chechnya independence, Agree or disagree

[Halina]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Divchyna

Or now we are not on to Crimea but to the rest of Ukraine as well. Sure why not, I grew up in Ukriane and had to go to a Russian school because out of 33 schoold only 2 were Ukrainian speaking. You are right, why not go back to that? It was much more convinient, after all what is Ukraine and its language? Its not as elite or prestigious as the BIg Brother.Or better yet, why don't we make Ukraine a province of Russia and call it Little Russia. Then you'll be the big Russian and I'll be the Little Russian. WOuld you like that?

Well said, Divchyna.

[Halina]

I have found some evaluation of the present day Ukraine in a lecture by Mykola Ryabchuk (poet & editior of the lierary monthly 'Vsesvit', Kiev)given in Krakow in 1995.
I have quoted this before, but I thought it would match our discussion on this thread.

'In the present-day, postcolonial Ukraine there are two diametrically opposed autostereotypes, a hypernegative & a hyperfavourable one. The former, as noted above, is a consequence of the internalization of the 'collective shadow' of the colonial power. It has been described fairly exhaustively as 'the complex of Little Russia', i.e. the recognition by a considerable part of makind of its (genetic, historical, cultural, political, economic, intellectual) inferiority with regard to 'the elder brother' - 'the great Russian nation'.
The stereotype was launched by Russian imperialists centuries ago; then it was taken over with minor corrections & developed by the Bolshevic ideologues. In accordance with this stereotype the Ukrainian nation is treated as by-product of foreign intrigues (Polish-German-Austrian-Hungarian-Jewish) while the Russians are, if not the only one, then certainly the chief heir of the Kievan Rus. They were the 'great nation' and 'God's elect nation'(bogonosets) in the Tsarist era, and 'the centre of the world's revolutionary movement' in the Soviet times (...).
It is obvious that from the perspective of ideology of this kind Ukrainians qualify automatically as 'unhistorical' and 'unpromising' nation. It appears to be just a branch of the big Rus(sian) tree, partly torn off by malignant historic forces but desiring to cling fast to the native trunk and become one with it (in the process which the communists hailed as 'the coming together and melting down of nations).
The Ukrainians were taught history (their own & Russian, or rather Russian with a bit of Ukrainian, carefully chosen & interpreted), given an interpretation of the present (with colonial dependence described as happy 'brotherhood')(..).

In contrast to the less hypocritical practices of Tsarist Russia, the Soviet authorities formally never banned the Ukrainian lg. Instead they developed a perfect system of educational, propagandist & administrative means to marginalize it and restrict its use. The aim was to prevent it from functioning as a vehicle of national identity.(..)

[Andrej]

Are you dumb or stupid ? I said noone invited them, how many of these Mexicans are legal ? Peuorto Rico is not part of USA proper, its an associate state of the USA. In any case, how can you compare USA to Ukraine ? All I said was a man coming to the USA is expected, to learn the national language, because he is an alien, an immigrant. How does someone whos grand-grand-grand father grew up on the very land compare to an immigrant ? In any case, I am also not interested in any historic misjustice, as I am very well aware of it, but emotions are useless. So just because Ukranian was surpressed under the Soviets, we need to make all street signs in Ukranian, even in places where noone even speaks the language ?

[Divchyna]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Andrej
[B]Are you dumb or stupid ? [QUOTE][i]

I am neither, are you? I don't think I was as rude and disrespectfull when I was 17. We are not in a sandbox here, Vovochka. If you can't play nice, put your toys back.

.[QUOTE][i]I said noone invited them, how many of these Mexicans are legal ? Peuorto Rico is not part of USA proper, its an associate state of the USA.[QUOTE][i]


What are you talking about? I am talking about Mexicans who have lived in Texas for generations, their grandfathers fighting against the Yankees. And the signs in Florida and Texan are in Spanish. Associate State? Are you okay?

[Andrej]

Don't cry, you know I love you.

But you better check yourself,

Puerto Rico: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico , commonwealth associated with the US. (CIA WF2002).

[Divchyna]

The chief of state is the President of the United States of America. The head of government is an elected Governor. There are two legislative chambers: the House of Representatives, 51 seats, and the Senate, 27 seats.
United States controls: interstate trade, foreign relations and commerce, customs administration, control of air, land and sea, immigration and emigration, nationality and citizenship, currency, maritime laws, military service, military bases, army, navy and air force, declaration of war, constitutionality of laws, jurisdictions and legal procedures, treaties, radio and television--communications, agriculture, mining and minerals, highways, postal system; social security, and other areas generally controlled by the federal government in the United States.

[Divchyna]

Yes, you can say commonwealth, ist nothing but jargon. The reality is its US territory. I don't really need your love.