Putin is a germophobic deluded old man who could incinerate us all...an old man in a hurry obsessed with his historic legacy.
Hopefully some general or oligarch will remove him from power before he presses the nuclear button in his frustrated state.
Printable View
Putin is a germophobic deluded old man who could incinerate us all...an old man in a hurry obsessed with his historic legacy.
Hopefully some general or oligarch will remove him from power before he presses the nuclear button in his frustrated state.
Putin's Rasputin, Alexandr Dugin gives, a gepolitical difference between "the seaman's point of view", the Atlantic world, and the "landman's point of view", the Russian point of view. The connotations go bigger and broader than that. I guess you can see also the liberal-democratic point vs the authoritarian-populist point of view. Is this a real contradiction or also a kind of dichotomy trap? Because the landman's view comes with resentments, with revanchist thoughts.....
@Malaparte you want to make from the US a landman and authoritarian point of view?
@ MalaparteI guess when Trump gets reelected in 2024, the torch of the free, liberal, democratic world has gone from the US to Germany in Europe. So from Pax Americana to Pax Germania!? Scholz has give a decisive push to it yesterday. And I guess with an isolationist US this will be the ultimate consequence.Quote:
First, I am not advocating that US become isolationist, even if I think this desirable over the (very) long term. What I believe must now happen, however, is that the US *pivot* to East Asia. Indeed, such a pivot is imperative because China is by far the greatest threat to the US.
But that's longer term, we are still facing a very severe crisis in which Nato needs to operate as a very close unit.
An older article, this got recently a push:
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...209-story.htmlQuote:
It is no small irony that the nation the U.S. transformed after 1945 may emerge as the primary standard bearer for universal values its mentor is in danger of leaving behind.
The best solution to this conflict, but something probably both sides, but especially the Ukraine and West won't agree, would be a ceasefire and then a referendum of the disputed territories under strict international control. The people living there should decide to which state they want to belong and all conflict parties should accept that!Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsnake49
This would be the only humane and democratic solution, like so often in history, but so often being ignored by the "democratic powers", if it was in their interest to keep people in a state to which they don't want to belong for geopolitical reasons. On the other hand, if minorities are useful for being made use of politically, well, then its all about minorities and human rights.
But yes, that would be the best solution for this conflict, and both sides should have agreed to it long ago and they should have - both - made these areas free from their military and suppression, for the time of the referendum.
Unfortunately, such a peaceful and truly democratic solution in the name of the self-determination of a people won't be done, like so often in history before, leading to all this unnecessary bloodshed, with either Ukrainians in a state they don't want or minorities in a state they don't want to belong to.
Or probably all of them want to belong to a Western Ukrainian state! Well, they should vote for it, that would be only good way from my point of view, but unfortunately, it won't got that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
This is an excellent post. If only.
We can still hope.
This current Russian propaganda reminds me a lot of Nazi propaganda from 1939 that Western Poland was allegedly predominantly German-inhabited. That was of course not confirmed by Polish official censuses (in 1921 and 1931) and it was also not confirmed by data coming from the community of Polish Germans itself. The German minority in Poland carried out self-censues (they counted themselves) and the results were similar as in official Polish census - Germans were about 10% of inhabitants in Western Poland, not a huge minority or a majority as Hitler claimed.
For example in Pomeranian Voivodeship (the so called disputed "Polish Corridor" to the Baltic Sea):
1926 German self-census - ethnic Germans were 12.5% of inhabitants (117.251 people)
1934 German self-census - ethnic Germans were 9.9% of inhabitants
1931 Polish official census - ethnic Germans were 10.1% of inhabitants (109.696 people)
And some less official Polish estimates for Pomeranian Voivodeship:
1920 Kazimierz Kierski estimate - 11.3% Germans (109.196 people)
1927 Zygmunt Stolinski estimate - 9.37% Germans (95.460 people)
1938 "Statystyka Polska" - 9.7% Germans (105.400 people)
As you can see German self-census numbers and Polish census numbers & estimates are similar.
Here is a detailed ethnic map of the "Polish Corridor" in the 1930s - https://i.imgur.com/FmY0QP8.jpg
While this is how Nazi maps showed the "Polish Corridor" in the 1930s - https://www.bpb.de/cache/images/0/29...x666.jpg?50DB4
And here a Non-Nazi map, based on real data - this map was used to draw the borders at Versailles in 1919 - https://i.imgur.com/vnNaPVH.png
=====
And in Poznan Voivodeship (also part of Western Poland, to the south of Pomeranian):
1931 Polish official census - 193.080 ethnic Germans (ca. 10% of the total population)
1934 German self-census - 208.986 ethnic Germans
=====
So as you can see Germans were about 10% in Western Poland - both according to Polish counts and their own self-counts.
But if you look at Nazi-made maps of ethnic distribution in Europe, they "painted" this area as at least 1/2 German-inhabited.
And Nazi maps also showed huge areas as German "Kulturboden" (inhabited by clear Polish majority, but culturally German).
^^^
And, frankly, I don't know what is a 1930s Nazi propaganda map doing on bpb.de (Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung) website in year 2022:
BPB - https://de-m-wikipedia-org.translate...en&_x_tr_hl=pl
Germans pay extreme attention to detail when they are not doing propaganda work.
That's how I distinguish German propaganda from German objective statistical work.
A lot of German statistics even from early 1800s is very detailed. But Nazi-made maps and statistics are never detailed, always vague.
These "ethnic maps of Ukraine" made by Russian trollls are also vague. They should be showing EXACT situation county-by-county.
Everyone can open MS Paint and do some "creative work" with colours on a map of Ukraine.
=====
Jakob Spett in his map did a very detailed work because in his map it can be seen which village/town was majority German & which majority Polish.
That's why his map was used during the Versailles Conference in 1919 to draw the borders of the "Polish Corridor".
While in Nazi-made maps, there is never such level of detail. So it can't be fact-checked if a map is correct or not.
If some map shows village XYZ as majority Russian, we can go to this village and confront the data from the map with reality, to verify if it is true.
But... are we going to include also the areas in Russia inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians in this referendum?:Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...gions_1926.jpg
Maybe even the Far East will go to Ukraine in such case?:
http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com...%5CFarEast.htm
"Large-scale settlement of the Far East expanded after the opening of the Trans-Siberian Railroad between Moscow and Vladivostok (1891–1905) and the construction of the additional Ussuri and Amur lines. New lands were opened up to the settlers. In 1901–3, 14,000 settlers on the average arrived in the Far East per year. During the Russo-Japanese War colonization ceased almost completely. It reached a peak of 70,600 people per year in 1907 and fell to 36,000 per year in 1908–10, to 21,000 in 1911–12, and to 12,000 in 1913–14. Altogether, in 1907–13 about 250,000 peasants came to the Far East. Most of them (85 percent in 1907) settled in the Primore oblast, but a small number settled in the Amur oblast. The majority of the settlers were Ukrainians; for example, in 1907, 74 percent of the settlers came from Ukraine. Ukrainians made up 75–80 percent of the settlers in the Primore oblast and 60–65 percent of the settlers in the Amur oblast. Hence, on the eve of the First World War Ukrainians constituted the nucleus of the Far East’s population. They settled primarily on the fertile lands of the Zeia-Bureia Lowland and Ussuri-Khanka Lowland."
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...gions_1926.jpg
That's long gone and all over, but just two issues:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomenable
- people tend to vote in mixed or unclear areas for the then dominant socio-political power more often. So with the change of a regime, such numbers can change in the course of months. This is why I wrote, to learn from history, that any such area should be free from any military and police pressure, under international control, for the time before the referendum. If one side occupies that territory and can exert pressure, it can manipulate the outcome, even if the votes themselves might be technically legitimate.
- secondly, and this is true in this case as it was in the past, a conquest and suppression often leads to refugees. Many Germans fled from Poland during the interwar period from later disputed territories, we're talking about miliions which already fled after WWI. Same here: Pro-Ukrainian people fled from Donbas and Crimea, pro-Russians being refugees in Russia for years after the conflict got violent.
But of course, we know, to not make this a debate about the WWII past, that most areas taken from Germany were majority wise Polish. The main issues were Danzig, a corridor for East Prussia and Upper Silesia. All such conflicts, after World War I, II, Yugoslavia and now should have been resolved like in Upper Silesia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Silesia_plebiscite
Even there violence broke out and the Polish side tried to conquer the territory before the official plebiscite. That's the problem, a territory which undergoes a referendum must be pacified and come under international jurisdiction by neutral 3rd parties. Otherwise nothing works and escalation being pre-programmed.
Another such case would have been Ödenburg, now Hungarian Sopron, because Hungarian forces took the city by force before a neutral referendum could take place:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopron_plebiscite
Obviously, the Western powers need to have an interest for a fair and legitimate plebiscite. They had no such interest when it was about the German minorities, or the Serbian ones after the break-up of Yugoslavia, they have now none for the pro-Russian separatists in the Ukraine.
That's the point. If it suits them, they are there and talking all day long about minorities and human rights, but if its about people they don't care for and which rights might just undermine their geopolitical games (like Germans in Czechoslovakia and Poland after WWI, Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia, Kurds in Turkey, Shia muslims in Bahrain etc.), then they can wait forever to get their rights and self-determination without using force.
I don't say Putin cares that much for the people on the ground, even those which are pro-Russian, he's playing his own geostrategical game on the back of common people, but the West shouldn't play the "morally shocked" in all those cases, because there are hundreds of other, much worse or as bad cases around the world in which they didn't care.
People which really want a humane, fair and democratic solution must always accept the self-determination of a people and a referendum for disputed regions. Not people being stuck in a state structure which is just some years old, because these are the borders which fit into the chess game the Western powers play. That's as inhumane and provocative, a certain path to conflict as is the "greater imperial" ambition of some other powers in the past and presence.
A lot of bloodshed and wars could have been prevented if that principle introduced by the USA and promised by Woodrow Wilson during WWI would have been held up all the time since then.
The Upper Silesian plebiscite was never intended to award the whole region to one side.
It was clear since the beginning that the area was going to be divided based on the results in each community.
And that was done, Poland got the part where it won, and Germany got the part where it won, as this data shows:
(although in some cities in the Polish part Germany won, and in some counties in the German part Poland won)
Results in area awarded to Poland:
For Poland - 56%
For Germany - 44%
Results in area awarded to Germany:
For Germany - 71%
For Poland - 29%
But let's remind that the proportion of votes was not the same as that of the general population, for few reasons, including: 1) votes of "plebiscite emigrants" and 2) the fact that the median age of Polish-speaking population was lower than that of the German-speaking population (a higher percent among the Polish-speaking population were children) - while only persons over the age of 21 were eligible to vote. Among "plebiscite emigrants" (who did not live in the plebiscite area, but mostly in other parts of Germany) the vast majority voted for Germany. So generally the percentage of votes for Germany was in the whole area higher than the percentage of pro-German population.
Even there violence broke out and the Polish side tried to conquer the territory before the official plebiscite.
Poles did not start it. It all started when Grenzschutz opened fired to Polish Silesian civilian workers / labourers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silesi...ings#Uprisings
"On 15 August 1919, German border guards (Grenzschutz) massacred ten Silesian civilians in a labour dispute at the Mysłowice mine (Myslowitzer Grube). The massacre sparked protests from the Silesian Polish miners, including a general strike of about 140,000 workers,[10] and caused the First Silesian uprising against German control of Upper Silesia. The miners demanded the local government and police become ethnically mixed to include both Germans and Poles [instead of exclusively German].[2]"
I think the 71 % were high enough, so we should close that case. It was one of the few rather fair ones in all of history, in all the history of such conflicts. Probably not ideal, still, but better than most other such cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomenable
Look at the map of how votes were distributed by area, not just raw numbers of voters.
Many rural areas which voted majority for Poland were left on the German side of the border.
And as I said, it was agreed before the plebiscite, that the region was going to be divided based on how each community / village / town voted. Of course it was not exactly possible to divide it like that because there were pro-German enclaves deep inside the pro-Polish territory, and vice versa.
It looks like the Dragon is awakening. Is it beginning?Quote:
Originally Posted by Malaparte
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/st...ve-are-soaring
The only question is how long before the financial hub- torch is transferred from New York to Beijing. 120 months? give or take+/-Quote:
it’s a turning point in monetary history: the end of USD hegemony
Many Germans fled from Poland during the interwar period
That's not true.
They emigrated during several months long window between the signing of the Versailles Treaty and the moment when Polish administration took over. So they left the area during the time when it was still under German rule, but it was known that it was going to become Polish.
They did not leave under any pressure (except for their own disgust at the thought that they would live in a Polish-ruled state).
After 1921 Germans were no longer emigrating en masse. Those who left mostly left in 1918-1920.
Since we mentioned the topic of Upper Silesia, such a historical curiosity:
The flags of Ukraine and Upper Silesia have the same colours (blue and yellow) because an Upper Silesian duke (Vladislav of Opole) once ruled the Duchy of Halych-Volhynia in what is now Western Ukraine - and he created the yellow-blue coat of arms of Halych-Volhynia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislaus_II_of_Opole
Fact is they were fleeing the region after WWI. And it wasn't just "disgust", but also the fear of what's coming, like most of the time in such cases with an ethnic-political regime change. Anyway, that's the past.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomenable
So you think there was a massive migration of Slavic people from Kiev to Moscow, and they are ancestors of modern Russians?Quote:
Originally Posted by Malaparte
If Ukraine was inhabited by Russian people, then where did the current Ukrainians come from? Perhaps from Alpha Centauri?
The Germans ruled the region in question since the Partitions of Poland 1772-1795 until 1918.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
They did oppress Polish people during that time, so they maybe had reasons to fear revenge.
But a more important thing than fear, was being "rootless" in the area. A significant part of the Germans living there, had no deep roots in the region but only settled there recently (or their parents/grandparents at best), as part of the efforts by the Ansiedlungskommission to Germanize the region.
Many Germans also were employed by the Prussian State, as officials etc. They were going to lose their jobs after the Polish takeover.
What the heck those thirties stuff what is the aim Tomenable... lines of ethnicity are relevant for whom? Putin? Or?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomenable
Sounds nice but passé. No pasaran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
You want plebiscites only when "The Prison of Nations" (that's how some people in Poland call Russia - Russia did not grant independence to its ethnic republics such as Sakha or Chechnya) invades weaker countries. But when there are spearatist movements in the West, you don't care.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riverman
Spanish police opened fire to Catalan separatists IIRC. All of Western European countries are multi-ethnic (in France - Basques, Bretons, Alsatians, etc.). Even Germany is like the former Yugoslavia, kind of a "Pan-Germanic State". Germans are not a single ethnicity IMO. Bavarian separatism maybe is no longer so strong, but it was a thing (and perhaps indeed Bavaria should secede from Germany and unite with Austria).
Why was there no plebiscite in Catalonia ??? Granted, Scotland was allowed to have one, but it now wants another.
How about Ulster, which is becoming increasingly Catholic and Anti-British ??? Hello, Sardinia and South Tyrol ???
The Flemish want to say goodbye to the Walloons as well, AFAIK.