не воспринимает здесь как лозунг. Лично для меня это скорее прописная истина.   (в этом есть доля шутки, но поверь, даже если бы это было 100% серьезно, то "вдолблено" мне это никак не телевидением, а скорее, тем же Достоевским).

 Что-то мы всё по-русски, да по-русски.. вроде как англи_ц_кий практикуем. Ну да ладно.  
Первым делом про особый путь. Разумеется не правительство изобрело этот термин. Но во времена оные, если мне не изменяет память, это имело контекст культурной конфронтации между славянофильством и западничеством. (Знаменитые "мокроступы" и т.п.) В наши дни этот термин стал употребляться в политической жизни совершенно в другом контексте. А именно - смена курса правительства времён Ельцина на Путина. Типа: "Ну делали мы как на Западе, и ничего хорошего не получилось. Наоборот, всё разворовали и утащили на Запад. Значит теперь надо заниматься укреплением вертикали власти. И что, это наступает на какие-то там свободы? Увы и ах! У России *особый путь* (=самый крутой в мире), ихние свободы - не для нас."  
Простой подменой понятий из давнишней культурной дискуссии сформировался лозунг, имеющий вполне конкретные политические последствия.  
Немного другая ситуация про "национальные интересы", но превращение в лозунг очевидно. Ты права в том смысле, что это - общий термин для чего угодно. Но в современном политическом контексте в России это означает примерно то же самое, что и "защита демократии" для США.

----------


## Crocodile

> Originally Posted by Crocodile   Я как включаю русское телевидение, то только и слышу, что про "особый путь" и про "соблюдение национальных интересов". А если на Западе остановить человека и спросить про жизнь, то он тоже ничего про демократию и свободу рассказывать не станет. Больше про что купил и где отдыхал.   Наверное, сейчас новости по общефедеральным каналам смотрят только бабушки в деревнях и иностранцы (включая эмигрантов).   НИКТО из моих знакомых, с кем я общался на эту нему, не смотрит эту хрень, разве что иногда, ради прикола, что там, мол, ещё весёлого порасскажут. Ой, я забыл ещё мемберов ЕдРа   . Это новости о них, для них и ради них, и только.

 Тут я с тобой полностью согласен. Самое наипрекраснейшее место для хорового распевания политических лозунгов.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  So you don't agree that Europeans are more individualistic than the Russians in general?   Here's the thing. Before I agree or disagree, I would like you to somehow quantify the "more" in the "more individualistic". And the quantification is relative, as you know. So, what is your scale?

 Well, let's see, who would you think will sooner understand the motives of a man, a person who lives nearby or a person from another continent?    

> I strongly disagree about the "abyss" though.

 You're not in a position to speak here, by the way. You're not from Western Europe, aren't you?    

> As a side word to you, Ramil, I know you're leaning towards the "cryptocracy", so ask yourself, who would benefit from the aforementioned "abyss"?

 I had to google about cryptocracy.  :: 
We're not discussing whether it goo or bad. In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.
Of course, the better educated person is the more he or she knows and the less that abyss I was speaking of. But FYI there is only about 1% of people in the world who has higher education. 
And regardless of me being unfamiliar to my shame with Asian culture to the extent I'm familiar with the European one I still think that Russia is neither European nor Asian country.

----------


## Crocodile

> Well, let's see, who would you think will sooner understand the motives of a man, a person who lives nearby or a person from another continent?

 You lost me here. Would you be able to elaborate? Earlier I mentioned that St.Peterers are more reserved and less outwards emotional than Moscovites. So, are St.Peterers more individualistic than Moscovites? You see? The word "more" is a very bad word to be applied here. It can mean as much as 1% or as much as 90% inclusive.     

> I strongly disagree about the "abyss" though.
> 			
> 		  You're not in a position to speak here, by the way. You're not from Western Europe, aren't you?

 And I strongly disagree with that as well. On the contrary, only the person who is familiar enough with BOTH cultures is in a position to evaluate the differences.    

> We're not discussing whether it goo or bad. In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.

 Ok, so now well-educated Johanna is asking well-educated yourself about the difference and you're saying it is huge. Why?    

> Of course, the better educated person is the more he or she knows and the less that abyss I was speaking of. But FYI there is only about 1% of people in the world who has higher education.

 Ok, so do you mean that the difference (individualistic-wise) between the well-educated Europeans and Russians is minimal? Or, do you mean that a French peasant is more individualistic than a Russian peasant?   

> And regardless of me being unfamiliar to my shame with Asian culture to the extent I'm familiar with the European one I still think that Russia is neither European nor Asian country.

 That is correct to the extent that France is not England, Spain is not France, Portugal is not Italy, Greece is not Scotland, etc. But (since I assume you normally eat with the fork and not with the chopsticks) do you agree that you were influenced much more by European culture than any other foreign culture? Ok, Russia was conquered by Mongols some time back, but how much do you know Mongolian culture?

----------


## Ramil

> And I strongly disagree with that as well. On the contrary, only the person who is familiar enough with BOTH cultures is in a position to evaluate the differences.

 Crocodile, read again the original quote:   

> From our point of view, perhaps, but if you look at Russia with the eyes of an average European you'll see the bottomless abyss that divide our cultures.

 If you see something alien (not familiar) and you don't understand it you see the difference.   

> Ok, so now well-educated Johanna is asking well-educated yourself about the difference and you're saying it is huge. Why?

 Read the original quote please.   

> Ok, so do you mean that the difference (individualistic-wise) between the well-educated Europeans and Russians is minimal?

 No, but an educated man tries to find the common features.   

> Or, do you mean that a French peasant is more individualistic than a Russian peasant?

 Yes, I think so.   

> That is correct to the extent that France is not England...

 No, I'll rephrase the original Johanna's question the way I understood it:
Do you believe that Russia is a European or Asian country. (Just like that, without definitions, clarifications, elaborations, etc). 
My answer was - neither (again - just a simple answer to a simple question).

----------


## BappaBa

> Ой, я забыл ещё мемберов ЕдРа   . Это новости о них, для них и ради них, и только.

 Кто-то мешает переключиться на РенТВ или Йэху Мацы, и насладиться чернухой? =)

----------


## Оля

> ихние свободы - не для нас."

 Во многом это так и есть.
Вообще, свобода - она внутри человека. Ее нельзя привить политическим путем. Если и можно, то суррогат получается. Люди на западе думают, что они свободны уже потому, что они живут в некоей политической системе, которая априори делает их свободными. И всерьез рассуждают об отсутствии и защите свободы в стране, в которой они никогда не были.   

> Простой подменой понятий из давнишней культурной дискуссии сформировался лозунг, имеющий вполне конкретные политические последствия.

 Это твое личное в_и_дение, и на мой взгляд, довольно притянутое за уши. Я или кто-то другой может увидеть в словах про особый путь России в устах Медведева или Путина любой другой подтекст, какой ему больше нравится. 
И все же ты путаешь *лозунг* с концепцией или национальной идеей, сокрытой в разных мудреных контекстах, которые еще надо уловить, объяснить и расжевать. Лозунг - это то, что для всех. Одно-два слова, просто и ясно. Так вот, демократия на западе - это лозунг для всех. Я даже не представляю себе, чтобы где-нибудь на американском ТВ организовали какое-нибудь ток-шоу на тему "Демократия - это хорошо или плохо?" А у нас на тему "особого национального пути" сколько угодно диспутов. Только свистни.

----------


## Hanna

_Da Croc is back on form!_    ::  My highly scientific expert opinion which has been empirically proven in numerous clinincal studies:   ::  
-------------
SOME European countries are a bit more "individualistic".  *In my opinion, Italian, Dutch and French people value individualism a lot*. To some degree English people too.  
Germans are a law unto themselves. Hard to say whether they are "individualistic" or not, but less than the French, Italians and English I think.  
Swedes get critisized for being obsessed with consensus and that everybody tends to have very similar opinions about everything. Similar story in Finland and Austria, but Norwegians and Danes are a bit more individualistic.  
I don't know enough about Eastern Europe, Greece or Portugal, so I don't have a view of that.    

> In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.

 Well, in the eyes of the same people that you are talking about, Russia fills a "vital role" as the "scary" country in Europe!_ (even though, based on history, it ought to be Germany...)_   
If people didn't worry about Russia, they might start worrying about why exactly there are still US bases in Europe and lots of other undesirable questions. The Georgia war was great for such people because it "proved" that Russia is aggressive. Lots and lots of strategists could start plotting how to deal with a similar situation in one of the Baltic States...  
There is probably at least a million people in Europe who are making a living one way or another from the general paranoia about Russia. Not to mention companies etc.  
Propaganda, silly or funny? 
The Simpsons clip about Russia... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrqcUeTcmH4

----------


## Hanna

> No, I'll rephrase the original Johanna's question the way I understood it:
> Do you believe that Russia is a European or Asian country. (Just like that, without definitions, clarifications, elaborations, etc). 
> My answer was - neither (again - just a simple answer to a simple question).

 Two possible responses to this, either:  
1) Your answer is invalid since Russia is not a continent. 
2) Your answer makes sense because the country is geographically split between two continents.  
Option two places you in the same category as Turkey who is viewed with great suspicion by many Europeans, certainly the EU.

----------


## Basil77

> Originally Posted by Basil77  Ой, я забыл ещё мемберов ЕдРа   . Это новости о них, для них и ради них, и только.   Кто-то мешает переключиться на РенТВ или Йэху Мацы, и насладиться чернухой? =)

 Ящик я смотрю только на кухне (когда ем или готовлю), и только 2 канала: Euronews и Viassat History (в основном второй). Эхо в машине бывает слушаю, грешен, хотя политику радиостанции и не долюбливаю во многом. Но не Вести ФМ же слушать в конце концов!  ::

----------


## BappaBa

::   

> Propaganda, silly or funny? 
> The Simpsons clip about Russia... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrqcUeTcmH4

 We have an answer   ::  
Yury Grymov's "Stangers" about respectable american families =) http://www.chuzhiemovie.com/

----------


## Ramil

Насчёт свободы - опять же, что вы называете свободой?
Вот, например, буддисты (если я не ошибаюсь) считают, что истинную свободу человек обретает, когда перестаёт желать. Человек должен освободиться от мирских желаний, страстей и т. п. 
В этом плане западное общество является самым порабощённым. Они прикованы к своим вещам, деньгам и пр. ТАКИМИ оковами, что о свободе никакой речи не идёт. Россия сейчас идёт по тому же пути. 
И о новостях: в последнее время я всё больше убеждаюсь, что сведения о действительно важных для меня событиях я могу почерпнуть из своего окружения - т.е. - из слухов. Если происходит что-то важное, то об этом начинают говорить люди, вот тогда я лезу на какой-нибудь малоизвестный новостной сайт и выясняю подробности. 
Таким образом я избавляюсь от кучи "мусорной" информации, которая не засоряет мой мозг. Пропущенная через множество "фильтров" информация сохраняет лишь ключевые слова, по которой можно обратиться к поисковику. Остальные комментарии и рассуждения про то, что "демократическая общественность опять в шоке" остаются в головах тех, кто смотрит новости. 
Может быть смешно, но слухи становятся более достоверным источником информации, чем зомбоящик. 
А в машине я слушаю "Наше радио".

----------


## Hanna

> В этом плане западное общество является самым порабощённым. Они прикованы к своим вещам, деньгам и пр. ТАКИМИ оковами, что о свободе никакой речи не идёт. Россия сейчас идёт по тому же пути.

 Yes, this is true. But now Russians are just as materialistic! Right?  
Or do you think you personally are less materialistic because of the old socialist ideals from your childhood? 
There must be something very tragic about growing up as a child with the ideals of socialism (solidarity, friendship, equality ETC) and then just when you become an adult, the whole thing is dropped! _"Welcome to adult life and the capitalism; your money is worth nothing and your ideals are dead! Have a Coca Cola!"_  ::  
I think this might have happened to some people on this forum? (My country changed its views a lot, and became much more commercially oriented. But the change was nowhere near as extreme as Russia. But I got disillusioned anyway.)   

> We have an answer 
> Yury Grymov's "Stangers" about respectable american families =) http://www.chuzhiemovie.com/

 I will watch this! Look out for my review   ::

----------


## Basil77

> Your answer makes sense because the country is geographically split between two continents. 
> Option two places you in the same category as Turkey who is viewed with great suspicion by many Europeans, certainly the EU.

 Unlike Turkey, which annexed a small part of European continent, all Russian lands in Asia are some sort of colonies. Until XVI century Russia hadn't any Asian lands and the story of conquering Siberia reminds me strongly about Cortés and Pizarro cases:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ermak  ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ермак_Тимофеевич 
And Middle Asia and Caucasus were annexed much later, in XIX century. 
BTW, what do you think about Denmark in this context since 95% of it's territory (Greenland) is outside of European continent either?  ::

----------


## sperk

> From our point of view, perhaps, but if you look at Russia with the eyes of an average European you'll see the bottomless abyss that divide our cultures. 
> I'm not trying to say that Russia is typically asian, I only try to say that it's more Asian than France, for example. And from the other hand it's more European than Turkey (or Georgia for that matter). The correct term will be 'Eurasian'. This word reflects the real position of Russia among the world's cultures.  
> We're not Asians by all means, but we're not Europeans either.

 Wow, bottomless abyss. I'm glad I don't see that otherwise I wouldn't be studying Russian.
How is the abyss between Russian and China?
How is  this "Asianness" manifested? (other than Mongol blood running through the veins of some Russians.)

----------


## Basil77

> How is  this "Asianness" manifested? (other than Mongol blood running through the veins of some Russians.)

 Were did you get that? The last phrase is almost exact citate from Alfred Rosenberg.

----------


## sperk

> Originally Posted by sperk  How is  this "Asianness" manifested? (other than Mongol blood running through the veins of some Russians.)   Were did you get that? The last phrase is almost exact citate from Alfred Rosenberg.

 Ramil, talking about Mongols.

----------


## Basil77

> Originally Posted by Basil77        Originally Posted by sperk  How is  this "Asianness" manifested? (other than Mongol blood running through the veins of some Russians.)   Were did you get that? The last phrase is almost exact citate from Alfred Rosenberg.   Ramil, talking about Mongols.

 Hehe  ::  Then no more questions, just remember that Ramil, as far as I know, not a serious scientist in the field of ethnography and anthropology, so I wouldn't take too serious his allegations in that field  ::  .

----------


## Ramil

> Hehe  Then no more questions, just remember that Ramil, as far as I know, not a serious scientist in the field of ethnography and anthropology, so I wouldn't take too serious his allegations in that field  .

 LOL
If you happen to look what I wrote about the Mongols and also the context...   ::   
Nobody reads my posts it appears...  ::  
Here, I'll help you:  

> In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.

----------


## Оля

> How is the abyss between Russian and China?

 I'd say, gigantic.
But my point of view is European, Muscovite. I know that there are a lot of the Chinese in the Far East of Russia. I have never been there.

----------


## BappaBa

> я смотрю ... Euronews ...

 Тогда мне вообще удивительно слышать эти претензии к нашим новостям. По Евроньюз Обамку пиарят покруче, чем ВВП по Первому. =)

----------


## Basil77

> If you happen to look what I wrote about the Mongols and also the context...    
> Nobody reads my posts it appears...  
> Here, I'll help you:       Originally Posted by Ramil  In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.

 *Ramil*, sorry, I didn't mean to insult you by any means.  ::  I'v read this exact post and agree with you that this statement takes place. I was thinking that *sperk* meant some other post.  ::

----------


## Basil77

> Originally Posted by Basil77  я смотрю ... Euronews ...   Тогда мне вообще удивительно слышать эти претензии к нашим новостям. По Евроньюз Обамку пиарят покруче, чем ВВП по Первому. =)

 А причём тут Обамка? Мне на него вообще плюнуть и растереть. Меня в новостях интересуют факты и только, причём факты об основных *значимых* событиях у нас в стране и в мире. Извиняюсь, но мне не интересно смотреть, как Путин передал какой-то там областной больнице десять новых автомобилей скорой помощи, а Медведев провёл очередное совещание с руководителями санэпидемслужбы Мухосранского района.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  If you happen to look what I wrote about the Mongols and also the context...    
> Nobody reads my posts it appears...  
> Here, I'll help you:       Originally Posted by Ramil  In the eyes of many (not all) Europeans we're just that - wild, savage and barbaric Russians with probable relation to the Mongols.      *Ramil*, sorry, I didn't mean to insult you by any means.  I'v read this exact post and agree with you that this statement takes place. I was thinking that *sperk* meant some other post.

 It's ok I wasn't insulted but I hate to see my words being mangled.

----------


## starrysky

> А причём тут Обамка? Мне на него вообще плюнуть и растереть. Меня в новостях интересуют факты и только, причём факты об основных *значимых* событиях у нас в стране и в мире. Извиняюсь, но мне не интересно смотреть, как Путин передал какой-то там областной больнице десять новых автомобилей скорой помощи, а Медведев провёл очередное совещание с руководителями санэпидемслужбы Мухосранского района.

 Ну, в Евроньюз Россию вообще почти не показывают. Так, какую-нибудь гадость выудят и покажут под рубрикой "No Comment." Совещания Медвепутов смотреть действительно занудно, но по НТВ по-моему ничего так новости -- в любом случае, то, что у них там в Европе творится тоже не всегда интересно. Ну, Греция на грани банкротства, right. Ну, англичанам чего-то не сидится, подумывают выйти из Евросоюза (был такой сюжет в начале января). Нам-то от этого ни горячо, ни холодно.    

> I'd say, gigantic.
> But my point of view is European, Muscovite. I know that there are a lot of the Chinese in the Far East of Russia. I have never been there.

 In terms of language and race, ethnicity, yes. Let's not forget that Russian is part of the Indo-European language family, so Chinese is indeed very different. Russian culture was based on the Byzantian, i.e., Greek culture, so... All you have to do is look at the Cyrillic alphabet and the Latin one and compare them with Chinese hieroglyphs. 
In terms of culture, on the other hand, I wouldn't call it an "abyss." I think it's ultimately counter-productive to set oneself apart so much. All it takes is to get to know a bit of their culture, like watch "The House of Flying Daggers" or something. Very distinct and unique and special culture, no doubt, but not so alien. I think it says something that they like "The Dawns Here Are Quiet" so much. I used to love the Japanese anime "Sailor-Moon" as a teen so, clearly, I could relate very well to the problems and feelings portrayed in it.

----------


## Оля

> Извиняюсь, но мне не интересно смотреть, как Путин передал какой-то там областной больнице десять новых автомобилей скорой помощи, а Медведев провёл очередное совещание с руководителями санэпидемслужбы Мухосранского района.

 Ну и зря, он недавно на каком-то совещании так угарно про "в граните отливают" зажОг!   ::  
Мне Медведев одного нашего царя напоминает.   ::   Даже некоторое внешнее сходство, кстати, есть.

----------


## Basil77

@Оля&starrysky
Да ёлки, я же написал, что смотрю ящик только на кухне.  ::   Вот представьте, прихожу я вечером с работы, сажусь ужинать, и тыкаю ленивчиком в ящик. Евроньюс мило бубнит гнусавым голосом, и я спокойно съедаю свой ужин, ничто не мешает пищеварению  :: . Если же я включаю новости на ВГТРК, к примеру, то там немедленно появляется морда господина Сечина, который бодро рапортует премьеру об очередных многомиллиардных прибылях от продажи нефти или физиономия Чубайса, открывающего очередную конференцию по нанотехнологиям  ::  . У меня немедленно портится аппетит и появляется непреодолимое желание запустить в ящик табуреткой. Ну и на хрена мне после этого сдались новости по федеральным каналам?  ::

----------


## Basil77

BTW, I'v just noticed, this thread should win the award "The greatest off-topic ever" on this forum!  ::

----------


## starrysky

> BTW, I'v just noticed, this thread should win the award "The greatest off-topic ever" on this forum!

 Ой правда!   ::     

> Мне Медведев одного нашего царя напоминает. Даже некоторое внешнее сходство, кстати, есть.

 Интересная мысль.   ::  Симпатяга, в общем, только под Путина косит малость. Их много там таких сейчас, как не послушаешь -- ну точно такие же интонации и паузы.    

> What culture more influenced you personally European or Japanese? What name rings the bells better for you: Walter Scott or Chikamatsu Monzaemon?

 Good point. I could easily name maybe a dozen European composers off the top of my head but no Asian ones. And the same applies to all cultural things. Hence, we certainly have beeen influenced much more by the European culture than Asian. I've just been reading two interesting articles on Chinese and Japanese, after which Russia and the Russian language/culture look _really_ European.   ::   Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard? So You Want To Learn Japanese

----------


## Ramil

> Интересная мысль.   Симпатяга, в общем, только под Путина косит малость. Их много там таких сейчас, как не послушаешь -- ну точно такие же интонации и паузы.

 Да нет, просто и того и другого одна и та же команда имиджмейкеров (тьфу, слово противное) обрабатывает.

----------


## Hanna

As far as I am concerned I consider Russians (at least those who look reasonably European) to be European.   _(Unless you are too "special" to want to be included with the rest of us plebs on this scruffy old continent, lol!)_   ::   ::  
The cultural and political stuff is technicalities and all of the countries in Europe feel that they are a bit "special" and not like the others, for one reason or another!  
But I suppose there are ethnic minorities in the Russian Far East that should not really be included...  
Apparently Caucasus is technically European, but I feel like they are more of a borderline case, like Turkey...  
Perhaps the Tatars feel less European than other Russians, in light of having a different religion (or?) and a mixed background? I don't know much about it... 
With Ukraine there is no question at all. 
Oh, one more thing. Starrysky, Novosibirisk is NOT technically in Europe is it? Are there a lot of minority people there, or mostly Russians?

----------


## Crocodile

> Originally Posted by Crocodile  ихние свободы - не для нас."   Во многом это так и есть.
> Вообще, свобода - она внутри человека. Ее нельзя привить политическим путем. Если и можно, то суррогат получается. Люди на западе думают, что они свободны уже потому, что они живут в некоей политической системе, которая априори делает их свободными. И всерьез рассуждают об отсутствии и защите свободы в стране, в которой они никогда не были.

 Дык, есть огромная разница между филосовским понятием свободы и термином "политическая свобода". Первое имеет абсолютно субъективное значение. Второе - калька с английского (например "Charter of Rights and Freedoms") и имеет юридически очерченные границы. Отсюда и неразбериха.    

> Originally Posted by Crocodile  Простой подменой понятий из давнишней культурной дискуссии сформировался лозунг, имеющий вполне конкретные политические последствия.   Это твое личное в_и_дение, и на мой взгляд, довольно притянутое за уши.

 Разумеется личное. Похожий пример с переносом контекста в политическую плоскость - "Труд облагораживает!"   

> Я даже не представляю себе, чтобы где-нибудь на американском ТВ организовали какое-нибудь ток-шоу на тему "Демократия - это хорошо или плохо?" А у нас на тему "особого национального пути" сколько угодно диспутов. Только свистни.

 Сдаётся мне, что если бы во времена образования США были зомбоящики, возможно транслировали бы и такие диспуты. Сейчас страсти уже улеглись. В 70-х в СССР тоже не было вопроса о руководящей роли партии.    

> Da Croc is back on form!

 Ya, mun!   ::     

> From our point of view, perhaps, but if you look at Russia with the eyes of an average European you'll see the bottomless abyss that divide our cultures.

 I suggest we put aside all the misreadings and misunderstandings. I think there's no big gap between Russian and European cultures. I also think that the individualism of Europeans and the collectivism of Russians are both stretched out of real proportions. Perhaps it used to be that way in the past, but not anymore.

----------


## Crocodile

> But my point of view is European, *Muscovite*.

 M*o*scovite = someone from Moscow 
M*u*scovite = a phyllosilicate mineral of aluminium and potassium [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscovite]

----------


## Ramil

> Разумеется личное. Похожий пример с переносом контекста в политическую плоскость - "Труд облагораживает!"

 * Освобождает    

> I think there's no big gap between Russian and European cultures.

 Agreed, you think so. But you're not an average European  ::     

> I also think that the individualism of Europeans and the collectivism of Russians are both stretched out of real proportions. Perhaps it used to be that way in the past, but not anymore.

 The difference may indeed be smaller nowadays than before, but again I'm saying that Russian mentality differs from both European and Asian ones. There are cultural, historic and linguistic reasons for this as I pointed out. Russia cannot be classified as 'purely European' or  'purely Asian'. This is my main point. The rest is just irrelevant details. 
And my view upon the past and the future of this situation. Cultures mix up and dissolve in each other. People travel more, people talk to people from the other side of the world, people marriage people of different nationality, culture or race and give birth to a new generation that in theory can inherit both cultures but in practice it inherits none. So if we will track this tendency to some point in the future we would discover that cultures, languages, traditions, etc are dead.

----------


## starrysky

> Oh, one more thing. Starrysky, Novosibirisk is NOT technically in Europe is it? Are there a lot of minority people there, or mostly Russians?

 No, the Urals are the border for the European part of Russia. It's mostly Russians here in Novosib, I couldn't tell the percent but I don't see a lot of people of Asian descent here -- just a random student from Kazakhstan or Altai. I wouldn't answer for other Siberian cities, like Irkutsk (which is near Lake Baikal) because there are Buryats there. But it seems a safe bet that Russians are a majority in all big cities, except Kazan. Kazan is the capital city of the Republic of Tatarstan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazan, apparently, it's around 50% Russians, 50% Tatars there.

----------


## sperk

> It's ok I wasn't insulted but I hate to see my words being mangled.

 Sorry....  ::

----------


## Hanna

> in the future (...) cultures, languages, traditions, etc are dead.

 Yes, if globalisation continues, that would be the likely outcome. But of course it won't happen over night. One step per generation.
It would start with regional blocks, then eventually go global.

----------


## Crocodile

> Yes, if globalisation continues, that would be the likely outcome. But of course it won't happen over night. One step per generation.
> It would start with regional blocks, then eventually go global.

 Do you think it might be a good idea to start forming an artificial 'global' cultural context that would encompass the languages-cultures-traditions that we have today? I think, if left totally uncontrolled, there would be one culture that eats 'em all, won't you think? For example, I would prefer children all over the globe start learning something like Esperanto as their foreign language rather than English. What would you say?

----------


## Ramil

Unfortunately, this process cannot be organized, or so I think. It's an evolutional process and will continue by its own laws. It's up to us, however, to decide how much of our local cultural heritage will be incorporated into this 'world' culture. 
What concerns the language, I think that English is the most probable candidate for 'universal language'. It's not decided by overall number of speakers (there are more people speaking Chinese, for example, but it's unlikely that Chinese will become universal). Any artificial language will also fail (why learn an artificial language if we've got many 'natural' ones). Even the English language will be changed in the end (even though it's the most probable candidate for 'universal language'). 
I think that in the end there will be a phonetic alphabet with latin letters based on English (Native English speakers are not that numerous compared to Spanish or Chinese and since everybody learn English now, but not all do it properly, there are no doubts that the language will be changed. (You can visit any international forum, by the way, where one can find people from all parts of the world, but the rules say that 'all posts are to be made in English'. You will see how English gets transformed by this 'fresh blood' into something new).

----------


## Crocodile

One of the issues with that is a language is learnt in the context of a culture. English is widespread now due to the IT culture. d u expec r futer gens speak tther bffs ws tis typ olang?  
I think there might be many ways to implement a move to a neutral artificial language. For example, the UN can make that language one of their official languages requiring all their documents being translated to that language. That would breed a new generation of translators. I think, that might be a smart political move to some of the countries which oppose a very specific culture, but still want to go global.

----------


## Hanna

> Do you think it might be a good idea to start forming an artificial 'global' cultural context that would encompass the languages-cultures-traditions that we have today? I think, if left totally uncontrolled, there would be one culture that eats 'em all, won't you think? For example, I would prefer children all over the globe start learning something like Esperanto as their foreign language rather than English. What would you say?

 Interesting! 
As for a united world: Some countries tried "Workers in all nations, unite..." for a while until 1990... 
So after that, it was clear road ahead for "Capitalists in all nations uniting... very fast..." Spearheaded by the US and it's interests and culture. If there _must_ be a globalised culture I'd prefer it to be something more neutral.   
Also known as "globalism", and certainly driven by motives of constantly increasing profitability. It pushes a fast-paced super-productive lifestyle, standardisation of everything, "lowest-common-denominator" culture and a very universal set of values and views. The digital revolution helped it happen faster than anyone could have expected.  
A lot of people don't really support this, but what can they do? *English is the language of globalism.*  
Globalism spooks me, even if I am on the right side of the fence, so to speak.  
Personally, *I am AGAINST English as lingua franca*. Particularly in Europe, but also in the world.  
It reinforces the power of certain countries that currently are or have been imperialistic... It pushes their culture and values at the expense of other cultures or values.  
RE English: The ludicrousness of me (Swedish) speaking the language of a country on another continent with people from a neighbouring country (Russia) is a good example! I feel like a muppet to be speaking English!   *If I could, I'd prefer to speak some other language.* Particularly Esperanto which belongs to no country and all people. I wouldn't mind speaking Russian either, if I could speak it to a decent level. Simply in recognition of the fact that it's a large local language in Northern Europe which I also come from.   
In todays world, if you come from one of the smaller (population wise) European  countries and want a professional career, you MUST become fluent in English.  
I had a very cynical view of languages in school, and concluded that all the other langauges I was studying were of secondary importance to English. I only made an effort in English. (That's partly why I flunked out of Russian I think. Unlike French and Spanish you cannot "coast" in Russian, it's too hard, complicated and different from a non-Slavic perspective... ) 
ONE of the reasons I have chosen to learn Russian is that it is in fact the most commonly spoken mother tongue on the European continent. English is actually only number 4 or something like that.  
My grandparents in Sweden all studied German as their first foreign language. If anyone took a second foreign langauge, it was French.   *The importance of English is a Cold War legacy, and business driven.* It has been CONSCIOUSLY pushed by English speaking countries because they know that it serves their interests very well.   
I don't know Esperanto but I support its' ideals and the fairness of of having a "neutral" language that is nobodys, and that is also A LOT easier to learn than English.

----------


## Ramil

> One of the issues with that is a language is learnt in the context of a culture. English is widespread now due to the IT culture. d u expec r futer gens speak tther bffs ws tis typ olang?

 Pbly wrse )
001011001011110101111000111011010010100101    

> I think there might be many ways to implement a move to a neutral artificial language. For example, the UN can make that language one of their official languages requiring all their documents being translated to that language. That would breed a new generation of translators.

 And yes, there will be about two dozen people who speak it.  ::  I   

> I think, that might be a smart political move to some of the countries which oppose a very specific culture, but still want to go global.

 You won't be able to change it for those who already lives. You should separate children and their parents to bring a new culture into this world.  Would you do that? 
Christian missionaries acted like that (but they only taught children in schools, not permanently isolated them)

----------


## Ramil

I don't mind globalism, btw.
It will help to get rid of racism, nationalism, etc. 
There are many drawbacks, of course, but I really think that people should be citizens of the planet Earth, not some petty country.

----------


## Crocodile

> You won't be able to change it for those who already lives. You should separate children and their parents to bring a new culture into this world.  Would you do that?

 I think it's too grim a prognosis. I'll give you an example from the real world. The official language of Israel is Hebrew. However, that language was artificially resurrected and modernized to become a live language. That was a purely political move to settle a dispute between native Yiddish-speaking and Ladino-speaking population.

----------


## Hanna

> I don't mind globalism, btw.
> It will help to get rid of racism, nationalism, etc. 
> There are many drawbacks, of course, but I really think that people should be citizens of the planet Earth, not some petty country.

 If it's GOOD, yes... But I don't trust the current leaders of the world to create good globalised world. I think there's a fair risk it would be a very creepy society with no privacy, no meaningful culture, slaving away in an office or factory to generate more profits for a global corporation and soothing your unease with gadgets if you are lucky enough to be able to afford them. Only a very tiny clique actually reach the lifestyle that everyone is dreaming about and even if they do, it comes at a very high personal price.   _As a someone with a nominally Christian upbringing I also cannot help seeing that there are some very uncanny similarities between the future globalised world as it is shaping up, and the prophecies of the book of Revelations. Only a few minor things would have to happen and you'd have exactly the situation that it is predicting... Make of it what you want, I am just making an observation._

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  You won't be able to change it for those who already lives. You should separate children and their parents to bring a new culture into this world.  Would you do that?   I think it's too grim a prognosis. I'll give you an example from the real world. The official language of Israel is Hebrew. However, that language was artificially resurrected and modernized to become a live language. That was a purely political move to settle a dispute between native Yiddish-speaking and Ladino-speaking population.

 It might have worked with the Jews, but it won't work with me and people like me, for example. How can you 'persuade' or force me to start using another language? I'll ask you what will I benefit out of it in the first case and I would resist in the second one. 
You should start with children (remember when did they start to brainwash children in the USSR). But it's parents who form up a new person. If parents don't cooperate (and they won't cooperate) all your efforts would be in vain.

----------


## Hanna

> You should start with children (remember when did they start to brainwash children in the USSR). But it's parents who form up a new person. If parents don't cooperate (and they won't cooperate) all your efforts would be in vain.

 No brainwashing needed, it's already happening with English it's just done in a much less obvious way than what you are referring to.  
Check what kids are watching on TV, where they want to go on holiday (Disneyland) what clothe they want to wear. (same style as "Hannah Montana" etc)
They are brainwashing themselves thanks to media.  
Don't know whether this is a "conspiracy" or not and you probably haven't seen the results in Russia yet. But I have heard Scandinavian kids of 6-7 using English expressions and saying short sentences in English. No way that would have happened 20 years ago.  
The generation after that might be bilingual from early childhood and then English takes over.  
Unless the current development is stopped.

----------


## Crocodile

> How can you 'persuade' or force me to start using another language? I'll ask you what will I benefit out of it in the first case [...] You should start with children (remember when did they start to brainwash children in the USSR).

 I would say to you: "Dear parent, do you want your children be exposed to the [INSERT THE BAD ADJECTIVE] culture of [INSERT COUNTRY] through their [INSERT THE EVEN WORSE ADJECTIVE] language? You, my dear parent, might think that evil is inevitable for them to adapt to the living in the global world? Well, guess what! Your counterpart parents all over the globe go through the same emotional struggle. And the cultural stress of the new language is on the internationalism, multiculturalism, blah-blah-blah. So, your little one is poised to embrace the globe whilst preserving his own identity. Isn't that just fantastic?  
So, to make this wonderful dream happen, my dear parent, all people over the globe must do their part and contribute to form the better future. Are you on board?  
And for the spiritualistic parents make up something like: "New Age - New Language!"  
(Or something like that, as I'm no good at pulling slogans off my sleeve.)

----------


## Ramil

> They are brainwashing themselves thanks to media.

 By the way, do you know the slang name for TV in Russian? Зомбоящик (a zombie box).
I know what are you talking about and this is not new.    

> Don't know whether this is a "conspiracy" or not and you probably haven't seen the results in Russia yet. But I have heard Scandinavian kids of 6-7 using English expressions and saying short sentences in English. No way that would have happened 20 years ago.

 Conspiracy is an intentional thing, this one is just an 'evolution'. It simply is and there's really nothing we can do about it. You can't shield a child from TV, street ads, internet etc. But I think it's parents' duty to explain a few things (the earlier the better):
1. TV is lies, lies and more lies. NO EXCEPTIONS!
2. Advertisements are more lies. NO EXCEPTIONS!
With these things every parent MUST brainwash his or her children every day.    

> I would say to you .... Isn't that just fantastic?

 I would say: "I ain't buying nothing dude. Get lost"  ::  
To be serious: It's an axiom: you can't change this world to the better intentionally.

----------


## Crocodile

> I would say: "I ain't buying nothing dude. Get lost"

 Alright, but you were bought into the idea of cryptocracy and anarchy, so you *are* a potential buyer. It's only a matter of smart marketing and wise pricing.   ::

----------


## Ramil

Well, I have a rather strange point of view on the matter.
I'm thinking that the globalization institutions and agents that we have now will finally win, but this at the same time will be their end. They were created to function in a divided nations environments. If their globalistic dreams come true one day, they will discover that they would not be able to function (in their present form) in a new society. 
Consider it: one currency, one market, one language, one government, one set of laws everywhere. One thing that pops immediately in mind - no currency trade, no difference in prices and laws, no customs. Well, our technological advances doesn't stop - we travel faster and much more - transportation costs will get lower and lower (the transporat fraction of added value also gets lower), etc. This is just a small list of changes this world is going to adopt one day.
So, Johanna, you can put your mind at rest - no present government will exist then.

----------


## Hanna

It would be great if you turn out to be right.  
A borderless world with no evil world government would be great. Utopia... _(has anyone actually read that book? I haven't...) _ 
But have you considered this? There are not enough resources in the world for everybody to live like people in the richest countries do! Plus, there would be too much pollution.  
If India, China and many others are to reach the living standards of the richest countries, then it HAS to be at the expense of someone else... North America and Europe will have to voluntarily step back and possibly reduce the living standards of people!  
Somehow I don't see this happening... We are already seeing oil wars... The richest countries are the ones that have the best armies and nuclear weapons... Not an enemy to provoke unnecesarily, as Saddam and many others found out.  
The population of the world has almost doubled since the 1980s. There is an upper limit for how large the worlds' population can get... What when food start becoming really expensive and drinking water short in some areas? Europe has nowhere near as much energy as it needs for it's basic needs, like heating, not to mention oil consumption.  
What when China becomes really strong? It is quitely buying up mineral and energy resources around the world. They are not starting wars at the moment, but they are very ruthless in the way they go about their business, seemingly no respect for local populations or for nature.  
They do not have the same frame of mind as Europeans (including Russians, lol!) and Americans... Will they be interested in the cosy borderless world or will they want to run it?   _Highly relevant for the Ukrainian election 2001_  ::

----------


## Crocodile

> There are not enough resources in the world for everybody to live like people in the richest countries do!

 It depends on the amount of energy the humanity would be able to harvest, and not on the way that energy would be distributed. The politics focuses on the distribution part. So, assume our civilization achieved level I (=so it is able to harvest all the energy of the planet). Would that still imply there would be "not enough resources in the world for everybody to live like people in the richest countries do?" No, it wouldn't (if we speak of the richest and the poorest countries of today). In the global economy the poorest countries of tomorrow would live better than the richest countries of today. However, if the distribution imbalance continues, the poorest countries of tomorrow would live like the poorest countries of today, whilst the richest countries would be capitalizing on the resources of the Solar system (e.g. think how much minerals a single asteroid might have). 
Another aspect is that presently lots of energy is lost due to the inevitable consequences of national economics (e.g. the armies that defend those economics).

----------


## Hanna

Yeah. I hope somebody will discover the free energy formula... But there may possibly be those who don't even want that to happen!  
But for the 3rd world to be flying like we in the West do... Impossible! Pollution would skyrocket and oil would run out in a decade.  
I have READ that oil companies are actively sabotaging some of the research in the energy research field because it goes against their business interests. This is not a "conspiracy theory" but more or less a known fact. They buy up institutions that work on this, and literally put the lid on. Probably saving the findings for the day when the oil is really running out.  
Same as certain food companies that support consumption of their unhealthy food because it generates more profits for them than any healthier alternatives. The sweetener scandal is a good example. The healthy and cheap alternative stevia root got banned in the EU and USA, after corrupted lobbyist tricked and bribed ignorant and greedy politicians. All the while the dangerous Aspartame (TM) and similar are on sale despite being very dangerous products that cause many deaths every year.

----------


## Ramil

This planet can conveniently support up to 10-12 billion people (I mean food, water, living space, etc) at the present technological level. It can be more.
Overpopulation IS a problem but there's still some room. Besides, there are oceans too. And they too can be colonized.
Energy is not a problem, after all even with nuclear power we can produce enough energy for all. 
The only question is - rich countries can afford it and poor countries - don't. This all can be eliminated once the countries disappear. Of course, in some areas people will live better than others but gradually this will averages out. This won't eliminate 90/10 ratio, however, 90% of the world's resources will be controlled by 10% of people but that's another story or the next step if you want.
Globalization will destroy the institution of international politics and currencies and international trade but will not solve any sociologic problems. I don't think that 'unification' will come peacefully. There bound to be some local conflicts but I don't think that things would deteriorate (although the scenario of a global conflict cannot be ignored completely). As Europe has united so will the Middle East, Asia, South America. We'll have 10-15 'megastates' in the beginning. North America and Europe will probably join next (and probably Australia), then it will probably be Asia and Africa - look at Asia I think that everything will be rotating around China the next decade and its influence in the region will grow more and more. (I really don't know whom Russia will stick to and I really wonder about it). If there will be no global conflicts (and I hope there wouldn't be anything like that) the further integration will gradually continue. Free travel is the cornerstone of this process.

----------


## Crocodile

> But for the 3rd world to be flying like we in the West do... Impossible! Pollution would skyrocket and oil would run out in a decade. [...]  
> I have READ that oil companies are actively sabotaging some of the research in the energy research field because it goes against their business interests. This is not a "conspiracy theory" but more or less a known fact.

 You seem to have the rather biased sources of information if you know so much about the undercover sabotaging and are totally unaware of the open info about the development of a "clean plane" powered by the hydrogen fuel cells.   ::

----------


## Hanna

> Originally Posted by Johanna  But for the 3rd world to be flying like we in the West do... Impossible! Pollution would skyrocket and oil would run out in a decade. [...]  
> I have READ that oil companies are actively sabotaging some of the research in the energy research field because it goes against their business interests. This is not a "conspiracy theory" but more or less a known fact.   You seem to have the rather biased sources of information if you know so much about the undercover sabotaging and are totally unaware of the open info about the development of a "clean plane" powered by the hydrogen fuel cells.

 I worked for a year at a large and well known oil company. 
They regularly sending out "informational" emails to staff saying _"contrary to what [xx environmental org] says, we are not sabotaging research into renewable energy, in fact, we are supporting it... blah, blah "_  
It had not occurred to me that they might be doing that, but I got curious and looked into it, and it seemed that some fairly reliable sources had proof that they did...  There were similar stories also about their dealings in the third world, which they claimed were perfectly honourable _"we build schools and provide drinking water"_, but which according to the local population was daylight robbery.   *I am not aware of any clean low emission way of flying. Can you tell me about it?*
How much cleaner is it than, say, a normal Boeing 707?

----------


## Crocodile

> *I am not aware of any clean low emission way of flying. Can you tell me about it?*
> How much cleaner is it than, say, a normal Boeing 707?

 Basically, the only by-product (=the pollution) of the hydrogen oxidation is water. Can it be any more clean?   ::   
However, the total environmental footprint depends on the way this hydrogen was obtained. It is yet to be proved (=unknown) that hydrogen could be mined from the certain geological formations. Presently, the most common way to produce hydrogen is to extract it from water by means of electricity. So, technically, hydrogen is more like an energy carrier. If the clean energy (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) is used for the extraction, the environmental impact of operating such plane is very low (i.e. there are other factors unrelated to fuel emissions).

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Johanna  *I am not aware of any clean low emission way of flying. Can you tell me about it?*
> How much cleaner is it than, say, a normal Boeing 707?   Basically, the only by-product (=the pollution) of the hydrogen oxidation is water. Can it be any more clean?

 It's not that simple. Large amounts of water vapor may change the weather patterns the same way today's CO and CO2 do.
Heavy clouds - nearly 100% humidity, etc...   

> Presently, the most common way to produce hydrogen is to extract it from water by means of electricity.

 And you spend more energy on producing hydrogen this way than it will produce when burning in oxygen.

----------


## Crocodile

> It's not that simple. Large amounts of water vapor may change the weather patterns the same way today's CO and CO2 do.
> Heavy clouds - nearly 100% humidity, etc...

 I have yet to see the research that points into that issue. Intuitively, a hot summer would evaporate more water from the oceans than any amount of planes in observable future could do. And later, the water rains back to the oceans. It's not at all like the CO2 issue because the CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and can only be sequestered by plants or dissolve in oceans contributing to their acidification. The overall environmental impact of hydrogen economy is yet to be determined, however it's not even close to the oil economy (which, in turn, is cleaner than the charcoal economy of the past). I realize the hydrogen economy is not the panacea, but just a temporary measure until the fusion is obtained.    

> Presently, the most common way to produce hydrogen is to extract it from water by means of electricity.
> 			
> 		  And you spend more energy on producing hydrogen this way than it will produce when burning in oxygen.

 That is correct. Therefore, producing hydrogen cells by means of burning fossil fuels is stupid. It should only be the renewable energy to make this whole thing work.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  It's not that simple. Large amounts of water vapor may change the weather patterns the same way today's CO and CO2 do.
> Heavy clouds - nearly 100% humidity, etc...   I have yet to see the research that points into that issue. Intuitively, a hot summer would evaporate more water from the oceans than any amount of planes in observable future could do. And later, the water rains back to the oceans. It's not at all like the CO2 issue because the CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and can only be sequestered by plants or dissolve in oceans contributing to their acidification. The overall environmental impact of hydrogen economy is yet to be determined, however it's not even close to the oil economy (which, in turn, is cleaner than the charcoal economy of the past). I realize the hydrogen economy is not the panacea, but just a temporary measure until the fusion is obtained.

 Why not use nuclear power? It's clean (unless you deliberately blow a nuclear reactor). It's cheap and it's available.
After all, the only drawback is peoples' fear of radiation.

----------


## Crocodile

> Why not use nuclear power? It's clean (unless you deliberately blow a nuclear reactor). It's cheap and it's available. After all, the only drawback is peoples' fear of radiation.

 Well, you can't install a nuclear reactor on board the plane, so I assume you don't dispute the usefulness of hydrogen as an energy carrier.   ::   
So, I agree that fission can produce a lot of energy (as well as some radioactive waste). As to the safety of operation, we don't know yet whether or not the fusion plant will be safer to operate than the fission plant.   ::   
The fusion, however, is the ultimate source of power in the observable universe as we know it. And it produces many-folds more power than the fission. So, that's the inevitable direction of development as it will allow the humanity to exploit the resources of the Solar system and go beyond the Level I civilization.

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  Why not use nuclear power? It's clean (unless you deliberately blow a nuclear reactor). It's cheap and it's available. After all, the only drawback is peoples' fear of radiation.   Well, you can't install a nuclear reactor on board the plane, so I assume you don't dispute the usefulness of hydrogen as an energy carrier.    
> So, I agree that fission can produce a lot of energy (as well as some radioactive waste). As to the safety of operation, we don't know yet whether or not the fusion plant will be safer to operate than the fission plant.

 I somehow know the answer and the answer is no, a fusion plant cannot be 'safer'. The only thing that matters is the amount of 'controlled energy'. If it suddenly becomes 'uncontrolled' - the whole thing explodes.  ::

----------


## Crocodile

> I somehow know the answer and the answer is no, a fusion plant cannot be 'safer'. The only thing that matters is the amount of 'controlled energy'. If it suddenly becomes 'uncontrolled' - the whole thing explodes.

 Let's not jump too much ahead, as we shouldn't underestimate the future engineers. I'm not a big nuclear physicist, so I have no clue on all the ways to control the reaction. Perhaps, they would install large permanent magnets for safety to encompass the plasma. Or, perhaps, they would build it the way that as soon as the magnetic control is lost and the plasma loses its density, the reaction stops momentarily. Who knows?   ::

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  I somehow know the answer and the answer is no, a fusion plant cannot be 'safer'. The only thing that matters is the amount of 'controlled energy'. If it suddenly becomes 'uncontrolled' - the whole thing explodes.    Let's not jump too much ahead, as we shouldn't underestimate the future engineers. I'm not a big nuclear physicist, so I have no clue on all the ways to control the reaction. Perhaps, they would install large permanent magnets for safety to encompass the plasma. Or, perhaps, they would build it the way that as soon as the magnetic control is lost and the plasma loses its density, the reaction stops momentarily. Who knows?

 We shouldn't underestimate Murphy's law either.

----------


## Crocodile

> We shouldn't underestimate Murphy's law either.

 That fear is similar to the fear of lightnings by the cave men. There are laws of Physics and they work. Atoms that form the crystal structure do not suddenly disappear (even though the Murphy's law allows them to).   ::

----------


## Ramil

> Originally Posted by Ramil  We shouldn't underestimate Murphy's law either.   That fear is similar to the fear of lightnings by the cave men. There are laws of Physics and they work. Atoms that form the crystal structure do not suddenly disappear (even though the Murphy's law allows them to).

 Your words would really make those guys at CERN laugh.   ::  
Quantum physics somehow denies standard logic. Particles disappear and reappear somewhere else, they change into something else and they seem to travel at speeds faster than light. There are still many paradoxes  ::

----------


## Crocodile

> Your words would really make those guys at CERN laugh.   
> Quantum physics somehow denies standard logic. Particles disappear and reappear somewhere else, they change into something else and they seem to travel at speeds faster than light. There are still many paradoxes

 That's right. And the plant should be designed by taking into account all those (and probably many other) factors. Think about it this way: one of the biggest nuclear plant catastrophes in Chernobyl fission plant resulted in emission of some significant portion of radiation, but the plant didn't explode like a nuclear bomb. If it were a fusion plant, there would be much less radiation hazard. Also, according to your "Murphy law" logic, we shouldn't be building the fission plants either.   ::  
PS. So far so good for the Ukraine Elections 2010.   ::

----------


## Ramil

> PS. So far so good for the Ukraine Elections 2010.

 Who cares?   ::

----------


## Hanna

> Originally Posted by Crocodile  PS. So far so good for the Ukraine Elections 2010.     Who cares?

 Some Ukrainians perhaps (?), but probably not the ones here on this forum! They have not shown any great interest in this discussion lol... Apart from the defeatist comment from iti-ogo that there is no hope for Ukrainian politics...  
But I am speaking as someone who hasn't voted for 10 years due to living abroad most of that time, and the complications of that..  
But I didn't get that part about the "clean" planes. Do they EXIST now? 
Can I fly to Asia or the US or a European destination in a clean plane? Which airlines have them? (As far as I've noticed all European carriers fly old Airbus, Boeing or Russian ones. None of them environmental!) 
Are you for or against nuclear power then? 
I think it's marginally preferable to coal and oil for energy. One lethal accident in ~45 years of usage is not THAT bad, even though Chernobyl was a terrible, terrible thing. I guess the people in the area there are strongly against nuclear power though.  
But looking forward to the day when we can use renewable sources more efficiently and I think people should be forced to live more ecologically; it's disgusting how some people think that just because they have money, it's ok for the to pollute the planet at a rate of 100x that of a 3rd world person.

----------


## Ramil

I studied the incident at Chernobyl at length. I reviewed many documents and interviews. I even went as far as studied the whole scheme of this particular reactor type (RBMK-100). It blew out due to 	negligence of personnel, not due to some technical malfunction.
The operators have deliberately turned off all safety mechanisms and run it in a mode it had not been designed for. This accident can be put in a textbook named 'A complete idiot's guide to blowing a nuclear reactor. Seven practical steps' (There were SEVEN fatal mistakes that operators made on 26.04.1986 in order to blow it).
The reactor resisted till the last moment but they blew it nevertheless. 
Well, we don't need Al-Quaeda if them at power plants will do this now and then.

----------


## Hanna

> I studied the incident at Chernobyl at length. I reviewed many documents and interviews. I even went as far as studied the whole scheme of this particular reactor type (RBMK-100). It blew out due to 	negligence of personnel, not due to some technical malfunction.
> The operators have deliberately turned off all safety mechanisms and run it in a mode it had not been designed for. This accident can be put in a textbook named 'A complete idiot's guide to blowing a nuclear reactor. Seven practical steps' (There were SEVEN fatal mistakes that operators made on 26.04.1986 in order to blow it).
> The reactor resisted till the last moment but they blew it nevertheless. 
> Well, we don't need Al-Quaeda if them at power plants will do this now and then.

 Interesting. I saw a documentary about it. It basically blamed a certain senior manager who was there to carry out some routine safety test (the irony!) and bullied the rest of the local staff into going along with his instructions despite,  them being against safety procedures. According that that documentary, the talk of a serious fault with the reactor was a exaggerated - essentially it was a case of human error on the part of one man. If he hadn't ignored the guidelines it wouldn't have happened. Was that the conclusion you came to?  _
There is a similar plant in Lithuania which has been running fine for many decades although the EU had managed to close it down (to the frustration of the local people who wanted to keep it. Now they have no energy...)_

----------


## Ramil

There is a good link that summarizes and explains graphically what happenned, but unfortunately it's in Russian only.  http://eco.rian.ru/ecoinfogr/20090425/169208464-ig.html 
(requires flash) 
There's another source (unfortunately in Russian too):
I'm inclined to believe this version: http://www.ufo.obninsk.ru/chernob0.htm (part 1) http://www.ufo.obninsk.ru/chernob1.htm (part 2)  
There's an alternative opinion. It his book about the accident Anatoly Dyatlov, a former chief engineer of the power plant states that there were faults in the reactor's design.
Well, he's dead already and he was the one who suffered the most, but nevertheless his arguments are weak. 
Not to go too deeply into specifics I can illustrate his point like this:
Imagine, you have a TV set, and you are trying to 'experiment' with it. You pull out an electric fuse and attach the mains directly, then you open the casing and put your hand onto the leads. Naturally you will suffer an electric shock, but you will say afterwards that the fact that 'something might go wrong if you put your hand onto the leads' was nowhere in the documentation for your TV. 
His book: http://lib.ru/MEMUARY/CHERNOBYL/dyatlow.txt

----------


## Crocodile

> But I didn't get that part about the "clean" planes. Do they EXIST now?

 They exist, but they aren't commercial yet (for the cost reasons mentioned above).    

> Are you for or against nuclear power then?

 There are two types of nuclear power: the fission (the present ones) and the fusion (the future ones). It's been theorized that the environmental impact of the later is less than the former. However, both are said to be slightly cleaner in the short term than the fossil fuel plants.    

> it's disgusting how some people think that just because they have money, it's ok for the to pollute the planet at a rate of 100x that of a 3rd world person.

 The 3rd world persons would gladly pollute just as much (or perhaps even more) should they be given the opportunity. Presently, they have more immediate issues than the environmental ones.

----------


## Ramil

To the topic. It appears Yanukovich wins this after all.

----------


## Crocodile

> To the topic. It appears Yanukovich wins this after all.

 Does anybody think there's a possibility for a complete political separation between the eastern and western Ukranians? Like two different states? (I mean, the difference of 3% is not really convincing who is the leader.)

----------


## Ramil

Remember George Bush junior.

----------


## Crocodile

> Remember George Bush junior.

 It wasn't that much geographically divided in 2000. However, the last time it was (North vs South) some things did happen.

----------


## it-ogo

> Does anybody think there's a possibility for a complete political separation between the eastern and western Ukrainians? Like two different states?

 No. Because there are also Central Ukrainians and they are essentially more then Eastern and Western ones.   

> (I mean, the difference of 3% is not really convincing who is the leader.)

 In 2004 all of them were leaders. Now no one of them is. We will see if the result will be different.

----------


## Ramil

No more Maidans  ::  I'm disappointed - I was secretly hoping to see the sequel - Maidan 2.

----------


## BappaBa

=))))))))) 

```
Жители села Старый Угрынов Ивано-Франковской области, где родился Степан Бандера, напуганы победой Виктора Януковича на выборах президента Украины, пишет газета "Сегодня". 
Как сообщает издание, селяне опасаются, что у них отберут землю, загонят в колхозы, не дадут ходить в греко-католическую церковь и заставят говорить "по-москальски".
Кроме того, староугрыновцы озабочены поисками "иуд" - именно так они обозвали своих односельчан, кто во втором туре выборов голосовал за Януковича. Согласно протоколам местного избиркома, из семисот избирателей села таких набралось около пятидесяти.
```

http://lenta.ru/news/2010/02/12/bandera/
У меня вопрос: почему западенцев называю рагулями?

----------


## Scorpio

> =))))))))) 
> 
> ```
> Жители села Старый Угрынов Ивано-Франковской области, где родился Степан Бандера, напуганы победой Виктора Януковича на выборах президента Украины, пишет газета "Сегодня". 
> Как сообщает издание, селяне опасаются, что у них отберут землю, загонят в колхозы, не дадут ходить в греко-католическую церковь и заставят говорить "по-москальски".
> Кроме того, староугрыновцы озабочены поисками "иуд" - именно так они обозвали своих односельчан, кто во втором туре выборов голосовал за Януковича. Согласно протоколам местного избиркома, из семисот избирателей села таких набралось около пятидесяти.
> ```
> 
> http://lenta.ru/news/2010/02/12/bandera/
> У меня вопрос: почему западенцев называю рагулями?

 http://lurkmore.ru/%D0%9B%D1%8C%D0%B2%D ... 0%BB%D0%B8   ::

----------


## Hanna

> To the topic. It appears Yanukovich wins this after all.

 Good, bad, ugly? Or have you got the same cynical view on Ukrainian polics as on Russian polutics?    _I was very sad to read in a paper about poverty in some parts of Ukraine. I really wish Ukraine can find a way to turn things around and find the best way ahead, whatever it might be. It's disgusting of the EU to treat Ukraine so coldly (Jean Monnet would turn in his grave) and the relationship between Russia / Ukraine / Belarus at the moment is really confusing to me. _

----------


## Ramil

> Good, bad, ugly? Or have you got the same cynical view on Ukrainian polics as on Russian polutics?

 Probably worse  ::  
Seriously though, Yanukovich was a pro-Russian politician 8 years ago and I doubt anything has changed. He represents the eastern Ukraine (starting from the left bank of the Dnepr river) and the people there are pro-Russian too. And of course he's much better than Timoshenko. But people change in 8 years and so do the circumstances. We'll see.

----------


## it-ogo

> Seriously though, Yanukovich was a pro-Russian politician 8 years ago and I doubt anything has changed. He represents the eastern Ukraine (starting from the left bank of the Dnepr river) and the people there are pro-Russian too. And of course he's much better than Timoshenko. But people change in 8 years and so do the circumstances. We'll see.

 Now Timoshenko would be much more preferable to Putin from the economical point of view. Even in 2004 Yanukovich was good for Russian big/state busyness only as a guarantee of political succession and stability but not as a handy economical lobbyist. He is bought by the big Eastern Ukrainian busyness (which does not need Russian competitors in Ukraine) and is expected to act as a protectionist in economics.

----------


## FromGalich

Всё будет видно скоро, кто для кого предпочтителен. 
Всем привет  ::

----------


## Lampada

> Всё будет видно скоро, кто для кого предпочтителен. 
> Всем привет

 И тебе привет!  Добро пожаловать!

----------


## sperk

Timoshenko's going to challenge the results in court.  ::   
Кстати, что такое майдан?
Спасибо!! 
Юлия Тимошенко: "Я приняла единственно возможное решение - обжаловать результаты выборов в суде. Я буду на основании юридических аргументов защищать наше государство, ваш выбор. Я не буду собирать майданы и не допущу публичных гражданских противостояний

----------


## alexB

It’s Ukrainian, I guess, for a square, plaza, meeting place, where Ukrainians get together to badmouth newly elected presidents.

----------


## Оля

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maidan_Nezalezhnosti 
I believe 'maidan' is sort of a synonym for the word 'revolution' in Ukraine. She says "I'm not going to call political meetings on Maidan to make a revolution".

----------


## E-learner

Павло ТИЧИНА  
* * *  
На майдані коло церкви 
революція іде. 
— Хай чабан! — усі гукнули,— 
за отамана буде.  
Прощавайте, ждіте волі,— 
гей, на коні, всі у путь! 
Закипіло, зашуміло — 
тільки прапори цвітуть…  
На майдані коло церкви 
постмутились матері: 
та світи ж ти їм дорогу, 
ясен місяць угорі!  
На майдані пил спадає. 
Замовкає річ… 
Вечір. 
Ніч.  
1918

----------


## it-ogo

> Timoshenko's going to challenge the results in court.   
> Кстати, что такое майдан?
> Спасибо!! 
> Юлия Тимошенко: "Я приняла единственно возможное решение - обжаловать результаты выборов в суде. Я буду на основании юридических аргументов защищать наше государство, ваш выбор. Я не буду собирать майданы и не допущу публичных гражданских противостояний

 "Майдан" в буквальном смысле в переводе с украинского - "площадь". В переносном смысле - "лобное место", Roman forum, место для совершения публичных действий. В русском языке для этого используется слово "улица/улицы": "народ вышел на улицы с требованиями..."

----------


## Hanna

Yeah, I saw a clip where she said (in Ukrainian!) that Yanukovich only won through cheating. She is very convincing!  Don't know what to believe. 2nd largest country in Europe and nobody has any idea what's really going on, or where the country will be heading in the future!

----------


## Оля

> She is very convincing!

 Oh...   ::   Really????   ::

----------


## gRomoZeka

Why not?  Being convincing is the only thing she is good at.  ::  
If she hadn't the talent to talk herself out of trouble, she'd probably have been in jail already.   ::

----------


## Hanna

> Oh...  Really????

 Well, you have to remember, I've lived in the UK for 8 years. I hadn't heard of Timoshenko at all until about 8 months ago. 
The interest in Ukraine here is very low. A lot of people seriously couldn't find it on a map. Remember "Borat"? The fact that such a silly film could become popular proves how ignorant people in the UK are about everything east of.. Germany..  
I started reading the Swedish papers online, partly because I knew that they write more about ex USSR countries. Also I thought they'd take more balanced view on Russia and I was getting seriously bored about reading British stories about the alleged aggressiveness of Russia. . But the outlook in Sweden turned out to have changed since I left. Now I've noticed that the new view is relatively suspicious of Russia. I also notice a lot of irritatation towards the Baltic states for some complicated issues relating to the longstanding relations across the Baltic sea. 
But I also noticed that people in Sweden have lately become very interested in both Ukraine and Belarus. But I think the politics in those countries are so complex that many of the journalists simply don't understand what's going on, or what the real issues are. Sometimes they are just reporting events without attempting to analyse, or they appear uninformed. Other times it's clear that they got the story from an English speaking source instead of checking local sources themselves.  
About the Ukraine elections they are saying that independent observers have stated that the election was honest, so the view is that Yanukovich won and Timoshenko is critisised for not facing reality.

----------


## it-ogo

> About the Ukraine elections they are saying that independent observers have stated that the election was honest, so the view is that Yanukovich won and Timoshenko is critisised for not facing reality.

 Once she won the revolution after the lost elections. Now she knows that revolution is more effective way to influence reality than elections.

----------


## Оля

> Oh...  Really????    Well, you have to remember, I've lived in the UK for 8 years. I hadn't heard of Timoshenko at all until about 8 months ago. 
> The interest in Ukraine here is very low. A lot of people seriously couldn't find it on a map.

 Well, Johanna, you have to know that any politician sounds very convincing, otherwise (s)he is not a professional politician. So you shouldn't trust a political oratory just because the speech is well written, _especially_ if you know almost nothing about the politician.

----------


## Hanna

> Originally Posted by Johanna     
> 			
> 				Oh...  Really????    Well, you have to remember, I've lived in the UK for 8 years. I hadn't heard of Timoshenko at all until about 8 months ago. 
> The interest in Ukraine here is very low. A lot of people seriously couldn't find it on a map.   Well, Johanna, you have to know that any politician sounds very convincing, otherwise (s)he is not a professional politician. So you shouldn't trust a political oratory just because the speech is well written, _especially_ if you know almost nothing about the politician.

 True... Some of them seem a bit less trustworthy than others though. Plus I have a habit of trusting female politicians just a tiny bit more than male ones, and usually also green/red people a bit more than conservatives.  Probably silly though but I like to think the best of people...  
Timoshenko is clearly not some blue-eyed idealist, particularly in view of her background as a businesswoman in the 1990s. I *wanted* to believe in her, I guess. Don't know too much about Yanukovich other than that he is supposedly "pro-Russia", whatever that means.  
In the UK there are a few senior politicians that actually have a bit of conscience and integrity, although not in excess.... Same thing in Sweden, but the politicians there are more like bureacrats. They never have to campaign based on their own merits, just on the merits of the party they belong to.

----------


## mishau_

Своим указом Виктор Янукович переименовал секретариат президента в администрацию главы государства. «Создать администрацию президента Украины, ликвидировав секретариат президента», — говорится в указе.  http://news.mail.ru/politics/3433367/ 
Вот все-таки не пойму, прямо сразу все переделывают под себя. А потом гимн начнут переписывать, менять конституцию и пр.  ::

----------


## Crocodile

> Своим указом Виктор Янукович переименовал секретариат президента в администрацию главы государства. «Создать администрацию президента Украины, ликвидировав секретариат президента», — говорится в указе.

 И чего? Просто официально оформленный повод быстро избавится от старой команды Ющенко и поставить у власти преданную себе команду. Она пока не такая большая, потому и сокращение. Со временем тоже разрастётся.    

> Вот все-таки не пойму, прямо сразу все переделывают под себя. А потом гимн начнут переписывать, менять конституцию и пр.

 Лично мне бы очень импонировало введение русского языка в качестве второго государственного. Успешных прецедентов в мире навалом.

----------


## Ramil

Во сколько кубометров газа это обойдётся?

----------


## Crocodile

> Во сколько кубометров газа это обойдётся?

 Что именно? Новая команда или язык? Кстати, само количество газа особого значения не имеет. Важнее величина отката. Тогда и газ никто считать не будет.   ::

----------


## gRomoZeka

> Вот все-таки не пойму, прямо сразу все переделывают под себя. А потом гимн начнут переписывать, менять конституцию и пр.

 Да и пусть меняют. И гимн УГ, и конституция недалеко от него ушла. Одни пляски вокруг "титульной нации" чего стоят. _При абсолютном уважении к представителям других национальных меньшинств украинцев как своих, родных я люблю больше._ (с) Тягнибок

----------


## mishau_

> Лично мне бы очень импонировало введение русского языка в качестве второго государственного. Успешных прецедентов в мире навалом.

 Точно! Вводить и отменять, вводить и отменять. Вроде и работа. Как у нас с переименованием.  ::

----------


## Crocodile

> Точно! Вводить и отменять, вводить и отменять. Вроде и работа. Как у нас с переименованием.

 Ну, а чем им прикажешь заниматься?

----------


## mishau_

> Ну, а чем им прикажешь заниматься?

 Да уж сразу тогда сделать федеральное государство, состоящее из Восточной и Западной республик и Крымского ханства. И сделать Севастополь анклавом российским.  ::

----------


## Ramil

http://smoking-room.ru/data/ku/701.html

----------


## gRomoZeka

> Originally Posted by Crocodile  Ну, а чем им прикажешь заниматься?   Да уж сразу тогда сделать федеральное государство, состоящее из Восточной и Западной республик и Крымского ханства. И сделать Севастополь анклавом российским.

 В 2005-м я лишний раз убедилась, что всем было бы лучше разделить Украину на два государства: каждому по своему президенту, и все довольны.   ::   Западная У. спокойно войдет себе в НАТО и будет ставить памятники Бандере, а в Восточной можно будет ввести второй государственный язык (или хотя бы разрешить русский язык в кинотеатрах). И никто не будет при этом биться в истерике. А граждане "Крымского Ханства" к Украине относятся более чем прохладно, так что тоже плакать не будут.  ::  
Конечно, западенцы при любом упоминании о федерализме срут кирпичами - если В.У. отделится, 80% ВВП долой, кому это понравится. 
Так что вместо всеобщего благоденствия имеем следующее: при любом исходе выборов половина населения остается недовольна, грозится гражданским неповиновением и планирует страшную мстю на следующие выборы. Любые начинания правительства саботируются или критикуются с пеной у рта либо в Восточной Украине, либо в Западной. Правительство занимется х*итой, т.к. управлять таким "тяни-толкаем" невозможно. 
Дурдом, а не страна.  ::

----------


## mishau_

Еще и месть. Уголовное преследование Ющенко за его деятельность на президентском посту.

----------


## Basil77

> В 2005-м я лишний раз убедилась, что всем было бы лучше разделить Украину на два государства: каждому по своему президенту, и все довольны.    Западная У. спокойно войдет себе в НАТО и будет ставить памятники Бандере, а в Восточной можно будет ввести второй государственный язык (или хотя бы разрешить русский язык в кинотеатрах). И никто не будет при этом биться в истерике. А граждане "Крымского Ханства" к Украине относятся более чем прохладно, так что тоже плакать не будут.  
> Конечно, западенцы при любом упоминании о федерализме срут кирпичами - если В.У. отделится, 80% ВВП долой, кому это понравится. 
> Так что вместо всеобщего благоденствия имеем следующее: при любом исходе выборов половина населения остается недовольна, грозится гражданским неповиновением и планирует страшную мстю на следующие выборы. Любые начинания правительства саботируются или критикуются с пеной у рта либо в Восточной Украине, либо в Западной. Правительство занимается х*Етой (_лучше х*нёй_), т.к. управлять таким "тяни-толкаем" невозможно. 
> Дурдом, а не страна.

 +1000  ::  
   Я бы ещё прибавил по поводу украинского языка. Ну блин, это же был язык необразованных крестьян в 19 веке. Это просто идиотизм заставлять говорить на нём всю страну. Меня просто передёргивает, когда я смотрю, например, рекламу на хохлоТВ и слышу выражения типа "дiтячья шкiра" или "жиночьи волосся".  ::  В Белоруссии вот давно уже образумились. Моя тётушка преподаёт там латынь студентам-медикам и в 1992-ом, после отделения от России, её заставили составлять латинско-белорусский словарь медициских терминов. Вот она, помню, голову ломала. Например, термин для "вакцины, испытываемой на кроликах" приходилось переводить как "прищепка для трусов" и всё в таком духе. Полная Кащенка в общем.  
   Родня моей жены в Сумской области с тоской говорит о том, что в Российской империи Сумы был уездным городом в составе Курской губернии, и как жаль, что он таким не остался, жили бы, говорят, сейчас в России. Кстати, сам засранец Ющ родом с Сумщины и многие там в 2005 голосовали за него, ибо земляк. Потом, естественно, волосы на себе рвали.

----------


## it-ogo

> Ну блин, это же был язык необразованных крестьян в 19 веке.

 Ты не поверишь, но русский - тоже. В начале того же 19-го века. Сюрпрайз! Сюрпрайз!    ::   
А какие нелепые словесные кальки с интеллигентных языков в свое время настругали: "влияние", "подлежащее"...

----------


## Basil77

> Ты не поверишь, но русский - тоже. В начале того же 19-го века. Сюрпрайз! Сюрпрайз!

 Но ты же, надеюсь, не станешь отрицать, что в том же 19-ом веке, да и в 20-ом тоже, большинство образованных людей на той же Украине говорило на русском, а не на украинском?

----------


## it-ogo

> Но ты же, надеюсь, не станешь отрицать, что в том же 19-ом веке, да и в 20-ом тоже, большинство образованных людей на той же Украине говорило на русском, а не на украинском?

 Насколько я представляю ситуацию, в начале 19 века большинство образованных людей в России говорило по-французски. А русский литературный язык создавали на коленке из [s:1jcsiaww]националистических[/s:1jcsiaww] патриотических соображений. 
"Громче всего про тупую шестнадцатилетнюю школоту кричат крутые семнадцатилетние первокурсники". (с)

----------


## Basil77

> Насколько я представляю ситуацию, в начале 19 века большинство образованных людей в России говорило по-французски. А русский литературный язык создавали на коленке из [s:2300u1xp]националистических[/s:2300u1xp] патриотических соображений.

 А Пушкин с Лермонтовым по-твоему в дружеском кругу общались ислючительно на французском? Так уж и не слова по русски?   ::

----------


## Оля

> А Пушкин с Лермонтовым по-твоему в дружеском кругу общались ислючительно на французском? Так уж и не слова по русски?

 Ни слова по-русски. И по-французски ни слова. Они никогда не встречались.   ::

----------


## it-ogo

> А Пушкин с Лермонтовым по-твоему в дружеском кругу общались ислючительно на французском? Так уж и не слова по русски?

 Пушкин с Лермонтовым не общались, насколько я знаю.  ::  
Пушкин с детства обучен французскому (русского немного нахватался от неграмотной крестьянки Арины Родионовны). На русский переходил в зрелом возрасте с трудом, как и многие из его поколения. Из националистических, опять-таки, соображений (война 1812 и т.д.). 
Лермонтов - фактически следующее поколение, уже пользующееся результатами усилий предыдущего. 
Вот случится войнушка вроде грузинской - за поколение русский забудем. И на Юге, и на Востоке.   ::

----------


## Basil77

Да блин, знаю я, что они никогда не встречались. Я имел в виду каждый в своём дружеском кругу. It-ogo, ты скажи что ещё и Ломоносов по-русски не говорил. И в славяно-греко-латинской академии на французском, наверное, преподавали.

----------


## it-ogo

> Да блин, знаю я, что они никогда не встречались. Я имел в виду каждый в своём дружеском кругу. It-ogo, ты скажи что ещё и Ломоносов по-русски не говорил.

 Дык Ломоносов же ж moujik был сиволапый. Феномен!   

> И в славяно-греко-латинской академии на французском, наверное, преподавали.

 Надо полагать, на тех же языках, что и в Киево-Могилянской академии после 1784 (когда запретили преподавание на [s:cfs6h19h]украинском языке[/s:cfs6h19h] малороссийском диалекте).   ::

----------


## Basil77

Пора кончать эту дискуссию, а то сейчас мы в такие дебри залезем, что начнём выяснять, на каком языке говорил князь Владимир с Ильёй Муромцем, когда он Соловья-разбойника в Киев притаранил.  ::  Я вообще не против украинской мовы, я против, когда она насаждается насильно и людей *заставляют* на ней говорить.

----------


## mishau_

Интересно, а акцент у франкоговорящих русских был сильно провинциальный?

----------


## it-ogo

> Пора кончать эту дискуссию, а то сейчас мы в такие дебри залезем, что начнём выяснять, на каком языке говорил князь Владимир с Ильёй Муромцем, когда он Соловья-разбойника в Киев притаранил.

 Отож...   ::     

> Я вообще не против украинской мовы, я против, когда она насаждается насильно и людей *заставляют* на ней говорить.

 Разберемся.   

> Интересно, а акцент у франкоговорящих русских был сильно провинциальный?

 Французы забавлялись.

----------


## Crocodile

> Да блин, знаю я, что они никогда не встречались. Я имел в виду каждый в своём дружеском кругу.

  

> Еще предвижу затрудненья:
> Родной земли спасая честь,
> Я должен буду, без сомненья,
> Письмо Татьяны перевесть. *Она по-русски плохо знала,*
> Журналов наших не читала, *И выражалася с трудом
> На языке своем родном,
> Итак, писала по-французски...*

   ::    

> По воспоминаниям Я. И. Костенецкого, "в то время на Кавказе был особенный известный род изящных молодых людей - людей великосветских, считавших себя выше других по своим аристократическим манерам и светскому образованию, *постоянно говоривших по-французски*, развязных в обществе, ловких и смелых с женщинами и высокомерно презиравших весь остальной люд; [...] *к этой же категории принадлежал и Лермонтов*, который, сверх того, и по характеру своему не любил дружиться с людьми: он всегда был высокомерен, едок и едва ли во всю жизнь имел хотя одного друга".

----------


## Basil77

Ну вот, набросились на меня  ::  . Всё равно не поверю, что французский был, что называется, native tongue для большинства. Да, в светском обществе одно время было модно на нём говорить, а пользоваться русским считалось своего рода моветоном, но это поветрие продолжалось не так уж и долго (лет 50 вроде).

----------


## BappaBa

> Всё равно не поверю, что французский был, что называется, native tongue для большинства.

 Конечно нет. Кроме нескольких сотен светского общества и снобов, остальные говорили по-русски. В "Войне и мире" Ростовы говорят дома по-русски, над Кутузовым в свете смеются за плохой французский, опять же Долохов, Давыдов, и этот...  которого играл Лановой. =)

----------


## it-ogo

Ну да. А до того (при Петре) немецкий был в этом качестве. [s:3gksgtc8]А разгадка одна — безблагодатность.[/s:3gksgtc8] Это говорит не о том, что русского не было вобще, но что он был плохо предназначен для общения на высокообразованные материи. Не было соответствующего словарно-понятийного аппарата, наработанной системы идиом и норм, поэтому приходилось пользоваться импортной продукцией. И вот на рубеже 18-19 веков народ взялся за ум, закатал рукава и сформировал, наконец, бета-версию культурного РЯ, очередные патчи которой стресс-тестируются до сих пор. А все, что было написано до того, читается сейчас с большим напрягом.

----------


## Basil77

> А все, что было написано до того, читается сейчас с большим напрягом.

 Можно подумать, что современные французы или англичане могут без напряга читать неадаптированных Ларошфуко или Шекспира.

----------


## Crocodile

Короче, народ, давайте жить дружно!   ::   ::   (Еще не хватало нам друг с другом гавкаться.)  Я вот, честно говоря, по-украински ни бум-бум. Хоть и кажется, что похоже на русский, а попробуй сказать что-нибудь - посмешищем станешь.   ::

----------


## BappaBa

> а попробуй сказать что-нибудь - посмешищем станешь.

 Хорошо если только посмешищем. =))))  

> Приехал русский на Западенщину, нужно ему от вокзала до аэропорта на автобусе доехать. Подходит он к дедку и спрашивает:
> - Дед, а где здИсь останИвка?
> - Не останивка, а зупынка, а ты, москалику, вже приихав...

----------


## Basil77

> Короче, народ, давайте жить дружно!     (Еще не хватало нам друг с другом гавкаться.)

 Да вроде тут никто и не ссорится, так - обычная дружеская перепалка.  ::  Я, когда на Украину приезжаю, постоянно в такие ввязываюсь, при этом поддерживая со всеми оппонентами отличные отношения.  ::     

> Я вот, честно говоря, по-украински ни бум-бум. Хоть и кажется, что похоже на русский, а попробуй сказать что-нибудь - посмешищем станешь.

 Не говори. Я вот вроде без проблем украинский понимаю и даже фразу в голове могу построить, и вроде представляю, как она должна звучать, но когда я в итоге её произношу, все знакомые хохлы ухохатываются над моим москальским выговором.  ::

----------


## it-ogo

> Да вроде тут никто и не ссорится, так - обычная дружеская перепалка.  Я, когда на Украину приезжаю, постоянно в такие ввязываюсь, при этом поддерживая со всеми оппонентами отличные отношения.

 Это наш русско-украинский национальный вид спорта. "Sruch".   ::

----------


## Ramil

Обязательная дисциплина специальной олимпиады

----------


## Basil77

Да, там по ссылке можно много чего интересного найти на тему. Например такие вот познавательные материалы:

----------


## it-ogo

> Обязательная дисциплина специальной олимпиады

 Зачод по битардингу.

----------

