Did you know that Ukraine was a country before it entered Donald Trump's vocabulary?

@Elessar America? Sure. Russia? Absolutely not. Russia and Ukraine both trace their roots to the same kingdom. Both have claimed Kiev being the birth place of their people for about 1000 years.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow A country that was based in Ukraine, geographically. Russia wasn't inhabited at first.

@Elessar Umm no. They did not become separate entities for centuries later. We are talking 800 or 900 years before they emerged as separate entities.

For some reason people seem to think they will make Ukraine somehow more legitimate by pretending it is some ancient separate country and culture. That is not the case.

The fact all this happened a geographic location that would happen to be called Ukraine and Russia as separate entities 8 centuries later is a nonsense point.

The Varangians who created the Kiev Rus empire settled first in Novgorod (modern day Russia and almost 20 years to the day later in Kiev so it is bunch of pointless trivia.

And if we want to get real silly we can look at the origins of the Varangians and claim Ukrainians, Russians, and Belorussians are ll Swedes. It gets ridiculous very quickly.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I'm speaking of locations and not populations. Current Ukraine was inhabited before modern Russia was relevant enough to appear on maps. That's a historically proven fact.

You're making your own claims of legitimacy when I've never spoken either of legitimacy, nor of populations.

@Elessar Again, as I point out, not really because Kiev Rus started in Novgorod. You are trying to use the geography of modern countries and force irrelevant ancient history into that.


I am not the one making up claims that something from 900 years ago magically makes a country that is 30 years old more legitimate. And locations without populations are irrelevant. Just like iron age kingdoms are irrelevant to modern states.

And there is no reason to engage in this kind of speculation if you are not trying to push some sort of narrative of legitimacy.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow Check the title / main post and you'll see exactly why my input fits without necessarily any political motives.

As I said, the talk about legitimacy is purely made up in your mind. The post is about the history of the land and so is my comment.

Persecution complex much?

@Elessar It is not about a persecution complex. It is about the fact it is the same line of reasoning that former Ukrainian President Leonid Kutchma used in his writings to essentially validate the claims of Ukrainian fascists that Ukraine is the birth place of the white Christian kingdom of Kiev Rus and Russia has been corrupted by the brown mongol hordes. And the level of propaganda has gotten to the point that the Wall Street Journal was praising this book this past year.

Unfortunately this kinds of discussions often devolve into some pretty yikes territory.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow It's still irrelevant to the point being discussed. We can also use that argument to invalidate pretty much every possible argument tangentially referring to anything controversial. What's next, I can't make a post/comment about cappuccino because it'll inevitably result in people discussing mixing whites with browns? lol

@Elessar Maybe we just stay away from the historical pretexts currently being used to make blood and soil justications?

That should not be controversial.

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow As I said, literally everything can be used to make "blood and soil justifications", that's a poor excuse for auto-censorship.