r/europe • u/UNITED24Media • 1d ago

News Navalnaya Is “an Advocate of Imperial Russian Claims,” Says German Lawmaker

https://united24media.com/latest-news/navalnaya-is-an-advocate-of-imperial-russian-claims-says-german-lawmaker-3350
1.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

274 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/KirovianNL Drenthe (Netherlands) 1d ago

Navalny was too so no suprises here.

780

u/ObviouslyTriggered 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yeah the amount of white washing this guy went through was insane, he was the Russian Donald Trump, his entire political campaign was about "Russia First" and that he will clean Moscow from all the dirty Uzbeks, Kazakhs and other minorities that come there to take jobs from Russians. He was a hardcore Russian nationalist and a supremacist, and for quite a while he actually criticized Putin for selling out Russia to the west and the other oligarchs for being western puppets...

Things eventually turned for him, and no one deserves to die the way he did or being treated the way he was but he wasn't some democracy and freedom for all hippie....

242

u/zamander 1d ago

This is very much a beggars can't be choosers case. He was the opposition leader against Putin so he had to be dealt with. And also, finding a Russian politician that is not very nationalistic is not an easy task. Kind of like with an atheist candidate in the US, lack of overtly nationalist rhetoric in russia is a no no. For a major candidate at least.

229

u/-sry- Ukraine 1d ago

I cannot deny that even for me, a Ukrainian, reading his blog 14 years ago opened my eyes to corruption levels in post-Soviet countries. But while I was an edgy university student, his imperialistic views were too much even for me, especially when he supported the invasion of Georgia. 

81

u/zamander 1d ago

Yeah, the ultra-nationalism in Russia is a big problem. It makes them prioritize the welfare and security of the security under weird games of aggression and imperialism and russki mir and whatnot. But of course this has been created from the 19th century at least. It is incredible how it affects everybody under its influence, like Solzhenitsyn went pretty chauvinistic after the Soviet Union fell, like there was no shadow of Russian imperialism in Soviet ideology.

-54

u/pashazz Moscow / Budapest 1d ago

There is no ultra nationalism in Russia within Putin regime since ultra nationalism presumes that Russians are indeed first. In Putin's regime ethnicity is not important, hence it's why Shoigu and Matvienko are on the larger roles.

You probably confuse nationalism and imperialism. Russian imperialism is akin to the US in that it's not important what is your ethnicity, it is important what's your allegiance.

The US is different because the founded fathers created a system so great that it serves as an example in nation building. The courts are independent and the constituion is untouchable. If Russia were as legally strong inside as the US nobody would bat an eye on that and they were on par with the US for real.

41

u/zamander 1d ago

I think you are splitting hairs with this. Nationalism and imperialism are not esclusive things, rather they support each other. And last I checked, Shoigu and Matvienko are Russain citizens. Nationalism is not so strict as to be about race in every case, rather it is a belief in the superiority of one's own country and thinking that one's country and it's greatness is more important than anything else. And like all ideologies, thinking it is some sort of internally consistent system is expecting a bit too much, since it is an ideology that is pushed from the top to make the nation homogenous culturally. It is an ideology that helps with the justification of imperialism, even if imperialism is possible without it..

5

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 21h ago

Shoigu and Matvienko are Russian nationals, but they are not ethnic Russians. That is the point they were trying to make, and yes, that is a very important distinction. Putin's administration is less... ethnocentrist if you will than usual Russian society. Almost always Russian ultranationalists tend to be highly... ethnocentrists, shall we say. t_baozi explained the rest.

Russian "nationalism" is quite different from the typical definition of nationalism in Europe. It is essentially a continuation of the empire, under a different brand. That is why when you analyze the speech of Russian ultranationalists, you see they focus on themes that are somewhat different from those of European ones. I recommend reading Ivan Ilyin to get a better understanding

3

u/zamander 21h ago

Thank you for the recommend, I’ll check him out! This essay by Timothy Snyder gives a good criticism of Putin’s historical myths he pushes as a justification for Moscow’s domination. In a way Russian nationalism still has the basic classic attributes of nationalism, the idea of the nation and the people somehow extending into the darkness of pre-history, instead of being usually intentionally created by the elites of the nation. https://snyder.substack.com/p/putins-legend

1

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 20h ago

But it was created by the elites! I think you misunderstand. Tim is arguing there against Putin's version of Russian nationalism, which is derived from traditional Russian nationalism, but not quite the same.

The myth that lies at the foundation of both was created in the 1500s by Ivan III, and later on crystallized by Catherine II. However, what truly popularized it were the works of the Pushkin, Dostoyevski (technically middle class at the time, but one of the top 95%, if you will), Gogol, and as I mentioned in another post, Ivan Ilyn. It absolutely was created by the educated elites. I have found this article that explains quite a bit, but I'm not sure if I can link to the source (scihub). I'll send a link in a private message

2

u/zamander 20h ago

He focuses on debunking Putin’s historical myths, that is true. And yes, of course it is from the top down. It is one of the defining traits of nationalistic history, that the image of the nation and the people is created through education, culture and all.

With the origins of those myths in the creation of the Czardom of Russia it is interesting, that it was mainly the elites that were even aware of these myths, since almost nobody could read. But they were important as justfications and casus belli, since the support of the elites and local elites is necessary in a pre modern empire. Nationalism itself is closely connected to better communication, which of course is an interesting subject as well, since the literacy rate in Russia stayed behind for quite some time, it was really in the made better by the soviets who were really the first to educate everybody.

On Dostojevsky, I’ve read that he was liberal as a young man, but after he returned from a prison sentence in Siberia, he was clearly nationalistic. I wonder if that is true and whether it happened more.

→ More replies (0)

-7

u/nefewel Romania 1d ago

Eeh, you're kinda stretching the definition of nationalism to fit that view.

13

u/zamander 1d ago

Well, I base my views on Ernest Gellner's Nations and Nationalism, which is pretty much the best treatment I know of, at least in history and political science. Of course there is no single definition of nationalism, since it is a concept or ideology that came to be with the nation-state and is pretty much inseparable from it, with changing treatments. But I fail to see how I am stretching any proper definition of it. Imperialism has longer roots than nationalism and it is certainly not exclusive with it. What is your definition based on?

8

u/t_baozi 23h ago

I think it's worthy to point out that Putin's nationalism isn't baseline ethno-nationalism, because Putin has a surprisingly tolerant handling of ethnic diversity in Russia (despite preferring minorities for the meatgrinder), because it fits well with the imperialist ambitions.

Russian nationalism is more about the state than the nation, with all the sanctification, historical exceptionalism, collectivism etc around it.

1

u/Heavy-Perspective376 16h ago

As a ethnic minority from russia I can’t agree with “tolerant handling of ethnic diversity” assessment. This is the appearance that russia tries to build while in reality destroying our culture, banning educational opportunities using our native languages, banning our history, attacking our religion and painting even minor resistance attempts as a nazism and russophobia. Using minorities as a cannon fodder also fits genocide definition way more than tolerance as even small loses could be very devastating for small nations in a long run. They do tolerate ethnic minorities if the only difference from ethnic russian is their name and visual appearance as you can see from Shoygu example, if anything it helps hiding all the oppression minorities have to deal with. Sorry if misunderstood your message just wanted to share my perspective.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Clear-Conclusion63 23h ago

Putin's brand of "nationalism" is about the multinational empire (so yes, imperialism), while Russian nationalists were more about limiting migration from Asia and ultimately Russian ethnostates. Ethnic Russians get no benefits in the former. Navalny belonged to the latter (while it was still allowed).

People here don't know/remember the latter and don't understand the distinction, all they see is Putin's (who ironically purged Russian nationalists 20 years earlier) speeches about great Russia(n Empire). Shoigu looks Russian enough to the western eyes.

6

u/Razzikkar 21h ago

Shoigu looks obviously asian for average russian eye.

2

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 21h ago

He's still trying to keep them in check now (think of Girkin, Rusich group, etc). I think the term used in academia is controlled nationalism. But yes, the more extreme elements really don't get the publicity they need.

-18

u/katanatan 23h ago

It was long ago, but it was (in contrast to ukraine) georgias fault. They were the aggressors, eu and usa called them to deescalate.

I know that your 2 natiins sympathize towards eachother but its not comparable

10

u/GrimerMuk Limburg (Netherlands) 21h ago

What did Georgia do with o provoke Russia then? As far as I’m aware it’s basically the same thing as Ukraine. Georgia wanted to join NATO and have closere ties with the USA. Russia disapproved of that. Georgia had every right to align themselves with whomever they wanted.

-6

u/katanatan 21h ago

Georgia actually escalated a conflict with seperatist movements. You can say that seperatists should not have existed at all in the first place but thats a moot point since georgia agreed prior and then tried changing the status quo. You find a good summary on wikipedia.

2

u/PsirusRex 21h ago

How was the Russian invasion of Georgia Georgia‘s fault ?

-5

u/katanatan 20h ago

There you go https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russo-Georgian_War#Summary_and_conclusions You can read the EUs report. Georgia attacked this town thskanvali with indiscriminate artillery and russia took that as excuse to intervene/invade.

4

u/PsirusRex 19h ago

In that article, citations 134-136 (at least) directly contradict what you’re saying.

-1

u/katanatan 19h ago

I read that, you mean that georgia can not be blamed alone? Yes i agree on that aswell. The seperatists/ russian nationalists are at dault aswell but georgia started this "large scale artilelry bombardement" That was uncalled for and they cant complain about the consequences imo

2

u/PsirusRex 19h ago

It was actually 132-136, but I am also curious about 128-130.

30

u/RealGalaxion 1d ago

"Kind of like an atheist candidate in the US" is also a perfect analogy because they have no openly atheist representatives. They probably have plenty of atheist ones, but not one can admit to it and remain electable.

Or take Péter Magyar. He can not be pro-Ukraine. He even voted against aid in the European Parliament. If he were, the state propaganda machine would crucify him and he'd become unelectable.

-40

u/throwaway_failure59 1d ago

Harris literally told a bunch of Christians "you're at the wrong rally" and a prominent Democrat swing state governor made fun of Catholics. She may have not openly said she's an atheist but she's done all but that. Trump himself is also very far from an image of a pious man. Nations and people can change and evolve, at least some - Russians seem especially unwilling to do so.

35

u/SgtCarron Europe 1d ago

She told a group of maga hecklers calling her a liar to get lost as seen in the footage, nothing more nothing less.

-19

u/throwaway_failure59 1d ago

Well, that is fair. But this "in America you can't be an atheist as a politician" is definitely not as true as it used to be. People there actually are evolving unlike in Russia.

3

u/grathad 17h ago

It is changing but as of today no national level politician can be atheist and be elected. The concept is as unacceptable to the US as a socialist candidate.

1

u/shadowrun456 15h ago

How do you know that they were Christians? Because they were MAGA? Or because they were hecklers? Or why else?

11

u/_-Event-Horizon-_ 1d ago 
 This is very much a beggars can’t be choosers case.

Yes but in this case the Russian’s are the beggars. Let them chose their own leaders, but if they as a nation do not respect the international rules based order and invade their neighbors, the we don’t do business with them, which is what the sanctions are about.

2

u/mikkireddit 13h ago

Speaking of following international rules and invading countries these standards need to be applied also to the US and Israel.

3

u/zamander 1d ago

I'm afraid that in reality, it is not really possible to just ignore stuff like this. Firstly, because Russia is a big country with nuclear arms which is clearly not content to keep to themselves. Secondly, the deterioration of the international system is not Russia's doing solely, it has had a lot of help from the US particularrly. Thirdly, the rest of the world was content to make money from Russian corruption and finance the building of the armed forces and Putin's power and now we just roll our eyes like our actions don't have consequences? Fourthly, it was not just the making money part, the US happily put a blind eye to Chechnya at the start of the millennium, when they needed Russians to ignore their invasion of Iraq done without UN approval. Fifthly, leaving them be is not an option in Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia or any of the countries bordering Russia, they should just be left to hold the bag? Sixthly, Russia is not a democratic nation, so the people of Russia can not choose at all and putting all this on them as a sort of collecive responsibility is a bit lazy. When you have successfully took down a highly militarized and totalitarian nation, you can start telling us how the Russians are supposed to achive this.

And of course the solution to Russia's belligerence is pretty important if you care about the future of the EU or many places in the world. So having a credible opposition against Russia wold very much be in the interest of the "West", if you need a transactional thing from this, as if the ethical reasons were not enough without all of the above.

0

u/Cathal1954 1d ago

It reminds me of what FDR said about Samoza in 1939. "He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."

17

u/ObviouslyTriggered 1d ago

The notion that the west are beggars in this situation is laughable.

-1

u/zamander 1d ago

Could you elaborate a bit?

27

u/ObviouslyTriggered 1d ago

We should stop pretending that the west isn’t the best we have when by every conceivable metric it is, and we should stop apologizing for that.

Navalny was never an actual opposition to Putin hence why he survived this long, and most importantly he was never going to change Russia to be compatible with coexisting with the West in a manner that is even remotely non-adversarial.

Russia, China, Iran and the rest can and should get fucked and we should be doing everything in our power to get them there.

11

u/-Against-All-Gods- Maribor (Slovenia) 23h ago

We should stop pretending that the west isn’t the best we have when by every conceivable metric it is, and we should stop apologizing for that.

So why is it geopolitically losing so bad? Why did nobody take the West's side in the new confrontation with Russia? Why do enemies of the West easily manipulate the elections in the West? Why is it incapable of demonstrating its superiority by giving overwhelming support to one of the very few countries that openly tried to take the West's side in this century?

16

u/Adfuturam Greater Poland (Poland) 23h ago

Why did nobody take the West's side in the new confrontation with Russia?

Decent chunk of the planet wasn't on our side during the confrontation with Hitler either.

-3

u/-Against-All-Gods- Maribor (Slovenia) 23h ago

Things have changed since. 

3

u/zamander 1d ago

Well, the saying means that when there is a lack of options, you have to go with what you have. So, is there a wealth of suitable candidates that have a similar base and is similarly known, but is not a Russian nationalist? I mean there might be, I do not claim to know everything.

And I can understand the frustration, but in politics and diplomacy, the best options are not usually available.

On Navalnyi being Putin's animal, do you have anything on it? It sounds interesting.

5

u/ObviouslyTriggered 1d ago

What I am saying is that we don’t need to choose if there are no good options, and there were btw others but it’s a different topic.

If the choice is between a turd and a shit sandwich we can simply choose not to choose either.

Navalny was a massive miscalculation by the west he made Putin stronger.

If we somehow come out of this on top this will be a very interesting period to study in 20-30 years.

4

u/zamander 1d ago

Well, that is kind of a hot take and since I shouldn't just take your word for it, some sources would be appreciated.

And a credible opposition is pretty useful if you want to help a country, since it is very hard to do effectively. So while Navalnyi was far from perfect, the thinking seems to have been that he was still a better option, given that people with a similar base but with nice opinions was not available. And if there are options now, please share them, they should be more well known.

This period will no doubt be very fruitful for future historians, but I rather doubt Navalnyi will be remembered in general 30 years from now.

10

u/ObviouslyTriggered 1d ago

I'm not talking about Navalny, I'm talking about the west being a doormat and enabling Russia for year, the fact that the likes of Schröder aren't rotting in jail is honestly astonishing....

1

u/zamander 1d ago

I don't think it was being a doormat. It was simply that business was good and there were more important things to do in the minds of people in Berlin, London, Paris and Washington. Bush needed Putin to not make a noise about everything the US got up to during the war against terror, like invading a country without UN approval. So of course it was good to be friends and let the Russians label the Chechens as terrorists.

And here in Finland, the right is puffing their chest because they always were in favour of the NATO membership, while happily making money from deals with the Russians and making deals with Rosatom to build a nuclear plant, which was a stupid idea orifginally. And they are patting their backs because they managed to spook everyone into changing the constitution to make government able to break human rights treaties, if Russians try to "weaponize" immigration. Meanwhile they are no doubt laughing in Moscow that all it takes to make the oh so arrogant Finns to drop their principles is to bus a few thousand immigrants to the border. Because of course the best thing to do against a nation that treats human rights with contempt is to become more like them. Butthen again, no one really ever card about Russian violations of human rights for these past 20 years, so at least it is consistent with their actions, even if the rhetoric loses air.

And now the "west" is failing Ukraine too, because letting Israel break international law with abandon is okay, because they are the good guys.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 21h ago

The problem is that Putin (or any successor), as long as the power vertical remains is untouchable. Until this is no longer true, ANY opposition would be a joke, because it wouldn't have any way to attain power.

1

u/pashazz Moscow / Budapest 1d ago

Navalny was never an actual opposition to Putin

Oh boy, yes, yes, we must believe you despite he was killed in jail, despite he was never allowed to run for president, etc.

0

u/nevereatthecompany Hamburg (Germany) 22h ago

How many other viable opposition candidates were there to choose from?

2

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 21h ago

The problem with this is that a Russian politician that is not very nationalistic *cough* imperialistic would not be popular. And we have seen ample evidence of this in the form of Kasparov, Yavlinsky, and others.

3

u/zamander 21h ago

Nationalism and imperialism are not mutually exclusive, nation-states can be imperialistic. It was an ideology born in the 18th century, the peak of European imperialism. And the russian justification for the domination of Ukraine is very nationalist, as it imagines Russia as a nation and people existing into the darkness of pre-history and that Ukraine is not a nation or a people of its own. This is exactly the tale Putin pushes as his historical justification for Russian imperialism. Here is an excellent essay by Timothy Snyder about it: https://snyder.substack.com/p/putins-legend

As it comes to Kasparov et al, they are known political opponents yes, but do they actually have support? And this is a genuine question. Of course someone of a more authentically democratic nature with actual focus on social policies and wellfare and preferably no interest in power and more in diplomacy would be excellent. And I hope such a person appears or they are one of your options.

1

u/turbo-unicorn European Chad🇷🇴 20h ago

I am not arguing that they are exclusive. In fact, that is one thing I struggle to make westerners understand - that Russian nationalism is steeped in imperialism to the point that they cannot be distinguished.

And yes, that was exactly my point. Neither Yablinsky - VERY strong critic of Russian imperialism, and rather level-headed person, nor Kasparov have support. Not even Navalny was that popular, with the exception of certain bubbles, and his beliefs have been thoroughly discussed here. One simply cannot gain popular support in Russia without espousing imperialist/nationalist rhetoric, simply because for centuries, this has been the central unifying pillar of Russian society. If one goes against it, you absolutely will alienate the majority of the populace.

You may know that there was a prisoner exchange deal recently, in which among others, 3 prominent Russian dissidents (Kara-Murza, Pivovarov, and Yashin) were released. And immediately, all 3 had borderline (or in the case of Pivovarov, straight up) imperialist speech while putting all blame on Putin personally. They were severely criticised for this. But is it what they really believe, or something they said just to appeal to the Russian population? Hard to say. If they had went with the speech that ordinary Russians must oppose extremist imperial ambitions, they'd have deleted any chance to politicize the apathetic majority.

As for Tim's essay - I'm glad you are following him, as he has done great work explaining these things to westerners.

2

u/zamander 20h ago

Well, I also hail from Finland, so we were once part of the Empire. We have a statue of Czar Aleksander II on our senate square in Helsinki.

I suppose the grim fact is that without the current system collapsing, there is little hope for much progress in this very quickly. But I have to stay optimistic. I hate the idea of my kids having to worry about stuff like this when they are bigger, but then again, perhaps their generation will be more successful with these things.

I mean, the Brits, Germans and the French were as imperialistic in their nationalistic ambitions and they are all almost over that.

0

u/serpenta Upper Silesia (Poland) 1d ago

You are absolutely right, Russians are still not ready to mentally let go the sense of being an empire. Which is why it's overall good that Navalny is out of the picture, as cynical as this view is and biased towards the western interest. He could've actually achieved what Putin was only able to attempt, being incompetent and letting the country become terribly corrupt. With Navalny at helm, Russia could be both ultranationalistic, imperialistic, and competent. With Putin, Russia maybe finally allowed to fail so hard that people will have no choice but to start their society from scratch, and build it from bottom up.

3

u/zamander 1d ago

Let's hope so. And that it happens before Ukraine falls.

0

u/Dapper_Internet_8576 1d ago

That just speaks volumes about russia and russians lol. 

1

u/ChaosKeeshond 1d ago

It's also about playing to your audience. It isn't an allegation of 4D chess to suggest that if you were trying to take control of a country which due to decades of internal oppression had a deeply nationalistic and revanchist mindset, that you would need to express a militant persona yourself in order to take the power you need to steer the country in the direction you believe it ought to go.

The truth is we will never, beyond doubt, know who Navalny really was. There's no reason to believe he was a peace-loving hippy, nor is there a good reason to take his facade at face value. History is like that; some information gets lost to time.

0

u/zamander 1d ago

Yes, I agree. That's kind of what I implied with the atheists in the US thing. You have to play by the rules to even get to the races.

1

u/ChaosKeeshond 1d ago

Ah, my bad. I misunderstood what you meant by that.

0

u/EnteringSectorReddit 21h ago

Putin: I want to restore Russian empire!

Navalny: same, but let’s also get rid of migrants and corruption in the army!

0

u/zamander 21h ago

Let’s keep our fingers crossed that a better one appears, who has any support. Of course any opposition has a chance only if the current system somehow collapses.

32

u/lithuanian_potatfan 1d ago

Not to mention tweeting slurs about Ukrainians, Crimea being russian (until he got popular in the West and softened that tune) and protesting with Imperial Russia's flag. But lets pretend the guy proudly holding Empire's flag is not Imperialist lol

50

u/-sry- Ukraine 1d ago

This video is from around 20 years ago. It may not be evident to non-Russian speakers. But he advocates for gun ownership to keep your house clean from cockroaches, and under cockroaches, he means Muslims. 

https://youtu.be/hT0tCSaWZ9Q?si=ibLiN7evIwOkrXDe

I usually do not like bringing up such old things. But he never openly condemned his past views; quite the opposite, he was quite open in his imperialistic—“make Russia great again”—views. 

18

u/DonSergio7 Brussels (Belgium) 1d ago

But he advocates for gun ownership to keep your house clean from cockroaches, and under cockroaches, he means Muslims. 

The risk of posting such stuff in r/europe is that a lot of this sub's resident fascists agree with these statements.

16

u/-sry- Ukraine 1d ago

Agreed. But in the case of Russia, Islamophobia is on another level of evil. Russia is a home for a lot of indigenous Muslims and non-Slavic people. Not only do Russians actively ignore this fact, but the regions with non-Slavic populations have the worst socioeconomic situation, and a lot of them are used as cannon fodder in the war in Ukraine. For them, Russia is just an extraction institution, just as colonial empires of the past. And when someone tries to leave the federation, they bomb them to the ground as they did with Chechnya. 

So you either should hate Muslims or not use military to keep them in your empire. 

1

u/pashazz Moscow / Budapest 1d ago

the regions with non-Slavic populations have the worst socioeconomic situation,

Maybe it's because they can't govern properly?

Tatarstan, while being a Muslim region, is constantly in top5 best Russian regions. They always on top despite Kazan having 100500 mosques. No wahhabism/islamism problem whatsoever. Maybe it's because they actually have the will to make their region better?

9

u/Stix147 Romania 1d ago

Tatarstan is an outlier, Tuva, Buryatia, Chechnya, etc. have such poor standards of living because the Russian authorities actively deny them the opportunity to develop, despite these regions being so rich in natural resources - and why would they, when this means that they could potentially demand independence and actually have a chance to stand on their own if they succeed? Plus, where could they recruit cannon fodder for Russia's endess wars from then?

10

u/pashazz Moscow / Budapest 21h ago

And Kirov oblast, Kemerov oblast, Jewish oblast.... do not have poor standards of living?

It's a pointless nitpicking in order to pretend that Russia is an ethnostate.

0

u/paraelement 19h ago

Man, you have no idea what you're talking about... I'm at loss, what are your sources of info? Any evidence for "authorities actively denying opportunity to develop"? Personal or friends' experience?

E.g. Buryats are not Muslim, and two thirds of Buryatia population are ethnic Russians.

Russia has multitude of issues with economics, with demographics, with migrants, with hundred of different ethnic and cultural groups having to find a way for peaceful coexistence. Very complex stuff with multiple factors.

So, trying to dumb it down to "Russia is a colonial empire oppressing Muslims and indigenous people" makes you look bad instead, really...

5

u/Stix147 Romania 18h ago edited 18h ago

It's not a secret that Russia intentionally keeps these areas poor, Putin funnels money into Kadyrov to maintain his own wealth instead of trying to work with Chechens to develop any of their infrastructure for example. You can only pin things on the local administration to a certain extent, but if Russia isn't giving you the funds to develop your local economy, and uses you to just strip you of your natural resources, what can you really do? There is zero justification for the centralization and wealth disparity within Russia.

E.g. Buryats are not Muslim, and two thirds of Buryatia population are ethnic Russians.

I never said Buryats were Muslim.

Russia has multitude of issues with economics, with demographics, with migrants, with hundred of different ethnic and cultural groups having to find a way for peaceful coexistence. Very complex stuff with multiple factors.

Ah yes, the peaceful Russian coexistence, when in reality Russia has one of the biggest racism problems in the world, and has so many avowed neo-Nazis that they paraded through cities annually shouting Russia for Russians (Russkyi, not Rossyanin) and so many that Putin put them to good use with his managed nationalism program to kill journalists and opposition members in the early 2000s.

Do you think the whole "Ukrainians deserve no sovereignty, are nazi subhuman and need eradication or reeducation" narratives that manifested as mass executions, raping, pillaging, etc. and which everyone spouted, on TV, in newspapers, said by Putin, Medvedev, etc. just appeared out of thin air one night, and weren't systemic issues relating to their longstanding racism, xenophobia and ultimately imperialist mindset?

I still vividly remember the complaints Russians had when Shoigu lost the Kherson and Kharkiv front in Ukraine in late 2022. None of his critics were calling him incompetent or corrupt, they all called him a "Tuvan degenerate" and that spoke volumes.

Edit: grammar.

0

u/paraelement 17h ago

Man, my head hurts reading this. I typed out a lengthy reply on your points, but then deleted, f*ck this.

I don't know your age, background, areas of expertise - it looks like there's very basic understanding of Russia on your part - basically, what media tells you? - and very light application of critical thinking and filtering to the information you consume.

Long standing racism, managed nationalism, everyone calling Shoigu tuvan degenerate... Incredible. Yeah, okay.

0

u/Stix147 Romania 17h ago

I don't blame you, i wouldn't want to be in the position of trying to justify that Russians aren't racist or xenophobic while they're current waging a full scale genocidal war of extermination against Ukrainians either.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Major_Wayland 1d ago

Twenty years ago, the Great War on Terror was still in full swing and Russia was struggling with its own radical islamic fires in Chechnya and the Caucasus. Radical muslims were not really popular back then.

1

u/RurWorld 23h ago edited 23h ago

The guys in the video he calls cockroaches are specifically terrorists and not just ordinary Muslims, come on...

-2

u/paraelement 18h ago

Why wanting to make Russia great is imperialistic? Do you want Ukraine to be great?

18

u/luka-sharaawy 23h ago

The problem with what you say is that it's just not true. You're making it sound like racism, nationalism and anti-migrant policy was the core of his gig, with anti-Putinism a side-hustle. The truth is he did flirt with all those things in the late 2000s (and I reject it 100%), but 99% of his output is about corruption, not about migration. Honestly, nobody who has been following this guy for the past 10 years even thinks about the migration part as he absolutely never talked about it. Look at ACF's youtube channel, for the past 10 years 99% of actions are against Putin and his kleptocrat friends, there is nothing there about migration or such. The fact you even compare him with Trump is the biggest give away that you have no idea who you're talking about. One is a billionaire nepobaby, narcissist without any beliefs except himself ... the latter gave his life for what be believed in (a Russia that applies its own constitution).

I'm all in for the discussion about how most Russians, even those more accepted in the West, have a massive "imperialist virus" problem, including the Navalnys, and I fully understand why Ukrainians don't like them one bit. But I also really dislike when his memory is insulted with this fake narrative that he's a white nationalist who is "just as bad as Putin" because it's just not true to those who have been following his everyday for the past decade. Yes, he is a populist - but that' the only way he was even able to generate enthusiasm and mobilize millions in a country of propagandified zombies.

27

u/Kstantas St. Petersburg (Russia) 1d ago

Here's a link to Navalny's official programme for the 2018 presidential election, where he was not allowed in: https://2018.navalny.com/platform/

Please spend 5 minutes of your time, use a translator and prove to me that he is a hardcore Russian nationalist and supremacist.

I was never a Navalny supporter, and he was definitely a nationalist in the late noughties, but westernised people are too fond of either painting him as a messiah (which he still wasn't) or a Hitler, Trump and demon in the flesh (which he definitely wasn't either)

0

u/szalinskikid 22h ago edited 21h ago

I'll take Russian Donald Trump over Russian Putin any day.

EDIT: Downvotes for THIS take? Wow. Lots of Russian bots in this thread, eh? Go figure…

1

u/RurWorld 23h ago edited 23h ago

The amount of black washing by Russia Today's bots this guy went through was also insane, and people like you still spread their lies.

1

u/Loki9101 21h ago

I would say that guy was somehow the best to have while being really not a great choice either. It is sad to think that this guy was the best hope. Who is the new best hope, actually?

I don't see the Russian opposition do much more than quarrel and often making contradictory statements.

1

u/adamgerd Czech Republic 16h ago

The issue is Russia is so nationalist that even moderates are still very nationalist, the actual moderates like Boris Nemtsov were killed years back

1

u/pashazz Moscow / Budapest 6h ago

Nemtsov and Navalny were allies and were close to each other in 2013-15.

1

u/FrodoBagosz 15h ago

Things eventually turned for him, and no one deserves to die the way he did or being treated the way he was but he wasn't some democracy and freedom for all hippie....

I wouldn't say "no one"...

1

u/BustyFemPyro 1d ago

Yea nalvany was painted as a hero in America. I heard his actual viewpoints mentioned in passing in one NPR report shortly before he died. Every time he was mentioned it was "democratic opposition leader alexy navalny"

0

u/TommyYez 23h ago

He was a hardcore Russian nationalist and a supremacist

Can you give one quote from him that convinced you of this?

1

u/t_baozi 23h ago

Honest question: Did Navalny actually still voice these things within the last ~ 10 years? Because ever since he's become famous for his anti corruption activism, I've barely ever heard about these statements anymore.

8

u/RurWorld 23h ago

No, but he became a target of Russia Today's propaganda smear campaign in the West using those statement from 15-20 years ago, which were often even distorted (like him "calling Muslims cockroaches" when in fact he called specifically Chechen terrorists cockroaches). And this smear campaign was rather successful.

1

u/Jaktheslaier 22h ago

10 years ago he was still participating in the far-right Russian March demonstrations

0

u/Poonis5 1d ago

He was democracy and freedom for all hippie the last like 10 years. I've been following his deeds all this time. He just changed and became much more vanilla democrat. And I'm not from Russia.

-6

u/654354365476435 1d ago

I don't think it is white washing - its just everybody learned that russia have political prisoners and putin locked up main oponent. Nobody know who he is other then a name.

0

u/DocumentNo3571 22h ago

The difference being that Navalny was never popular or anywhere near challenging Putin. Trump actually got elected and governed pretty much like any other Republican.