![Kamil Galeev Profile picture](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="73" height="73"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
I find this line of argumentation illustrative of the general state of Russian discourse, whether "patriotic" or "liberal". Everything Turkic occupies the same place in the Russian debates as everything Irish in the Imperial British. The Inner Other and the source of all the evil
Reading the Russian-Ukrainian debates with both sides accusing each other of racial impurity and having too many Steppe admixtures or influences, I noticed that their argumentation is mirroring each other. See this Russian nationalist material for example sputnikipogrom.com/history/15934/…
This mutuality and almost exact symmetry of Russian-Ukrainian accusations reminds me of a brilliant thread on the British rule over the Ionian Isles. Bach then the discourse was similar. Brits and Greeks were constantly accusing each other of Irishness
British administration had very low opinion of their new Greek subjects. They compared them of supposedly lower races such as the Irish or the Hottentots and the Irish, and even labeled the Ionian population as the "Mediterranean Irish" 
Why would the Brits compare the Ionians to the Irish? Well, because nothing could be worse than the Irish who occupied the place of the Inner Other in the British discourse of the era. That was the axiom which the Greek subjects soon weaponised against their British masters 
Mutual Anglo-Greek accusations of Irishness illustraeof how cultural hegemony works. Brits believe nothing can be more disgusting than the Irish. That's the axiom. And since Brits hold the hegemony the entire discourse will be based upon this axiom. Including the anti-British one
Brits be like:
- Greeks are the total savages. They're just Mediterranean Irish
Greeks be like:
- No, it's *you* who are the true Irish. Do you think I don't recognise your Donegal accent?
That's how the cultural hegemony works. the axioms of a hegemon shape the entire debate
- Greeks are the total savages. They're just Mediterranean Irish
Greeks be like:
- No, it's *you* who are the true Irish. Do you think I don't recognise your Donegal accent?
That's how the cultural hegemony works. the axioms of a hegemon shape the entire debate
When you read the Russian-Ukrainian debates, you must keep in mind that the axiom of the Turkic/Steppe inferiority strongly influences both lines of argumentation. Just like the axiom of Irish inferiority shaped the British-Ionian debates. That's the basic assumption of a hegemon
Consider this good text by the Sputnik and Pogrom - a vastly underrated Russian nationalist media. You probably never heard about it - that's because representation of Russian internal debates by the Western media and academia is below any criticism
sputnikipogrom.com/history/52636/…
sputnikipogrom.com/history/52636/…
"Asian Lithuania vs European Moscow"
Russian nationalists correctly point out that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania had massive Turkic Muslim population whose position was far better than in Muscovy. E.g. the first mosque in Minsk was built in 1599 and in Moscow - only in 1744
Russian nationalists correctly point out that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania had massive Turkic Muslim population whose position was far better than in Muscovy. E.g. the first mosque in Minsk was built in 1599 and in Moscow - only in 1744
They also correctly point out to the cultural syncretism reflected e.g. in the phenomenon of the Belarusian Arabic alphabet: Belarusian written with the Arabic letters. Pointing out to the "Oriental" connections is a Russian nationalist argument against the Belarusian identity 
When you read the Eastern European debates, you should keep in mind that the axiom of the Turkic/Oriental inferiority lies in the foundation of many (most?) of them. Because that's the axiom of the Russian empire, which historically dominated both politically and culturally
Rule of thumb:
When you hear that "X. has always been the same... They didn't change at all for a 1000 years", you can be sure that the one who speaks has no idea about the X. When you see the assumption of immutability, assume the total ignorance. You won't be wrong
When you hear that "X. has always been the same... They didn't change at all for a 1000 years", you can be sure that the one who speaks has no idea about the X. When you see the assumption of immutability, assume the total ignorance. You won't be wrong
Those who don't know anything about the Islamic world think it's immutable. Those who know nothing of China, think that China is. Assumption of immutability = indication of ignorance. The end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
