Talk:Russian nationalism/Archive 1

Total revision

I can't understand what most of the article is about. I see just a brief history of Russia in XX century. Article should be and will be capitally revised. I'm adding information about Russian national doctrines such as Third Rome, All the Russias, and Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality, and about Russian romantic nationalism in art, and more is needed. We need quotes from Russian XIX century nationalist writers and thinkers. We need to add about Peter I's complex views of nationalism (he installed western traditions and discouraged russian ones, still remained a russian patriot); views of Mikhail Lomonosov, normanist and anti-normanist theory; opinion polls from modern Russia; and more, and more.

Article saying "then Stalin came to power.... then there was a war... then Yeltsin came to power..." is not needed there. The topic is Russian Nationalism, not History of Russia in a nutshell! Garret Beaumain (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Top note on Radical nationalism removed - now there's a link in the article itself.Garret Beaumain (talk) 07:52, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Gerret Beaumain... Bol'shoe spasibo! I have been watching this article for a while, kind of horrified by its incoherence and misconceptions--but it's such a mess that I've failed to edit it for not even knowing where or how to begin. I will help where I can.Speed Jackson (talk) 14:55, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense

The entire entry is rubbish. It must be rewritten. Talk about "nationalism having a long history" is utter nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.144 (talk) 14:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

• You seem too emotional. Please, don't add your personal remarks to Wikipedia articles. You are free to add information, and we will appreciate your contribution as long as it will be based on reliable sources and keep neutral point of view. You are right that what article needs is more information about SLavophile and Pan-Slavist movements of the 19 century and their main ideologists. But you are not free to throw away others' contribution which is based on the sources.Garret Beaumain (talk) 16:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I repeat the article is rubbish. that is stated with cold reason. > The posted entry under this title is not about Russian Nationalism. > It is a nationalist account about Russian history. > Nationalism is a theory that states ethnic and political borders > should coincide. > An entry for Nationalism must detail when this theory > arrived to Russia, who were its first proponents, their major > works, how far those works were disseminated, who supported and who > opposed those ideas. In the Russian case it must discuss how government sponsorship of empire and imperial identity stunted Russian national identity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.114 (talk) 17:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

• The article is an original research full of outrageous, POV pushing statements. Russian/Soviet imperial history was indeed more about suppressing Russian national identity than anything else. And pogroms - they took place in the Ukraine, Moldova and parts of Poland. Although definitely the Russian government's responsibility, they were still committed by ethnically non-Russian mobs and had nothing to do with Russian nationalism whatsoever. -- Evermore2 (talk) 09:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

So typical, yet another Russian who wants to blame only others and pretend they are innocent. I suppose you're going to pretend there's no neo-nazi groups in Russia today?31.193.8.168 (talk) 08:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

So, what you think does not belong to this article? Creation of Russian and Soviet Empires? Third Rome? Black Hundreds? What is missing and should be included? Biophys (talk) 16:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Placed my answer down there below for the simple reason of disliking this section's headline. -- Evermore2 (talk) 08:50, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

RUbbish

TO understand why this article is rubbish just look at who sponsored it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.130 (talk) 19:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Nonsense on Stilts

What on earth has anything that happened in Vladimir-Suzdal or Muscovy before Peter I to do with Russian nationalism except in so far as Russian nationalists, who did not exist until the nineteenth century, THINK that it did? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.130 (talk) 18:30, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

• Russians and Russian state existed long before Peter I. The concept of "Third Rome" and Russians as the leading Orthodox nation, as well as their ambitions on "All the Russias", outdate Russian Empire for centuries. They were the nation-shaping political and religious ideologies of Russia from Ivan III onwards, a messianistic view of Russia as a nation, "chosen by God". In case you didn't know, Russia is not founded by Peter I. Garret Beaumain (talk) 19:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

• Mr. 142.150.49.130 seems to be coming from the Ukraine. So that could explain his emotional historically illiterate drivel. According to some Ukrainian "nationalist" talking points, the Ukraine exists longer then Russia, even though there was not even a word "ukraine" back then. The word "ukraine" comes from "okraina" (meaning border land/edge). One of the "arguments" that those nationalists present is: "it was Muscovy, and not Russia, therefore Russia did not exist back then". However, they deliberately omit the fact that Muscovy was just one of Russian principalities, just like Novgorodian Rus', Kievan Rus', Pskovian Rus' etc. That is where the term All the Russias comes from, that is still used today, among others by the Russian Orthodox Church.Chernovorn (talk) 11:52, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

WHEN WILL THE NOSENSE CEASE?

THere were no "Russians" or RUssian state before Peter. THere were muscovites and the tsardom of Muscovy. Peter founded the RUSSIAN EMPIRE. No body know about the "Third Rome" theory beyond the monastary where it was written until it was rediscovered and published in the 19th century when nationalist pan slavists and RUssian enemies abroad misinterpreted it as excuse/rationale for expansionism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.48.131 (talk) 19:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• You don't seem to know much about Russian history from what you say above, not to mention Russian nationalism and its evolution. Please stay away from the article in that case, you are incompetent.Garret Beaumain (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

I suggest you start writing about NATIONALISM IN RUSSIA and stop writing nationalist accounts about Russia. Nationalism is a theory that emerged in the eighteenth century and claimed national and political borders should coincide. To claim otherwise is to be a nationalist. Fine. But not in scholarship. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.150.49.111 (talk) 19:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Article needs complete re-write, and administrators' attention to boot off the worst offending POV warriors here

The article is badly organized, unclear, and lacking references of important points. As can be seen above this section, the level of POV warrior activity here seems very high. I suggest that an administrator be brought in to stop these immature petty fights by the POV warriors who are deliberately violating WP:NOTBATTLE by kicking out the worst offenders through topic bans of them editing this article, and giving warnings to others. Nationalism is always controversial and no mature person here should feign surprise that this article on a deeply political topic will be controversial. The article needs to get to the points: (1) what Russian nationalism is about (2) it's aims (3) it's history.--R-41 (talk) 12:49, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I support the proposed merge. As a stand alone article, this one is a loser. Joe Bodacious (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Correction -- I meant that Radical nationalism in Russia is a loser, and should be merged into this article. Joe Bodacious (talk) 21:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I restored Radical nationalism in Russia for now, but I agree it should be merged here. If there are no objections, I can do it later. My very best wishes (talk) 19:11, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

It's been three years and no objections have been raised. I think it's okay to go ahead with the merge now. Charles Essie (talk) 16:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

"Dima Yakovlev" recentism

One of the worst examples of Wikipedia recentism is removed. To claim that a single 2013 law, that is not even related directly to the topic (the law does not deal with ethnic or language policy), created "the new form of Russian nationalism" is an original research at its worst. Even worse that it's based on a single news article, which hardly deserves even a line of mention like "Ellen Barry of New York Times claims that...". That's if she did. In fact, Ellen Barry of New York Times does not even claim that. She didn't mention Russian nationalism in her article at all. Garret Beaumain (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Nationalism on Russia's territory which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I created that discussion and I decided I might as well be bold, so never mind. Charles Essie (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Mosques destructed

1) what kind of English is that??? 2) what relevance does that entry have to nationalism? no explanation whatsoever. Neatly matches the amateurism of the entire topic. GET RID OF IT. 49.2.28.155 (talk) 03:59, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Removed

This page was telling: "The Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections which helped Donald Trump to be elected as President of the United States, was believed to be a joint effort by Russian and Ukrainian Jews who support Russian nationalist movement", and other things/conspiracy theories like that. So removed. My very best wishes (talk) 04:12, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• President Vladimir Putin speech Crimea reunification anniversary 2022, Pic 1.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Is Putin Russian Ethnic Nationalist?

′′I am Russian. As they say, I have Ivan and Marya in my family. But when I see examples of such heroism as the feat of a young guy Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov, a native of Degestan, a Lak by nationality, I want to say: “I am a Lak, I am a Dagestan, I am a Chechen, Ingush, Russian, Tatar, Jew, Mordvin, Ossetian.” It is impossible to list all.′′ Page text.

--Egor Starilov Alert (1)Egor Starilov (talk) 22:48, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Russian nationalists in opposition to Putin and the current regime

After reading Western opinions, one gets the impression that Russian nationalism is professed mainly by radicals, Putin and his supporters, while there are nationalists who are opponents of the current political regime. For example, the fact that a split occurred among Russian nationalists and some went to fight in Ukraine for Novorossia, and the other part went to fight for UkrainePage text.

Also, some Russian nationalists were imprisoned. For a snack, I'll throw you a link to a YouTube video where nationalists shout "DPR burn in flames!" and "Glory to Kievan Rus, Novorossiya suck!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJ2QI_Bi0WI

--Egor Starilov (talk) 23:10, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Synth in Neo-Nazism in Russia

I'm concerned about amount of synth in the "Neo-Nazism in Russia" section, which leaves an impression that the sole purpose of this section is to persuade reader that a 20,000 person RNU from 2000 is fighting in Ukraine in 2014-2022.

Firstly, RNU and its demise already described in "Contemporary nationalism" and there's no apparent reason to describe a non-existent organisation in two sections.

Secondly, none of the sources support what the last sentence of "Neo-Nazism" says. "Miroslav Mareš, Martin Laryš, Jan Holzer (2018)" say "RNE volunteer troops were closely linked with the Russian Orthodox army, an armed unit comprising about 300 combatants and largely involved in marauding and criminal activities. 'DNR authorities' have terminated its business, however. (conveniently trimmed by the editor who added the citation); Jarzyńska writes "The most radical activists volunteered to join the fighting in Donbas; news on these developments was posted by some of the organisations on their websites, such as the Eurasian Youth Union and Russian National Unity. ", not saying anything about members of RNU (RNE) joining the fighting; Mitrokhin writes In the Donbass region, the RNE organized the small but highly effective group Russkaia pravoslavnaia armiia (Russian Orthodox army), which was de facto under the control of RNE member Pavel Gubarev, by Gubarev’s own account., which refers to a single RNE member; Laruelle doesn't write anything on topic and describes RNE break-up.

I think participation of nationalists in the war should be described, and there are concerning reports of links between neo-nazis and Kremlin, but the current shape of the Neo-Nazism section doesn't lit much light on either, presenting outright WP:SYNTH. PaulT2022 (talk) 20:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes there is no need for this subsection. It was added not long ago[1][2] and could be improved. Mellk (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2022 (UTC)