Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "After Putin Tucker Interview" video.

@Dread_2137 "started to call themselves Rossiya" There never was a starting point. They never called themselves anything else. The Duchy of Moscow was an official title, but it didn't reflect the sentiment of the people on the ground. Do Kosovars not consider themselves Albanians? The "Muscovites" always called themselves Rus. And there are multiple written inscriptions from the 1500s onward that make use of both Rus and Russia, in the same document. It wasn't an 1800s invention, sorry. I think you're confusing the statehood of the Russian Tsardom with the self-conception of the Russian people.
3
@wick9427 Dude you know that Kiev never really recovered after the Mongols forced Danylo to open the gates and burned it to the ground right? Its population started to rise again only in the 19th century after the Russian Empire conquered it and invested heavily into the east and center of what is now Ukraine. Russia became a husk after the USSR because Yeltsin sold everything off to either Western companies or oligarchs who spent the money on luxury goods.
2
 @HowlingWolf518 Israel
1
@RTWPimpmachine Not really a myth though, the ruling class of Russia did have Scandanavian roots and family members, and yet ended up ruling a city far south of them. Whether or not you think Rurik specifically existed, Kiev's history as a part of Rus started when it was invaded and conquered. Also Kiev predates Rus entirely so it being older doesn't have any impact on the legitimacy on Novgorod. The mythical stories acknowledge this, it's one of the first events listed (Oleg captures Kiev and moves the Rus capital to there). Not sure what you are trying to prove here
1
 @DomR1997 I guess Germany as a concept popped into existence in 1991 then, since before that it was split, and before that it was a totally different government altogether. Lol
1
@Dread_2137 In Old East Slavic it is simply роусьска землѧ, pronounced almost exactly the same as русская земля. You're using English to make a non-existent distinction.
1
@andrek6920 Besides the shift in capitol (which happened in the 'original' Rus) can you explain which characteristics of Russia were so different that you think it warrants a separate name as a distinct geopolitical entity (despite Russia and Rus both being in common use in the 14th century)? Let me ask you this: when China splits apart and then gets re-united, does the succeeding state stop being Chinese?
1
@Dread_2137 It is a retroactive distinction, and it's done for historical purposes. If we are talking about the word that the actual people in that time period used, it's identical. It's also even harder to make that distinction outside of English when used as an adjective. Rusian vs Russian? Lol
1
@RTWPimpmachine Kiev certainly was populated long before most other cities in Rus, but you need to give evidence to the fact that it has evidence of Rus' settlement earlier than the north of Russia. That is literally where the Rus' came from and we have multiple sources dating to the early 9th century (Byzantine source De Administrando Imperio saying that Sviatoslav I took tribute from Kiev but ruled from Lake Ilmen (right where Gorodische is currently) and Ahmad Ibn Fadlan describing the Rus as living on an island, which is what happens to the Gorodische peninsula every spring when it floods. Not to mention we have late 8th century Viking amulets excavated in the area, pointing to (if you believe that the Rus are Vikings) Rus presence since the earliest dates mentioned in the Primary Chronicles (late 800s). I would agree with your last point if not for a few important points: -Kiev was destroyed by the Mongols, and the Rurikid Dynasty moved up to Vladimir to rule. The political continuity of the ruling class that actually founded Rus kept on going outside of Kiev. -Western Rus' language was so heavily Polonized that it acquired a new name: Ukrainian. Belarus was Polonized too, but they kept their old name. When 40% of your language, and your culture, is influenced by an outside power, I hesitate to call you a direct successor to the Rus. Similar to the Holy Roman Empire claiming to be Rome. While you have control of the capital city, the culture is clearly different (Germanic HRE vs Roman) while a better option is still existing (the Byzantine Empire— which was Greek, but like Russia, came from the original Roman Empire and continued to exist after Rome itself collapsed.) The major difference here is that the 3 Slavic cultures all descend from 1, so it would be like of Romanian culture ruled the Byzantine Empire. Which was called the Eastern Roman Empire back then.
1
 @TheArklyte Probably not, but if Russians treated Georgians and Uzbeks like Americans did Natives, they would only exist in history textbooks
1
@TheArklyte Uzbeks and Georgians aren't a part of Russia but if you're talking historically... Georgia and the Tsar had a close relationship up until the Revolution. They supported him against the Bolsheviks and if their treatment was horrible, they probably wouldn't have. Uzbekistan was less stellar but after the Korenizatsiya program in the USSR things were rather peaceful. The language was mandatory in Uzbek SSR, and they had a degree of local decision making. That's more than I can say for any Native reservation in the US. At least the Georgians and Uzbeks are still living on their actual ancestral lands.
1
 @tengir-too Is he wrong? He is on record calling Chechens roaches... people in the West are willing to overlook a person's views as long as it suits them. No real principles whatsoever
1
 @SaintThomasAquinas1 "lol no he didn't say that, he just said that a long time ago" ?? He didn't really apologize for those comments btw
1
@AlexM-oq5el Have you considered that classifying the Rus into 'several different peoples' is also projecting the modern split back onto a relatively homogenous group? I would argue that Poland doing it is more drastic due to them being on a totally different branch of the language tree (and more different culturally) than just being assimilated by one of the descendants of the group that Ukraine also descends from.
1
@TheArklyte The original term is ро́усьскаѧ землѧ́ Pretty sure there's an о in there lol That's besides the point, first written instance of Ukraine is ѡ нем же Ѹкраина много постона. There's an о in there too. Does that invalidate Ukraine's claims to the legacy too? Or just the side you don't personally like? Last thing, language evolves. Russian has words in its vocabulary that also show the unique vowel transition that happened in Russian (just like in English): окраина means edge or border, it used to be spelled like Ukraine was back then too. Words that used to have у or, even farther back, оу, now just have о.
1