The Iron Curtains' Affect on Our View of History...

[EAB]

It is well known that Stalin decided what went into Soviet history books based upon what he wanted the population to think in the future. One subject Stalin hated was genetics, and he did not like it being researched in the Soviet Union. He didn't like the study of languages either. Economics was also a rather marginalised subject. It is clear why this was, he didn't want people to concentrate on their differences or reach a source of other ideas.

My question is how much do people feel this kind of policy affects our understanding of history and genetics today, considering a great deal of European and Native American ancestors came from this part of the world? Does anyone know what the culture for archeology was like in the USSR, and how finds were treated and reported on? Does anyone else think we are still suffering in our knowledge due to the repercussions of this era still being felt today?

How much influence does turn of the century politics have on archaeological finds that were made back then? The Nazi regime was very interested in archaeology for the benefit of proving a direct link between the German nation and high cultures of the past. With modern DNA we see Germany is a large mosaic of people and cultures. Is it somewhat ironic that the group that suffered some of the greatest losses at Nazi hands, those carrying R1a, were in fact more connected to the "Aryans" that made their way into India thousands of years ago?

 

[LeBrok]

It is well known that Stalin decided what went into Soviet history books based upon what he wanted the population to think in the future. One subject Stalin hated was genetics, and he did not like it being researched in the Soviet Union. He didn't like the study of languages either. Economics was also a rather marginalised subject. It is clear why this was, he didn't want people to concentrate on their differences or reach a source of other ideas.

I grew up in Communist Poland, but I never heard or read in official or opposition materials that these subjects were some sort of taboo. Well perhaps it was true when Stalin was alive, but he died in 1953 so there was almost 40 years communism after Stalin, which could have went away from his dogma.

My question is how much do people feel this kind of policy affects our understanding of history and genetics today, considering a great deal of European and Native American ancestors came from this part of the world? Does anyone know what the culture for archeology was like in the USSR, and how finds were treated and reported on? Does anyone else think we are still suffering in our knowledge due to the repercussions of this era still being felt today?

I think archeology was quite well sponsored by state in Soviet Union, though not much work was published in the West.
It would be actually funny if Soviets claimed that they have discovered graves of Indo-Europeans in Ukraine, the West were sure it was pure propaganda.

How much influence does turn of the century politics have on archaeological finds that were made back then? The Nazi regime was very interested in archaeology for the benefit of proving a direct link between the German nation and high cultures of the past. With modern DNA we see Germany is a large mosaic of people and cultures. Is it somewhat ironic that the group that suffered some of the greatest losses at Nazi hands, those carrying R1a, were in fact more connected to the "Aryans" that made their way into India thousands of years ago?

I'm sure Hitler and Goebbels would commit suicides learning that their super race didn't exist, and they were killing close cousins of Aryans. Well they committed suicide anyway.

 

[Yetos]

It is well known that Stalin decided what went into Soviet history books based upon what he wanted the population to think in the future. One subject Stalin hated was genetics, and he did not like it being researched in the Soviet Union. He didn't like the study of languages either. Economics was also a rather marginalised subject. It is clear why this was, he didn't want people to concentrate on their differences or reach a source of other ideas.

My question is how much do people feel this kind of policy affects our understanding of history and genetics today, considering a great deal of European and Native American ancestors came from this part of the world? Does anyone know what the culture for archeology was like in the USSR, and how finds were treated and reported on? Does anyone else think we are still suffering in our knowledge due to the repercussions of this era still being felt today?

How much influence does turn of the century politics have on archaeological finds that were made back then? The Nazi regime was very interested in archaeology for the benefit of proving a direct link between the German nation and high cultures of the past. With modern DNA we see Germany is a large mosaic of people and cultures. Is it somewhat ironic that the group that suffered some of the greatest losses at Nazi hands, those carrying R1a, were in fact more connected to the "Aryans" that made their way into India thousands of years ago?

plz do not confuse Aryans which is a Greek word for Georgians and Medes, with Arians, which was Hitler superior race

Αρειοι / Aryans is a word imported by Xenophon to the story of Medea, Aryan language was spoken at Colchis Georgia and then at Medea
Αρειοι means shooters Αορ Arrow simmilar scythians
Arian race Αρια φυλλη is what Hitler considered superior race, compare Greek Αριστοι (best), Plato the governance of Aristoi
a big misunderstanding due to orthography

 

[bicicleur 2]

How much influence does turn of the century politics have on archaeological finds that were made back then? The Nazi regime was very interested in archaeology for the benefit of proving a direct link between the German nation and high cultures of the past. With modern DNA we see Germany is a large mosaic of people and cultures. Is it somewhat ironic that the group that suffered some of the greatest losses at Nazi hands, those carrying R1a, were in fact more connected to the "Aryans" that made their way into India thousands of years ago?

all research in every country was abused for nationalistic argumentation these days
and it still happens today
why does Erdogan claim there were muslims in America before Columbus?
why does ISIS blow up the archeological sites?

 

[Fluffy]

It is well known that Stalin decided what went into Soviet history books based upon what he wanted the population to think in the future. One subject Stalin hated was genetics, and he did not like it being researched in the Soviet Union. He didn't like the study of languages either. Economics was also a rather marginalised subject. It is clear why this was, he didn't want people to concentrate on their differences or reach a source of other ideas.

My question is how much do people feel this kind of policy affects our understanding of history and genetics today, considering a great deal of European and Native American ancestors came from this part of the world? Does anyone know what the culture for archeology was like in the USSR, and how finds were treated and reported on? Does anyone else think we are still suffering in our knowledge due to the repercussions of this era still being felt today?

How much influence does turn of the century politics have on archaeological finds that were made back then? The Nazi regime was very interested in archaeology for the benefit of proving a direct link between the German nation and high cultures of the past. With modern DNA we see Germany is a large mosaic of people and cultures. Is it somewhat ironic that the group that suffered some of the greatest losses at Nazi hands, those carrying R1a, were in fact more connected to the "Aryans" that made their way into India thousands of years ago?

Yes it is rather ironic that all those Poles the Nazi's murdered were Indo Europeans.