“Islam is the broom of Israel …”

So, GREAT idea!

Quote taken from this recent MUST WATCH video:

Thank you. I am a fan of your posts and I consider your high regard for mine as an honor.

AP, you are doing God’s work in dealing with the 3rd-tier trolls. Bless you.

You are back to your manipulative ways. That shows a weakness in your argument, not strength, do you realize that?

You are describing yourself. Perfectly.

One small thing: 25% or 32% of 40 million is 10 million or more.

Let me remind you that you wrote:

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/eurabia-update/#comment-2105383

“And only if Ukraine resolves its huge issues with their Russian population (tens of millions).”

So, liar, you were discussing Russians, not Russian-speakers. There were were about 8 million Russians, now there are about 4 million Russians.

Now you are attempting to be manipulative, and to change the discussion to one of Russian-speakers. But you fail even there – 33% of 40 million is about 13 million, not “tens of millions.”

Some of the collapse is an ‘artifact of currency collapse‘, but not all. Most is simply a drop in wages and a drop in many economic activities. Plus higher utilities, school payments, drugs, imports,… The living standards in Ukraine definitely dropped since 2013

Sure, but not as much as nominal GDP suggests. They have dropped a little in Russia also, but not enough to suggest that Russia is now poorer than Romania, because its per capita nominal GDP is now about 7% lower than that of Romania.

Here is Ukraine’s per capita GDP PP:

https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/gdp-per-capita-ppp

It was $8,340 in 2013, down to $7,465 in 2015, and up to $7,668 in 2016. It will probably be around $7,900 in 2017. Which is almost 95% of its 2013 amount.

Do you also realise that Ukrainian exports have dropped to 1/3 of 2013 and now consists of about half agricultural products.

Here you are, lying again. You can’t help yourself.

Ukrainian exports:

https://tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/exports

They are about 2/3 of what they were in 2013.

Taking into account loss of 10% of the population this decline becomes a little less severe.

In terms of exports of goods it is about 40% agricultural products; however Ukraine also exports services (IT outsourcing) so that % drops.

So, just to keep track, Beckow – you lied when you transformed 4 million Russians in Ukraine into tens of millions, and you lied when you transformed Ukraine’s current 2/3 of 2013 export volume into 1/3.

An analogy is an illustration. Since it is an illustration by means of some other situation it will necessarily be “imprecise”. If you can show how the “imprecise” features of the analogy affect the meaning I pointed out, please do so.

1. Ukraine is part of EU? If it is or becomes so it must follow whatever standards are a condition of EU membership. We did not start out talking about these things and I am not an expert on the matter, so please describe (a) what these standards are and (b) what the Ukraine must do to become part of EU.

Your analogies are very tricky, and thus imprecise. Ukrainian and Russian are closely related, English and Gaelic are nor. History, geography and linguistics are very different. But all analogies tend to be misleading.

If someone can explain why is Ukraine allowed to have a completely upside-down minority policies, please do so. EU has minority treatment standards. If it waves its own standards because ‘Russians’ are involved, it has nothing left and becomes even more of a laughing stock. Double standards simply mean they have no standards.

1. Response to war with Orthodox Russia and consequence of the loss of most of the Orthodox elite during the Khmelytsky uprising, and understandable wish for another elite to not arise.

2. Uniate church remained as a Rus bastion.

3. And how is this worse than Russification policies that Russia would implement in the 19th century?

But the Orthodox in the Commonwealth were allowed to be swineherds (in the estates of the Polish landlords),

There were still many Orthodox noblemen when Russia took over.

According to the plan, Jews were to be employed to undermine the economic status of Ruthenian burghers, while Tatars were to be used against the populace of Right-Bank Ukraine, Podilia,and Volhynia if it rose in defense of its faith. The devastated lands would then be settled by migrants from Poland”

This was an anonymous pamphlet, not policy. You conveniently forget to post that fact.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::

So what did the linguistically Polonized Rus do in the 19th century:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%82opomania

Chłopomania spread into Carpathian Ruthenia and the Russian Empire, touching the westernmost parts of Ukraine (Right-bank Ukraine, Podolia etc.). This section of the movement merged into the larger Ukrainophile current, which brought together partisans and sympathizers of Ukrainian nationalism irrespective of cultural or ethnic background. Russian scholar Aleksei I. Miller defines the social makeup of some chłopomania groups (whose members are known as chłopomani or khlopomany) in terms of reversed acculturation: “Khlopomany were young people from Polish or traditionally Polonized families who, due to their populist convictions, rejected social and cultural belonging to their stratum and strove to approach the local peasantry.”[2] Similarly, Canadian researcher John-Paul Himka describes the Ukrainian chłopomani as “primarily Poles of Right Bank Ukraine”, noting that their contribution was in line with a tradition of “Ukrainophile” cooperation against the Russians and the Russophiles.[4] In reference to the cultural crossover between the two ethnic versions of chłopomania, French historian Daniel Beauvois noted that “in certain numbers”, chłopomani from within the Polish gentry contributed to “reinforcing the Ukrainian movement”.[1] Miller however focuses on the movement’s role in exacerbating tensions between Ukrainians, Poles and the Russian administrators. He writes: “The government could not but rejoice at the fact that some khlopomany renounced their Catholic faith, converted to Orthodoxy, and refused to support the Polish national movement. However, the Polish ill-wishers were quick to draw the government’s attention to the subversive flavor of the khlopomany’s social views and their pro-Ukrainophile orientation. The authorities were more often than not inclined to pay heed to these accusations, being guided more by the instinct of social solidarity with Polish landowners than by the strategy of national confrontation with the Poles.”[2]

According to Himka, the earliest chłopomani, active in the early 1860s, included Paulin Święcicki, who dedicated much of his career to advancing the Ukrainian cause.[4] Among the best-known representatives of this circle of intellectuals are Stanisław Wyspiański (whose The Wedding is occasionally associated with chłopomania as its standard manifesto).[3] In 1900 Wyspiański married the mother of his four children Teodora Pytko from a village near Kraków. In November of the same year he participated in the peasant wedding of his friend, poet Lucjan Rydel in Bronowice.[5][6][7] Other prominent figures include intellectuals associated with the Ukrainian magazine Osnova, primarily Volodymyr Antonovych and Tadei Rylsky,[2] as well as poet Pavlo Chubynsky.

::::::::::::::::::::::::

Plokhy’s also writes that not only Ukrainian clerics but sons of Cossack officers and nobles migrated to Russia to pursue their careers. There were twice as many Ukrainian as Russian doctors, and over 1/3 of the students in St. Petersburg teachers college were Ukrainians. So -brain drain.

You are back to your manipulative ways. That shows a weakness in your argument, not strength, do you realize that?

One small thing: 25% or 32% of 40 million is 10 million or more. Some remedial math would help you argue better.

Some of the collapse is an ‘artifact of currency collapse‘, but not all. Most is simply a drop in wages and a drop in many economic activities. Plus higher utilities, school payments, drugs, imports,… The living standards in Ukraine definitely dropped since 2013. We can argue exactly by how much, but after increasing country debt by almost 50% and getting the EU Association, how come the living standards dropped? Or are we to see a boom in Ukraine any day now? Based on what? Exporting what to whom? Or maybe borrowing more? Do you also realise that Ukrainian exports have dropped to 1/3 of 2013 and now consists of about half agricultural products.

Crimea incomes, pensions and living standards have gone up anywhere between 50 to 100%. That’s why 90% of people in Crimea are happy. Money is money and they are getting more than before. You can ignore it, but then you just become irrelevant.

Russian culture and assumptions are obviously very different today from what existed 80 years ago, let alone centuries ago.

Prevalent attitude seen today in Russia: Ukrainian is a fake language, Ukrainians are confused Russians, West is bad, etc. etc. Union with such a people who outnumbers your own 3:1 is a good idea? No thanks.

There’s a natural human tendency not to want to admit mistakes. So Ukrainians have turned against Poroshenko, but haven’t yet made the leap to questioning Maidanism itself. But eventually they might begin to do so, when whoever succeeds Poroshenko also inevitably fails to deliver on Maidan’s promises.

Corruption remains bad, but economy has stabilized and is improving. Certain regions have already recovered fully. These were the most pro-Maidan regions. I doubt they would have second thoughts. Kharkiv has not recovered but it wasn’t pro-Maidan to begin with.

It will be interesting to see whether Maidanist Ukraine is able to snatch the title of Europe’s poorest country from Moldova (which went from 55% of Ukraine’s per capita GDP in 2013, to 87% in 2016).

Moldova had 63% of Ukraine’s per capita GDP PPP in 2016.

If you want to play the game of nominal per capita GDP, you can consider that Russia’s per capita nominal GDP is now only 93% that of Romania, thanks to ruble devaluation.

real per capita GDP growth would average -5%,

This includes the crash of 2014-2015. It was followed by two years of growth. Not very honest way of describing post-Maidan performance, sorry.

‘Extreme‘? Well, let’s say that not half are Russian speakers, but only 40%, or 32%, or even 25% – that is still a lot, millions upon millions.

You wrote tens of millions of Russians, when actual number is around 4 million. Yes, that is extreme exaggeration.

I strongly doubt that most of the Russian speakers embraced Ukrainian nationalism

You who thought there was tens of millions of Russians in Ukraine when there are only 4 million are welcome to your strong doubts.

Ukraine currently is probably a little more than 1/3 Russian-speaking. Of those – perhaps a little less than half have embraced Ukrainian nationalism. Kiev is Russian speaking and nationalist. The extremists in Azov battalion and Right Sector are mostly Russian-speaking. To equate Russian-speaking with opposition to Ukrainian nationalism is silly.

Last time I checked, Ukraine banned Hungarian schools

Ukraine banned secondary schools that don’t use the Ukrainian language at all (or use it 1-3 hours per week). Kids form those schools were unable to take national university entrance exams. Now the secondary schools will be half in Ukrainian and half in Hungarian. Such discrimination.

Ukraine has a 2017 GNP of $90 billion (in US dollars). That is down about half from 2013.

That’s an artifact of the currency value collapse. Something similar happened in Russia with the ruble. By your logic Russia should not have taken Crimea?

But when the field Marshal Rumyantsev (famous commander and presumably the illegitimate son of Peter the Great) was awarded estates in the Ukraine, he surrounded himself harem concubines, and probably had lots of children – its brain drain from Russia to Ukraine?

The Russian colonial governor who helped abolish Ukraine’s autonomy sent his sons to St. Petersburg. The Ukrainian colony was a place to exploit.

People actually living in Ukraine, who know more about the results of Maidan than you do, do not consider it a “disaster” and do not wish Yanukovich was back

Probably post-reaction to the revolution of 1917 was the same. However, if I’m not mistaken, the vast majority of Ukrainians believe that their life only got worse

And who were raised by their predecessors and who share their predecessors’ culture and assumptions. They are not blank slates.

Russian culture and assumptions are obviously very different today from what existed 80 years ago, let alone centuries ago. The language remains very similar, but opinion on political, socioeconomic, and moral questions is certainly not. What % of Russians today would agree that absolute monarchy is the best form of government? Of course, there are some genetic traits, like IQ, that are passed down through the generations. But it seems unlikely that Russians possess an “anti-Ukrainian” gene (not to mention that the rulers responsible for the grievances you cited- expansion of serfdom, and the 1930s famine- weren’t even ethnic Russians).

People actually living in Ukraine, who know more about the results of Maidan than you do, do not consider it a “disaster” and do not wish Yanukovich was back or that Ukraine would reverse course and once again pursue integration with Russia

There’s a natural human tendency not to want to admit mistakes. So Ukrainians have turned against Poroshenko, but haven’t yet made the leap to questioning Maidanism itself. But eventually they might begin to do so, when whoever succeeds Poroshenko also inevitably fails to deliver on Maidan’s promises. Meanwhile, it’s apparent to every reasonable outside observer that, like every neocon project, Maidan has been a complete disaster. It will be interesting to see whether Maidanist Ukraine is able to snatch the title of Europe’s poorest country from Moldova (which went from 55% of Ukraine’s per capita GDP in 2013, to 87% in 2016).

Imagine that in 2013, a time traveler from 2017 had informed Ukrainians that in the first four years post-Maidan, Ukraine would lose Crimea and Donbass, more than 10,000 Ukrainians would be killed in a civil war, real per capita GDP growth would average -5%, and there would be no prospect of EU membership anytime in the foreseeable future. I suspect that with that knowledge, support for Maidan would have been substantially less.

The original point was brain drain. Gogol was an example of someone talented who moved to Russia. Had he married, he’d probably have married a Russian woman. His descendants would be Russians.

Hmm. But when the field Marshal Rumyantsev (famous commander and presumably the illegitimate son of Peter the Great) was awarded estates in the Ukraine, he surrounded himself harem concubines, and probably had lots of children – its brain drain from Russia to Ukraine?

Had he worked in a more ordinary occupation (like engineering or architecture), his work would have been little benefit to Ukraine. Etc.

In “Ukraine” built a lot engineers and architects from St. Petersburg (directed by the Imperial government): Charles Gascoigne, John Hughes, Francesco Rastrelli, Charles Cameron. Examples to the contrary I don’t know.

My point is that “Russian-speakers” are not same as “Russians”. Gaelic was analagous in my usage to Ukrainian, not Russian, which was analagous to English.

But if Russians want rights to teach children in their language, other cultural concessions, I don’t see why not, unfortunately I am not in charge in Ukraine.

Irish independentism is backed only by Gaelic speakers?

Well, Ukraine is independent. This is about minority rights, not independence.

Gaelic has (unfortunately) gone out of use quite some time ago, so your analogy is very wobbly. I can list for you dozen countries in EU that have minorities with full language rights and even autonomy (Swedes in Finland, Hungarians in Romania, Austrians in Italy, Turks in Bulgaria,…). Why aren’t Russians in Ukraine entitled to the same treatment?

Do you also think Irish independentism is backed only by Gaelic speakers?

‘Extreme‘? Well, let’s say that not half are Russian speakers, but only 40%, or 32%, or even 25% – that is still a lot, millions upon millions. I strongly doubt that most of the Russian speakers embraced Ukrainian nationalism – in times of civil war and ‘extreme’ danger to anyone with pro-Russian views, it won’t come out. But people don’t change.

The real problem for Ukraine is its incredible shrinkage of population. I believe in 1991 they were around 50 million. Even the most optimistic scenarios have Ukraine today at around 40 million or less. The young ones are leaving.

In Slovakia, Hungarians have their own schools, media and are represented in the government. Last time I checked, Ukraine banned Hungarian schools pissing of Budapest (yes, easy to do). If Ukraine would treat its minorities – incl. Russians – in a decent way there would be no civil war, no separatism, and they would be more likely to be allowed into EU.

Ukraine has a 2017 GNP of $90 billion (in US dollars). That is down about half from 2013. Average incomes are down in double digits. Foreign debt is almost 50% higher. Ukrainian money lost 2/3 of its value in 3 years. Are you sure relatively booming Poland wants to take that on?

Soon the poles adopted a law prohibiting the noble status for the Orthodox population of the Commonwealth.

And then there was the Treaty of Hadiach whose specific features included:
- admission to the Senate of Orthodox ecclesiastic members:….

funny joke

“In 1673, the Orthodox of the Commonwealth were prohibited from acquiring noble status. In 1717 and 1733, religious dissenters (i.e Orthodox) were banned from participating in Diets … In 1699 Orthodox burghers were prohibited from holding council offices in the royal towns…. Among the major factors that contributed to the Polonization of the Ruthenian elites was the decline in the use of the Ruthenian language. In 1696, when the Commonwealth Diet adopted a resolution making the use of Polish obligatory in jurisprudence and administration.. Thus the equalization of noble rights in the Commonwealth went hand in hand with linguistic and cultural Polonization…” etc., etc.

S. M. Plokhy , “The Origins of the Slavic Nations: Premodern Identities in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus”

But the Orthodox in the Commonwealth were allowed to be swineherds (in the estates of the Polish landlords), and absolutely free talk with the pigs in their Ruthenians language. However the poles began to think, not too great favour on their part to Orthodox?

“Accordingto the plan, Jews were to be employed to undermine the economic status of Ruthenian burghers,whileTatars were to be used against the populace of Right-BankUkraine, Podilia,and Volhynia if it rose in defense of its faith. The devastated lands would then be settled by migrants from Poland”

But of course Treaty of Hadiach guaranteed full freedom and equality, Jeremiah Vishnevetskii was a Ruthenian patriot, and Auschwitz was a resort.

Urban Ukrainians, yes. Overall, it was about half prior to Crimea and Donbas leaving and certainly less than half now.

Here is a massive study from when Ukraine still included Crimea and Donbas:

http://www.kiis.com.ua/materials/articles_HVE/16_linguaethnical.pdf

Page 5. 40.5% Ukrainian, 43.1% Russian, the rest use both equally and have no preference.

“down to around 4 million”

Wow, how proud you are of eliminating the evil ‘Russians’. Very Western, you might get some brownie points.

Russians eliminated the ones in Crimea from Ukraine, and the ones in Donbas eliminated themselves with Russian help.

Now for reality: Russian speakers are still almost one half of Ukraine.

They were about half prior to recent events. They are now certainly less than half. The Russian-speakers in Kiev are mostly pro-West, Ukrainian nationalists.

People who think of themselves as Russian (ethnically) were 17% in the last census.

That was when Ukraine included Crimea and Donbas. Now they are probably around 9%. That’s about the same as the Hungarian percentage of Slovakia.

Why would 17% still be there now that Crimea and Donbas are gone?

Ukraine also lost a few million Ukrainians who emigrated to Poland (EU) and also to Russia.

And many Russians also moved to Russia. AFAIK there is no evidence suggesting that ethnic Ukrainians have left Ukraine at a higher rate than have ethnic Russians.

Your extreme exaggeration of the Russian presence in Ukraine is noted.

Soon the poles adopted a law prohibiting the noble status for the Orthodox population of the Commonwealth.

And then there was the Treaty of Hadiach whose specific features included:

- admission to the Senate of Orthodox ecclesiastic members: the Archbishop (metropolitan) of Kiev and other Orthodox bishops (of Lutsk, Lviv, Przemyśl, Chełm and Mstislav) and elevation of the Orthodox religion and Church to the same level as Catholicism.

- ennoblement of Cossack elders (starshyna kozatska). Each year the hetman would recommend to the king 1,000 Cossacks to receive a patent of hereditary nobility, and up to 100 Cossacks in each military regiment could be personally ennobled as well.

Enjoyed reading your comments – thinking out of the box – I like it.

One point; that Ayoub Kara guy is Druze – they have a different status in Israel since they are Arab, but are not Muslim.

It’ll be very interesting how these trends play out in the next few decades. My guess is that, due to the issues that the normal people in Europe are seeing due to the influx of refugees (and sometimes invaders) from the ME is that Europe is going to start; 1) closing up borders and 2) politically trying to stop the US from doing any more meddling in the ME for which they have to pay they most obvious price. Less broken countries = less refugees = less sympathy for rule-breakers with respect to borders.

Peace.

What I meant about the Greens is that they have been coopted and used. I think the sentiment behind them was – and is – real. But they got behind-the-scenes support as a useful chess piece in the changing political landscape.

Christian Lindner could work. A perfect ‘Macron-like’ candidate needs to have some controversy in his/her past. So people can project their hopes. I don’t know anything about him, so he might be unusable. German establishment needs a new story, new face, they will find somebody.

Half?? Don’t most Ukrainians speak Russian?

down to around 4 million

Wow, how proud you are of eliminating the evil ‘Russians’. Very Western, you might get some brownie points.

Now for reality: Russian speakers are still almost one half of Ukraine. People who think of themselves as Russian (ethnically) were 17% in the last census. You can dream, but they are still there. Ukraine also lost a few million Ukrainians who emigrated to Poland (EU) and also to Russia.

I care more about the attitudes of Polish elites

Not just Polish, but ‘elites’, good one. Maybe you can start another bloody (and suicidial invasion to the east). Or just merge with Western Ukraine and get them into EU that way. I don’t think Brussels would approve – they would lose the ability to fight the ‘Russkies’. And it is still Brussels that calls the shots.

“Natives rebels largely got rid of serfdom on their own.”

Natives rebels largely got rid of serfdom, and the Moscow Tsar, this state of Affairs legalized

Moscow didn’t care about serfs, Moscow brought rebels under its protection. Had Moscow in 1656 insisted on Catherine II’s conditions there would have been no Rebel-Moscow treaty.

The fate of Khmelnytskyi you know. He became a rebel, after the murder of his the son by poles.
for such as Khmel’nytskyi choice was – revolt or disappear

As szopen pointed out, you never heard of Adam Kisiel?

If not for Poles, Khmelytsky would have stayed in Turkish captivity. Polish king ransomed him out. His son was not murdered, but beaten. Khmelnytsky was driven off his land by a Polish magnate who could defy the Polish king (who was friendly towards Khmelnytsky).

“Moreover, you do not seem to have a realistic view of Russian rule. Ukraine ruled itself until 1709″

You see, by your logic, Russian rule brought unprecedented benefits to Ukraine .

Russian protection brought temporary benefits but long-term disaster. Russians now are arguing for Ukrainians to try again. No thanks.

“Khmelnytsky was a swineherd? Or a Catholic Pole? I had no idea.”

Without Moscow Khmelnitsky would be a dead rebel (maybe exile in Turkey).
But his descendants would be swineherds or poles

The problem is that there were plenty of Orthodox Ruthenians who did not rebel, and whose descendants would not have been swineherds or Poles.

The position is understandable, but in your case it is absolutely incredible doublethink.

Nonsense. It is very consistent.

You, and only you have argued that in the case of the princes Vyshnevetsky a complete change of religion, language, culture, and active voluntary participation in the extermination of former compatriots, means absolutely nothing, and brought no harm to Ukraine. But the fact that Gogol wrote in Russian (about Ukraine) «as a cultural figure/writer he was obviously lost to Ukraine».

Here we see where Russian nationalist and Ukrainian nationalist mythmakers agree on something.

Vyshnevetsky stayed in Ukraine and invested heavily into it, financially supporting various Orthodox monasteries and the famous Kiev Orthodox Academy. He also kept the place peaceful and safe from Tatar raids. The lands that Vyshnyvetsky had developed and protected were the heartland of Ukrainian culture. He was forced by the rebels out of his homeland.

The rebels whom he tried to exterminate sacked many of the monasteries and brought into Ukraine their Tatar allies, who killed and enslaved 10,000s of Ukrainians.

Gogol, in contrast to Vyshnevetsky, voluntarily left Ukraine and did nothing for it.

As for language, the rebel officers were as Polish-speaking as Vyshnevetsky. Polish was the language of command for the rebels. Their books were printed in Polish, their elites studied at Orthodox schools that used Polish and Latin. Vyshenyvetsky’s personal conversion to Roman Catholicism, not his language set him apart from the rebel leaders. But his consistent declaration of himself as a Rus and his lavish support for Orthodox institutions tells us it was not a “national” conversion.

The alternative however was the conversation in pure Ukrainian language with pigs Polish landlord

Is a Polish-speaking elite worse than a Russian-speaking elite?

What likely would have happened is what did eventually happen – in the 19th century the non-Ukrainian speaking elite would adopt the peasant vernacular speech and standardize it. This is what Russian and Polish speakers did under the tsars, there is no reason to think it would not have happened within the Commonwealth. Indeed a similar process occurred with German-speaking elites or Swedish-speaking elites elsewhere in Europe. However under Russia this movement was crushed and stifled.

In contrast, the Ukrainian locals would have been in a much stronger position had they been part of the Commonwealth because Poland is not nearly as large and strong relative to Ukraine as Russia is. So despite the short-term “benefit” of Russian protection (no rebellion at all would have been preferable), in the long run it was a complete disaster for Ukraine. There is a parallel here to seeking short-term benefit by integrating with Russia.

So Russian rule meant – expansion and harshening of serfdom, and brain drain of talented Ukrainians from Ukraine and to Russia.

this is pure “orwellisation” of history.

Facts – serfdom expanded and became harsher as Russian rule replaced Ukrainian autonomy. Under Russia talented Ukrainians left for Russia, benefiting Russia and harming Ukraine. Nothing Orwellian about these correct statements.

What would a German ‘Macron’ be like?

Maybe Christian Lindner from the liberal FDP would like to be that. I don’t think he’d get the support of German media though which generally is rather anti-FDP and criticised him for breaking off coalition talks with CDU/CSU and Greens.
And I wouldn’t even say the Greens are “fake”…unfortunately they really do represent a certain milieu in the German bourgeoisie, one which has disproportionate influence in the media.

Greens look like one of the first (successful) attempts to create a fake ‘new’ political force to use when needed. Now there is an avalanche of these ‘new’ forces that are formed from nowhere, funded, given a mission, and then often self-destruct.

Political engineering at its best :)… West seems to be heading from a two-party monopoly (tweedledee-tweedledum) to a more chaotic way of controlling the society by a constant churn, fake ‘newness’ and deception. We will see a lot of ‘Macrons’ in the near future, ‘Pirate’ parties, etc… – they are probably testing a few right now. The key is to confuse the voters and to ‘adopt’ some of the issues without any intention to change anything. What would a German ‘Macron’ be like?

Have you ever heard about senator Kisiel, orthodox and RUthenian

Who was the last of the Mohicans. Soon the poles adopted a law prohibiting the noble status. for the Orthodox population of the Commonwealth. But the Orthodox could be swineherds (although especially patriotic poles discussed plans for the complete destruction of the Orthodox population)

And only if Ukraine resolves its huge issues with their Russian population (tens of millions).

In 2001 Ukraine had 8.3 million Russians. With population decline and the loss of Crimea and urban Donbas this is probably down to around 4 million…not “tens of millions.”

That love is almost totally one-sided and unrequited, nobody in the West cares much. They don’t want Ukrainian goods, migrants, and problems

I care more about the attitudes of Polish elites than of Brussels elites. And they are different.

Nations consist of individuals.

Individuals who are completely replaced over time.

And who were raised by their predecessors and who share their predecessors’ culture and assumptions. They are not blank slates.

My approach is to recognize that the “us” in question is literally not the same “us” which existed in 1930 or the 18th century. It’s irrational to profile a nation based on events from many decades or centuries ago, as though this were the same as profiling a particular person based on their own past actions. And being guided by an irrational premise, is a good way to produce a self-destructive disaster like Maidan.

People actually living in Ukraine, who know more about the results of Maidan than you do, do not consider it a “disaster” and do not wish Yanukovich was back or that Ukraine would reverse course and once again pursue integration with Russia.

Have you ever heard about senator Kisiel, orthodox and RUthenian, who tried talk reason with Chmielnicki?
Or, for taht matter, have you heard about Hadziacz union?

Merkel and her ilk DO value the opinions, pretensions and sensitivities of Euro-liberal intellectuals and activists much more than those of normal people

True. But I still struggle with it because it is so politically counter-intuitive. There is a difference in the voters’ common-sense quotient between Eastern Europe, and the West (roughly speaking).

We also have the pretentious Euro-global-liberals in East-Central Europe. All capitols and large cities are dominated by them. So are the media, culture, academia, etc… But the bulk of the population maintains a very healthy skepticism about them. They cannot win elections and they are kept in a box (TV shows, seminars, Oscar-seeking movies,…). The liberals maintain influence purely with Western money, NGO’s, and by extensive ‘gaming’ of the system: endless ‘new faces’ (ala Macron) and ‘reform parties’, betrayals after getting elected, ‘anti-corruption’ movements. Without support from the West the liberals here would collapse to a small discussion group occasionally meeting for coffee. It is the Western money that keeps them alive.

How did the West descend to the level of liberal intellectual elites having such undue influence?
Something in the Western psyche itself broke, your inability to see one’s self-interest clearly. The decades of pro-liberal heavy propaganda (and Hollywood) was more effective – and more harmful – than the clueless communist propaganda.

Well, good luck. Or you might have to move.

Nothing jeopardised her popularity more than the infamous million-migrant trek.

She was lauded enthusiastically by the German media for it, also by the churches, and many left-wing celebrities have stated their admiration for her “courage”. The entire establishment is behind her. It also brought her closer to the Greens, and a CDU-Greens alliance has long been a goal of Merkel…influential members of her coterie like Peter Altmaier have been working towards that since the 1990s.
Yeah sure, she’s also hated by a non-trivial part of the German population like no other chancellor since 1949. But as long as the media and the political class support her (and so far they’ve done so to a shocking extent, despite severe losses for the CDU in several elections), that doesn’t matter. Merkel has been in politics for 30 years, she never lived in the federal republic as a normal citizen, the concerns of average people aren’t important to her.

I said “the masses of CUCKED Euro-liberal intellectuals, activists, and ordinary voters (including voting non-European minorities already in Germany, such as the Turks)” – not the un-cucked majority of voters who, as normal people, were and are against the migrant invasion. “CUCKED” is the operative word here.

“If you assume that Merkel and CDU are only concerned with Euro-liberal intellectuals, we have a bigger problem.”

I certainly think that Merkel and her ilk DO value the opinions, pretensions and sensitivities of Euro-liberal intellectuals and activists much more than those of normal people who don’t subscribe to the Euro-liberal worldview – and that is a huge part of the problem.

Ukraine has decent chance

Yes, in about 50-75 years. And only if Ukraine resolves its huge issues with their Russian population (tens of millions). And does it peacefully.

You are a ‘Ukrainian’, and as many Western leaning Ukrainians you are in love with the West, EU, Nato, anything coming from the West. That love is almost totally one-sided and unrequited, nobody in the West cares much. They don’t want Ukrainian goods, migrants, and problems. Some crazies in the West want to use Ukraine as a tool against Russia. That’s it, a tool, and object to use – nothing at all about Ukrainian well-being. Watch what they do, not what they say. Unrequited passions tend to end badly.

The Brussels intellectual elite doesn’t want more conservatives in EU, they dread it. They want Ukrainians to fight the Russians for them. Brussels is still totally in charge in EU, so they will get what they want.

1. Maintaining herself and her party in power, for which one of the requirements is preventing the formation of widespread opposition to her in both Germany AND the EU by the masses of cucked Euro-liberal intellectuals

The best way for 1) in 2015 was to stay firm and follow the ‘refugee’ laws. In other words, do exactly the opposite of what Merkel did. Nothing jeopardised her popularity more than the infamous million-migrant trek. It was a political disaster for CDU and Merkel. They might not recover for a generation.

Point 2) (neoliberal globalist interests) is directly opposed to this and because of 3) (US Interests), Merkel and CDU abandoned goal 1). That tells us a lot. People arguing that it is all about ‘staying in power’ overlook the fact that by far the best way to stay in power would be to do what majority of their voters want. Merkel did the opposite, so there are other motivations.

I define 1) as ‘pleasing voters’, I think it is a heart of any democracy, nothing negative. If you assume that Merkel and CDU are only concerned with Euro-liberal intellectuals, we have a bigger problem. The fact that 1) has become clearly a secondary goal in the West tells us a lot.

Beckow, on your skepticism regarding automation, it is useful to keep two things in mind. First, technological changes happen in S-curves, and not in linear fashion. Something becomes expensive for a long time and then gradual change occurs. As this very gradual change happens, people who think in linear terms simply extrapolate from that trend onwards to the future. Look at the mass adoption of smartphones or for that matter the massive plunge in solar energy costs. Both were unforseen to happen as quickly as they did. Now we will see a similar S-curve with EV adoption.

Look at the situation even 5 years ago. AI has improved massively. 10 years ago, people were saying that quantum computers – real ones – wouldn’t happen before 2050, if even that. Now it is mainstream to say it will happen within 5 years. Google will come out with their own very shortly. A huge number of breakthroughs have happened in the quantum computing space. Go to arkivx.com and look for yourself.

So in short, it is the skeptics who have the burden of proof given how technology has again and again surprised to the upside in how quickly it changes. Why would AI/quantum computing be different? As for jobs, I think most service jobs will either be heavily automated/heavily enchanced or outright replaced. It’s not just low-level jobs. In fact, some of the jobs that could be replaced are doctors. An AI, paired with a modern smartphone, can already outperform the median doctor in various diagnoses. Imagine what it’ll be like even within 10 years, not to say 15 or 20. Some jobs, like hairdresser and the like will also get automated. Only the very best (the trendsetters) will remain, the rest of us don’t care if we’re cut by a human or a robot. Driving will be automated. A lot of routine jobs will as hell. Amazon is already experimenting with cashier-free shops. They have sensors which register what you pick up and with you in a shop and automatically charge you for it once you leave the shop. It’s on trial in a store in Seattle as I write this. I could go on endlessly. As I said, it’s the skeptics who are behind the curve not the other way around. That was true with solar prices/smartphone adoption and it was true with EVs just a few years ago. Now AI. The reactionary mind is always dull and slow.

As for your point on EU migration. Look at this chart:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_average_wage#Maps

Poland and EE is not going to converge any time soon. By the time we get to an eventual convergence, say 2040s at the earliest, the question then would be if there is need for an EU at all. Remember that much of WE’s sway/power over EE lies in economic factors. Once that is removed, what pressure do they have left? I already mentioned that EU funds will be cut in 2020. Even if they weren’t, as a percentage of GDP they have continually declined from the first cohesion fund program until the current one. That will continue regardless.

Plus, you’re making the mistake of assuming static political preferences. Le Pen won French (ethnic) youth in the 2nd round. AfD, while a party with many problems of muh civic nationalism, is nevertheless a step in the right direction. SD will have their best election-showing yet next year in Sweden. More radical forms of nationalism is also growing. I think a bigger problem for EE would be social instability in the West and significant sectarian strife. That would damage our export markets.

In this case, and serfdom was re-introduced by natives too.

Natives rebels largely got rid of serfdom on their own.

Natives rebels largely got rid of serfdom, and the Moscow Tsar, this state of Affairs legalized
Later, the natives had restored serfdom (in those circumstances it was the only way to develop the economy), and Catherine legalized it

Khmelytsky drove away the Poles in 1648.

And then begged the Tsar to recognize Moscow’s authority over Ukraine. Ie Khmelnytsky considered “independent” victory over Poland impossible.

In this case (without Moscow) would be (instead of Gogol and the like) Polish landlord with their yoke

Unknown. A Swedish alliance would have been possible, a Turkish one, etc.

And the Alliance with France, Britain, Manchu China, Mughal, etc. But the real alternative was the Polish Ukraine, where for potential Gogol and Ostrogradsky was assigned the role of swineherd

Russian peasants from the south but not close to the frontier were just as enserfed as were Polish peasants. Central and southern Ukrainian serfs under Poland were less enserfed than were Russian peasants (or Polish ones and western Ukrainian ones).

This is obviously incorrect statement, as in the Polish Ukraine happened several bloody uprisings under the slogan of the transition under Russian rule.

“None of those people were swineherds or peasants – all were from noble or officer families”
Which appeared due to the destruction of the Polish authorities, and the transition of the left-Bank Ukraine under Russian rule

There were lots of nobles in Ukraine prior to Khmelytsky’s uprising (including, of course, Khmelytsky himself). They did not “appear” due to Moscow’s rule.

The fate of Khmelnytskyi you know. He became a rebel, after the murder of his the son by poles.
for such as Khmel’nytskyi choice was – revolt or disappear

Moreover, you do not seem to have a realistic view of Russian rule. Ukraine ruled itself until 1709

You see, by your logic, Russian rule brought unprecedented benefits to Ukraine . heh heh heh. And if the Ukrainian elite is not pissed away everything so poorly..

Under Polish rule, these people would be swineherds (as an alternative – would become the Catholic poles)

Khmelnytsky was a swineherd? Or a Catholic Pole? I had no idea.

Without Moscow Khmelnitsky would be a dead rebel (maybe exile in Turkey).
But his descendants would be swineherds or poles.

Gogol was a Ukrainian, whose father was a Ukrainian playwright and he as a child is supposed to have written some works in Ukrainian. But he moved to Russia and became a figure in Russian, not Ukrainian literature. As person he was a Ukrainian, but as a cultural figure/writer he was obviously lost to Ukraine, he was a Russian.

The position is understandable, but in your case it is absolutely incredible doublethink. You, and only you have argued that in the case of the princes Vyshnevetsky a complete change of religion, language, culture, and active voluntary participation in the extermination of former compatriots, means absolutely nothing, and brought no harm to Ukraine. But the fact that Gogol wrote in Russian (about Ukraine) «as a cultural figure/writer he was obviously lost to Ukraine». The alternative however was the conversation in pure Ukrainian language with pigs Polish landlord

So Russian rule meant – expansion and harshening of serfdom, and brain drain of talented Ukrainians from Ukraine and to Russia.

Emotional reason in your case is understandable, but this is pure “orwellisation” of history.

Nations consist of individuals.

Individuals who are completely replaced over time.

Your approach is – you got burned twice, but trust us this third time, it’ll really be different. No thanks.

My approach is to recognize that the “us” in question is literally not the same “us” which existed in 1930 or the 18th century. It’s irrational to profile a nation based on events from many decades or centuries ago, as though this were the same as profiling a particular person based on their own past actions. And being guided by an irrational premise, is a good way to produce a self-destructive disaster like Maidan.

Your approach is – you got burned twice, but trust us this third time, it’ll really be different. No thanks.

On the other hand, you also advocate a western integration into a much stronger EU and NATO block. How well did German rule work out in the last century? You are banking on Germany losing its clout quickly, but I think you’re running ahead of time. Germany (and France etc.) will still be strong for the next generation, and their growing problems will only mean they will work frantically to export those problems. Or at least to destroy the eastern countries, too, so that their failure won’t look so bad.

“…Merkel was first anti-migrant and anti-multiculturalism, then fanatically pro-migrant, now a bit less – I am not sure anyone knows what she believes or if she just follows instructions.”

She’s just a weathervane politician whose main – indeed ONLY – interests are: 1. Maintaining herself and her party in power, for which one of the requirements is preventing the formation of widespread opposition to her in both Germany AND the EU by the masses of cucked Euro-liberal intellectuals, activists, and ordinary voters (INCLUDING voting non-European minorities already in Germany, such as the Turks); 2. Looking out for the interests of the German neoliberal capitalist elite class, who are also, of course, mostly globalists; and 3. Keeping the U.S. and Anglo-Zionist hegemons satisfied and “un-angry” by complying with the dictates of the currently prevailing globo-imperial received wisdom, which, of course, precludes following any independent national sovereigntist path in things such as immigration, control of borders, etc.

That’s all there is to it, really.

I think you both said what could be said about Gogol, moreover, you are both in agreement with each other about the facts. It’s not very productive to argue about terminology, i.e. whether Gogol should be considered part of the Ukrainian or Russian literature (or both).

The original point was brain drain. Gogol was an example of someone talented who moved to Russia. Had he married, he’d probably have married a Russian woman. His descendants would be Russians. Had he worked in a more ordinary occupation (like engineering or architecture), his work would have been little benefit to Ukraine. Etc.

So regardless of the concrete example, brain drain did affect Ukraine, talented people did move out of Ukraine to Russia.

Though it’s difficult to imagine how that wouldn’t be the case with any other integration, where Ukraine was bound to be the poor periphery anyway. So it’s an argument against integration in general.

I have a kid in Ukrainians school now. No Gogol.

I attended Saturday Ukrainian school too, and trust me the curriculum was quite abbreviated, and I would imagine it being even more truncated today than when I went. You seem to purposely ignore the curriculum that I’ve cited, where actually two segments deal with Gogol, Section 14 & 15. ‘Ukrainian cultural aspects’ relating to Gogol is a category listed, this is what’s being taught in North America at the college level.

You’re the one who has pointed out that Gogol was actually a Ukrainian. I’m only logically following your lead and pointing out that when Gogol wrote about Ukrainian themes, he should be looked upon as an Ukrainian author, even though he wrote in Russian. I’m not trying to elevate his stature to that of Shevchenko as far as his importance as a Ukrainian writer, but even Shevchenko wrote some books in Russian and it’s well known that he kept his personal diary in Russian, not in Ukrainian.

The curriculum of Ukrainian literature that I’ve already presented was created by a diaspora instructor, Marta Tarnowsky

I have a kid in Ukrainians school now. No Gogol. At least a few years ago, in Ukraine itself Gogol was taught as foreign literature .

N. Berg, a poet and translator, reminisces: “Most of the time Gogol preferred to be all by himself. When at a social gathering, somebody would come over to where he was sitting to ask whether he was writing anything new, he hardly answered anything, pretending he was dozing or staring blindly into nothingness, or he would just get up and leave. But when among the guests there was at least one person from Little Russia (the usual way Ukraine was referred to in Russia — tr.), he behaved quite differently… They seemed to be pulled to each other as if by a magnet; they would sit in a corner and talk all the evening long, passionately and heart-to-heart. I never saw Gogol talk like this to any of the Velikorosy (Great Russians, that is Russians, as opposed to Little Russians, Ukrainians — tr).

We are discussing whether Gogol was a Russian or Ukrainian writer. His literary peers with whom he spent time, whose opinions influenced his works, were Russians as were the principal audience for his work. He seems to be have been unfamiliar with the literary scene in Ukraine (his Ukrainian friends would bring up Shevchenko and Gogol would sort of dismissively opine that things should be written in Russian) His close personal friends were ethnic Ukrainians like himself but his literary colleagues were Russians.

Ukraine and Belarus will be tough to add – the whole Russia-EU issue, let’s not go there. But I wouldn’t count on it.

Ukraine has decent chance. It is probably important for the eastern EU project for Ukraine to be a part of it. It adds a lot of people and territory and its territory is solidly in the conservative camp alongside Poland, Hungary, etc. Belarus would join in the long-term if ever.

Diaspora Ukrainian schools still don’t teach him and still don’t include him as Ukrainian literature.

The curriculum of Ukrainian literature that I’ve already presented was created by a diaspora instructor, Marta Tarnowsky, who teaches in Canada. Grabowych, who heads the Harvard program of Ukrainian literature, is quoted by Ms. Tarnowsky quite extensively.

He wrote in Russian to a Russian audience, and worked in the company of Russian authors, considering himself to be their peer and not a peer of the Ukrainian authors.

Really? And yet:

N. Berg, a poet and translator, reminisces: “Most of the time Gogol preferred to be all by himself. When at a social gathering, somebody would come over to where he was sitting to ask whether he was writing anything new, he hardly answered anything, pretending he was dozing or staring blindly into nothingness, or he would just get up and leave. But when among the guests there was at least one person from Little Russia (the usual way Ukraine was referred to in Russia — tr.), he behaved quite differently… They seemed to be pulled to each other as if by a magnet; they would sit in a corner and talk all the evening long, passionately and heart-to-heart. I never saw Gogol talk like this to any of the Velikorosy (Great Russians, that is Russians, as opposed to Little Russians, Ukrainians — tr).

Add Ukraine and Romania and you get 150+ million

Ukraine and Belarus will be tough to add – the whole Russia-EU issue, let’s not go there. But I wouldn’t count on it.

how politically pro-migrant the EU will be

Yes, we don’t know. But if the 2015-6 migrant trek failed to change the Western EU elite’s view – in many cases they are doubling down, listen to Juncker – I am not sure what would.

Let’s even assume that Poland and its few E European neighbours hold the line on migration. Tough to do over time, but let’s assume Poland, Czech, Slovakia, Hungary stay demographically as they are today. That is roughly 65 million people out of over 500 million in EU. Even with a few other allies (Austria, Croatia, Baltics), they will barely break 100 million or 20% of EU population.

Add Ukraine and Romania and you get 150+ million – Russia’s population.

And they will be surrounded by EU dominated by the migrant-friendly liberals and increasingly the migrants themselves.

We don’t know how politically pro-migrant the EU will be, nor how strong and capable of imposing its will the rest of the EU will be.

English has become Ireland’s native language (perhaps 2% of its population speak Gaelic).

For many Ukrainians, Russian became their native language…

But not for all. There is such a thing as Ukrainian literature. Irish literature, OTOH, is in English.

What Gogol lacked in actual knowledge about Ukraine and its customs first hand, was supplemented through much study and correspondence with his mother

Well, he had to ask his mother a lot of questions, and still got a lot of things wrong, enough for actual Ukrainians in Ukraine in his time to view him as relatively clueless about the country he had left.

“None of his works were included in the curriculum of Ukrainian diaspora schools. In Galicia before the war the Russophiles liked him, the Ukrainian nationalists largely pretended he didn’t exist.”

I have no reason to doubt you, but in the curricula of Ukraine today, and within modern Ukrainian history of literature books, Gogol is given his due.

Diaspora Ukrainian schools still don’t teach him and still don’t include him as Ukrainian literature.

Ukrainian literature isn’t simply – something written by a Ukrainian. Even if that something has Ukrainian themes.

Here is Britannica about Ukrainian literature:

https://www.britannica.com/art/Ukrainian-literature

Gogol isn’t mentioned.

Encyclopedia of Ukraine mentions Gogol very briefly:

http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CL%5CI%5CLiterature.htm

Most of the authors of the period also wrote in Russian; some did so exclusively and thus belong to Russian literature. The famous Nikolai Gogol is a prime example.

Gogol did not live in Ukraine, he did not belong to any Ukrainian literary school or join any Ukrainian literary circles. He wrote in Russian to a Russian audience, and worked in the company of Russian authors, considering himself to be their peer and not a peer of the Ukrainian authors. He was an ethnic Ukrainian and, especially in the beginning drew on his experiences growing up in Ukraine (including some elements from traditional Ukrainian theater he had been exposed to), but his was not Ukrainian literature and thus he was not a Ukrainian writer (except if Ukrainian is used strictly as a description of his ethnicity).

I wish I could be as optimistic as you. By the way, Merkel was first anti-migrant and anti-multiculturalism, then fanatically pro-migrant, now a bit less – I am not sure anyone knows what she believes or if she just follows instructions.

Let’s even assume that Poland and its few E European neighbours hold the line on migration. Tough to do over time, but let’s assume Poland, Czech, Slovakia, Hungary stay demographically as they are today. That is roughly 65 million people out of over 500 million in EU. Even with a few other allies (Austria, Croatia, Baltics), they will barely break 100 million or 20% of EU population. About the same as the Third World migrants in EU. And they will be surrounded by EU dominated by the migrant-friendly liberals and increasingly the migrants themselves. This is not a prescription for success. More likely, it is prescription for marginalisation and eventual surrender. Defense is not enough, it just delays the inevitable.

An old wisdom says that oasis never spreads, desert does. My humble view is that to save the Visegrad countries in the long run, and EU itself, the EU must change and take drastic actions to prevent all of EU (not just the east) from being over-run by Third World migration. Are they capable of it?

English has become Ireland’s native language (perhaps 2% of its population speak Gaelic).

For many Ukrainians, Russian became their native language…

Oleksa Storozhenko, was adamant in describing Gogol as a Russian, not Ukrainian writer, and furthermore claimed that Gogol’s descriptions of Ukraine were full of mistakes and betrayed the lack of knowledge about the country, as one would expect of someone who left young and never turned back.

What Gogol lacked in actual knowledge about Ukraine and its customs first hand, was supplemented through much study and correspondence with his mother:

Gogol began working on his Evenings as early as in 1829 when he barely turned 20. In his letters home he was pleading with his mother to tell him about “the Ukrainian customs, traditions, tales and folk wisdom at the grassroots level,” to describe the attire of a rural deacon, a wedding rite, exciting jokes… It took him three years to complete on the novel, which was finished in 1832;

Sure, there were some inaccuracies in the book, but it wasn’t meant to be an encyclopedic expose about the customs and mores of Ukrainian peasants, but an artistic rendition well within the confines of writing a novel.

None of his works were included in the curriculum of Ukrainian diaspora schools. In Galicia before the war the Russophiles liked him, the Ukrainian nationalists largely pretended he didn’t exist.

I have no reason to doubt you, but in the curricula of Ukraine today, and within modern Ukrainian history of literature books, Gogol is given his due. I couldn’t locate my own copy of Czyzhevky’s ‘A History of Ukrainian Literature’ (a classic on the subject!), but strongly believe that a good amount of space is given to Gogol within this resource book. Czyzhevky, after all wrote quite a bit about Gogol. Here’s the type of modern curriculum that is taught throughout the world today, that devotes a whole section to Gogol, Lecture 14: https://portal.utoronto.ca/bbcswebdav/users/tarnawsk/PDF%20Files/218-Lecture-notes.pdf

Sure. A lot of people liked that old movie starring Yul Brynner. But having incidental Ukrainian fans doesn’t place his career into Ukrainian literature.

I clearly indicated that I was moved by the English transliteration of the book ‘Taras Bulba’ not the film version. Aren’t you stretching it here a bit to try and make your point?:-)

Perhaps not, but wouldn’t “Germany” and “France” — by then countries populated mostly by young Arab and African Muslims — be facing a dwindling, aging, and aged Polish / Austrian / Hungarian / Ukrainian / Belarussian population?

If Poles, Hungarians, etc., don’t start having children again, they will not be safe or strong countries under any likely scenario.

Poland isn’t always going to have a government as nationalistic as the one it has now, and the West could potentially be much tougher on Poland than it is now.

Maybe, though Polish youth are more nationalistic than their elders so if the pendulum swings it won’t swing far.

EU itself is becoming more nationalistic, as evidenced by Austria’s election and even Merkel’s softening on her extreme pro-immigration stance.

“As forensic specialists will tell you – the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.”

That applies to individual personalities, but becomes increasingly invalid over time when applied to groups whose membership is completely replaced over time, such as nations or their governments.

Nations consist of individuals. Your approach is – you got burned twice, but trust us this third time, it’ll really be different. No thanks.

The point that I was trying to make, is that there were a number of Irish writers, who lived within and outside of Ireland, who chose to write in English about life in both Ireland and England, and who remain within the Irish oeuvre of literature

1. English has become Ireland’s native language (perhaps 2% of its population speak Gaelic).
2. An Irishman who moved to England, spends his life there,is part of London’s literary scene and doesn’t ever hang out with other Irish writers, isn’t a part of Irish literature.

Gogol’s works that depict life in Ukraine are of course safe fare for scholars of Ukrainian literature, just google in his name and see the vast amounts of studies of his works written by Ukrainian scholars.

A recent phenomenon. Gogol’s childhood friend, the Ukrainian writer Oleksa Storozhenko, was adamant in describing Gogol as a Russian, not Ukrainian writer, and furthermore claimed that Gogol’s descriptions of Ukraine were full of mistakes and betrayed the lack of knowledge about the country, as one would expect of someone who left young and never turned back. This was the traditional consensus view among Ukrainians. None of his works were included in the curriculum of Ukrainian diaspora schools. In Galicia before the war the Russophiles liked him, the Ukrainian nationalists largely pretended he didn’t exist. As I had written the feelings were mutual – Gogol never spent time with other Ukrainian writers, never bothering to see Shevchenko when the latter was in St. Petersburg. He wrote for a Russian audience, his literary contacts were all Russians, etc. He gave them the Romanticized Ukraine that they liked and which was fashionable in St. Petersburg.

As a personal note, as a teenager I had the great pleasure of reading ‘Taras Bulba’ transcribed into the English language, and was intensely moved by its patriotic fervor towards the Ukrainian cause.

Sure. A lot of people liked that old movie starring Yul Brynner. But having incidental Ukrainian fans doesn’t place his career into Ukrainian literature.

that´s it. If you want the white man to respect you, you have to beat him. Antiracist only love violent minorities.

These are just projections and much more likely is the decline of the eu and its out of touch elites and media, We are already seeing the beginnings of new blocs looking at trade and alternatives such as the V4 and the 16+1 ( Central & Eastern Europe and China ) and the inevitable rise of nationalist or nationalist inspired parties and leaders alk over Europe as silent majorities begin rejecting msm/politics. Eastern Europe is home to ethnically aware populations and political elites that a determined not to swap rule by one foreign body to another ( ussr to eu ) and these trends are underway in Western Europe too. And regards Russia and it’s Muslim population, the Muslim share of births has remained basically the same for a decade whilst the European share has increased thanks to pro Natalist policies along with the continued fight against abortion ( both are increasingly being used in the rest of Eastern Europe ) alongside increased life expectancy and reduced mortality rates. So let’s exercise some caution and use common sense and look at what governments and political bodies are actually doing in the real world.

The point that I was trying to make, is that there were a number of Irish writers, who lived within and outside of Ireland, who chose to write in English about life in both Ireland and England, and who remain within the Irish oeuvre of literature. Gogol’s works that depict life in Ukraine are of course safe fare for scholars of Ukrainian literature, just google in his name and see the vast amounts of studies of his works written by Ukrainian scholars. There always seems to be a place for his name in general histories of Ukrainian literature. As a personal note, as a teenager I had the great pleasure of reading
‘Taras Bulba’ transcribed into the English language, and was intensely moved by its patriotic fervor towards the Ukrainian cause. Throughout my 20′s, I must have reread this classic book 5-6 times and still consider it to be a masterpiece, and as I’ve already pointed out, Gogol himself considered this novel to be his own favorite, one that he kept rewriting throughout most of his life…

Poland all by itself seems to be doing finer standing up to the West.

Poland isn’t always going to have a government as nationalistic as the one it has now, and the West could potentially be much tougher on Poland than it is now.

As forensic specialists will tell you – the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

That applies to individual personalities, but becomes increasingly invalid over time when applied to groups whose membership is completely replaced over time, such as nations or their governments.

because, Hindus in the western countries, never do terrorism, create no-go zones or create street crime ;

think that a perfectly good analogy could be made between a Ukrainian writer like Gogol to similarly great Irish writers like Bernard Shaw and James Joyce

An analogy would be Robert Stevenson and Walter Scott. These two are the exact analogue of Gogol.

Yes, some of his (Russian language) works, written for a primarily Russian audience in St. Petersburg, were set in Ukraine. But was he active in Ukraine, was he involved with other Ukrainian writers , was Ukrainian literature indebted to him? Gogol never even bothered to meet Shevchenko, when Shevchenko was in St. Petersburg. Gogol belonged to Russian literature.

I think that a perfectly good analogy could be made between a Ukrainian writer like Gogol to similarly great Irish writers like Bernard Shaw and James Joyce, to name just a few.

Shaw was from an ethnic English (and Protestant) family, born in Dublin and he moved to London at age 20. He could perhaps be compared to Kiev-born Bulgakov.

Joyce was Irish, left in his twenties but moved around and always wrote about Ireland. He wasn’t a French or Swiss writer.

Gogol left Ukraine at age 19, wrote in Russian after doing so, was part of the Russian literary scene, was an influence on Russian literature, etc. His analogue would be someone like Joseph Conrad – the Pole who was an English writer, wrote only in English, and was an influence on English literature while playing no role in Polish literature. Or Nabakov, had Nabakov not written anything in Russian after his school years and had immediately started writing all of his major works in English, after leaving Russia.

The real danger for Poland (and Visegrad countries) is the slow movement of some of the 60 million Third World immigrants already in Western Europe east. They have a full right to do it today. They can establish ethnic beach-heads in big cities and continue bringing their relatives from EU and from outside of EU. This is exactly how it happened in UK, France, …

Difficult language doesn’t protect you – there will be communities in large cities that will speak their native languages, or English-French. That is perfectly feasible. Why would they care about becoming citizens? As EU citizens they can live anywhere they want to inside EU.

You are too wide-eyed optimistic on automation. Many jobs cannot be automated, and greedy business people will always bring cheaper labor to do service jobs, restaurants, hotels, or IT, or call centers, etc…

EU has free movement of people. That is great as long as the current Third World dwellers in WE don’t decide that moving east is actually quite profitable. And there is nothing Poland can legally do to stop them. Once they are there, many others directly from Third World countries will be able to come via family reunification, fake ‘kabob’ jobs, student visas, or just as visitors overstaying their visas. Exactly the same process as UK in 90′s or 2000′s.

As a cultural figure, he was lost to Ukraine.

I would disagree with you here. I don’t know if you read the article that I cited, but it makes a very strong case that even though Gogol wrote in the literary language of the Empire he found himself living within, he was an important writer for both Ukraine and Russia, that had both a Ukrainian and a Russian soul. His ‘Taras Bulba’, ‘Dikanka’and ‘Mirhorod’ certainly attest to his Ukrainian soul.

I think that a perfectly good analogy could be made between a Ukrainian writer like Gogol to similarly great Irish writers like Bernard Shaw and James Joyce, to name just a few. No one would say that these Irish writers, who often wrote about British (English) topics in the English language, were ‘lost as cultural figures’ to the Irish nation.

You are correct. He was a Ukrainian, not a Russian and indeed felt ambivalently towards Russians as many foreigners do towards places they have moved to. Later Russian mythmakers made him as some sort of a hardcore Russian nationalist, but some Russian contemporary critics saw in Dead Souls, a foreigner’s contemptuous sneer.

But he wrote in Russian, lived in Russia, and found a place in Russian, not Ukrainian, literature. As a cultural figure, he was lost to Ukraine.

‘Typically Finish’, no doubt.

It sounds so nice, they had to say it thrice …

Muslim countries don’t connect much to their pre-Muslim past. If we converted, we’d automatically lost all connection to our past.

You are right about this. But small numbers of converts, numbers similar to the converts to Wicca or Buddhism, would not be a problem.

Even though he wrote in a somewhat strange form of Russian (not altogether highbrow style), many of his works dealt with Ukrainian themes, and he himself considered ‘Taras’Bulba’ as his most important work. He never really felt altogether ‘Russian’, and often felt repulsed by their lack of culture and often resorted to sarcasm when describing their crude manners:

“

Let’s get the hell out of this Katsapiya (Ukrainian derogatory term for Russia — tr.) and go back to Kyiv… Who are we working for here?”

Naturally, we [Gogol and Mickiewicz] talked mostly about the Moskals (Moskal — derogatory term for a Russian — tr.), toward whom both we and he had animosity. Over and over again we kept returning to the discussion of their having been greatly influenced by the Finns and their culture. Gogol, with all the passion of a Little Russian, insisted that the Finnish impact had been very considerable, and quoted [to substantiate his arguments] from collections of folk songs in several Slavic tongues, of which he had quite a few with him. He wrote a brilliant essay about the Finnish impact on Moskal culture and read this essay to us. He argued that the spirit, customs and morality of the Moskals were strikingly different from the rest of the Slavonic brethren, quoting from the Czech, Serbian, Ukrainian and other Slavic songs, and making comparisons. For every human feeling there was a song — our, Slavic songs were gentle and soft, while the Moscow songs were wild, gloomy, even cannibalistic at times — in other words, typically Finnish.

http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20033/52

Even though he wrote in a somewhat strange from of Russian (not altogether highbrow style), many of his works dealt with Ukrainian themes, and he himelf considered ‘Taras’Bulba’ as his most important work. He never really felt aotogether ‘Russian’, and often felt repulsed by their lack of culture and often resorted to sarcasm when decribing their crude manners:

“

Let’s get the hell out of this Katsapiya (Ukrainian derogatory term for Russia — tr.) and go back to Kyiv… Who are we working for here?”

Naturally, we [Gogol and Mickiewicz] talked mostly about the Moskals (Moskal — derogatory term for a Russian — tr.), toward whom both we and he had animosity. Over and over again we kept returning to the discussion of their having been greatly influenced by the Finns and their culture. Gogol, with all the passion of a Little Russian, insisted that the Finnish impact had been very considerable, and quoted [to substantiate his arguments] from collections of folk songs in several Slavic tongues, of which he had quite a few with him. He wrote a brilliant essay about the Finnish impact on Moskal culture and read this essay to us. He argued that the spirit, customs and morality of the Moskals were strikingly different from the rest of the Slavonic brethren, quoting from the Czech, Serbian, Ukrainian and other Slavic songs, and making comparisons. For every human feeling there was a song — our, Slavic songs were gentle and soft, while the Moscow songs were wild, gloomy, even cannibalistic at times — in other words, typically Finnish.

http://www.wumag.kiev.ua/index2.php?param=pgs20033/52

By “the breeders” you mean normal people who have their own children?

Serfdom in Left-Bank Ukraine was destroyed as a result of the native rebellion

In this case, and serfdom was re-introduced by natives too.

Nonsense.

Natives rebels largely got rid of serfdom on their own. Khmelytsky drove away the Poles in 1648.
Moscow stepped in a few years later (1654), after serfdom was already largely destroyed.

Moscow itself reimposed serfdom, native elites just collaborated, accepting loss of autonomy in exchange for harsher serfdom.

So – reducing serfdom – native initiative. Reimposing it – Moscow thing.

“Good that you admit that under Russian rule serfdom got much worse than it would have been had Ukrainian landlords not had Moscow’s power to back them up vis a vis their peasants.”

In this case (without Moscow) would be (instead of Gogol and the like) Polish landlord with their yoke

Unknown. A Swedish alliance would have been possible, a Turkish one, etc.

“In an earlier discussion you conceded that under similar climate and social conditions Russian and Polish serfdoms were about the same.”

But “social conditions” were different. In particular, in Russia the peasants had been protected from the excessive oppression by huge number of religious holidays

Russian peasants from the south but not close to the frontier were just as enserfed as were Polish peasants. Central and southern Ukrainian serfs under Poland were less enserfed than were Russian peasants (or Polish ones and western Ukrainian ones).

“None of those people were swineherds or peasants – all were from noble or officer families”

Which appeared due to the destruction of the Polish authorities, and the transition of the left-Bank Ukraine under Russian rule

There were lots of nobles in Ukraine prior to Khmelytsky’s uprising (including, of course, Khmelytsky himself). They did not “appear” due to Moscow’s rule.

Moreover, you do not seem to have a realistic view of Russian rule. Ukraine ruled itself until 1709, Moscow was largely a protector; after Poltava Ukraine’s autonomy was gradually getting abolished.

Under Polish rule, these people would be swineherds (as an alternative – would become the Catholic poles)

Khmelnytsky was a swineherd? Or a Catholic Pole? I had no idea.

“Russia’s gain was Ukraine’s loss”

And how (in the three mentioned cases – for Gogol, Berezovsky and Bortniansky)? Please decide.
If Gogol Ukrainian writer – what’s the difference where he wrote his books? If Gogol because of the move to Petersburg was transformed into Russian (from Ukrainian), then you should not call Gogol a Ukrainian writer (which you repeatedly do)

Educated talented Ukrainians left Ukraine and moved to Russia, contributing to Russia’s civilization and culture and leaving behind their own. That’s the brain drain that occurred under Moscow’s rule.

Gogol was a Ukrainian, whose father was a Ukrainian playwright and he as a child is supposed to have written some works in Ukrainian. But he moved to Russia and became a figure in Russian, not Ukrainian literature. As person he was a Ukrainian, but as a cultural figure/writer he was obviously lost to Ukraine, he was a Russian. Russia’s gain, Ukraine’s loss.

So Russian rule meant – expansion and harshening of serfdom, and brain drain of talented Ukrainians from Ukraine and to Russia.

Serfdom in Left-Bank Ukraine was destroyed as a result of the native rebellion

In this case, and serfdom was re-introduced by natives too.

Good that you admit that under Russian rule serfdom got much worse than it would have been had Ukrainian landlords not had Moscow’s power to back them up vis a vis their peasants.

In this case (without Moscow) would be (instead of Gogol and the like) Polish lanlord with their yoke

In an earlier discussion you conceded that under similar climate and social conditions Russian and Polish serfdoms were about the same.

But “social conditions” were different. In particular, in Russia the peasants had been protected from the excessive oppression by huge number of religious holidays.

None of those people were swineherds or peasants – all were from noble or officer families

Which appeared due to the destruction of the Polish authorities, and the transition of the left-Bank Ukraine under Russian rule. Under Polish rule, these people would be swineherds (as an alternative – would become the Catholic poles)

Russia’s gain was Ukraine’s loss

And how (in the three mentioned cases – for Gogol, Berezovsky and Bortniansky)? Please decide.
If Gogol Ukrainian writer – what’s the difference where he wrote his books? If Gogol because of the move to Petersburg was transformed into Russian (from Ukrainian), then you should not call Gogol a Ukrainian writer (which you repeatedly do).

OTOH, this isn’t even universal to East/Central Europe. For instance, Hungary and Romania both have very high Gypsy minorities that might be approaching 10% of their population. I’d take Russia’s problems over theirs (for now).

Well so far the gypsy is more of a nuisance issue than the existential threat large Muslim populations are. Though at least in the case of the Romanians I know Gypsys are the source of considerable emotional upset, they see themselves as next door to being overrun by Gypsys and that at times makes them seem to be a bit unhinged.

I am unsure if anarachist terrorism specifically killed children. However, some anarchist terrorism–such as the bombing of the Barcelona Opera House–certainly wasn’t pleasant in any sense:

https://listverse.com/2014/05/04/10-acts-of-anarchist-terrorism-that-shocked-the-world/

Indeed, while I don’t know if children were killed by anarchist terrorism, civilians certainly were.

The clear pattern from those anarchist attacks is that attacks targeting civilians were exceptions rather than rules. This is the opposite of Islamic terror attacks.

I didn’t quite say that they *would* engage in a blockade, though. Rather, my point is that the threat of a blockade could be discomforting to the Intermarium–just like Russia was concerned about foreign powers controlling the Straits.

Perhaps, but I suspect the relationship between Intermarium and the EU would not be so hostile. Strict immigration controls wouldn’t preclude friendly trade relationships.

Also, I am unsure if Intermarium’s population will stop falling at 100 million.

It’s currently 153 million, it may be 100 million in 30 or 50 years. I think it makes no sense to make projections beyond that.

Indeed, Steve Sailer once speculated about an extreme scenario where hundreds of millions of Africans moved to Europe (in response to global warming, extreme poverty, wars, et cetera) and turned Europe into Detroit. In such a scenario or even in a somewhat milder scenario, I could certainly see Europe experiencing a large-scale population increase.

Sure, this is a possibility, particularly if climate change isn’t fixed. But it’s something that might happen in 2100 or whatever – beyond the realm of reasonable speculation. Who would have predicted in 1910 what the world would be like in 2010?

The likely scenario for the EU is something like what AK proposed – possibility 2.5 – with country differences. Germany and Scandinavia might have a high migration case scenario but Austria seems to have turned against migration; if this trend is stable it might have a best-case scenario.

“Russia and Belarus are part of the Eurasian Customs Union”

As most countries in your proposed Intermarium are currently part of the EU.

And EU is far less Muslim than ECU.

My point is that of the two hypothetical new arrangements, a union of the three East Slavic states makes more sense.

Putin has lost Ukraine for at least a generation. Russia is about as popular in Ukraine as it is in Poland – not at all. So for at least 20 years integration with Russia is not feasible.

but much more populous, powerful, and able to stand up to the globalist, multicultural West.

1.Poland all by itself seems to be doing finer standing up to the West.

2. As commentator szopen pointed out, Ukraine attaching itself to Russia becomes a 100 lb wolf attached to a 300 point bear. Within Intermarium Ukraine becomes much more of an equal partner. Which is better for Ukraine? We also have a history of 2 previous attempts of integration under different Moscow regimes – both turned out very badly for Ukrainians.

What is best for Ukraine depends on the circumstances that exist now, not those that existed 80+ years or centuries ago.

As forensic specialists will tell you – the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. It’s not about spite or revenge but rational view of likely future outcomes based on previous outcomes.

Not to mention that when Ukraine was most recently united with Russia, it was much wealthier relative to Russia than it is today.

1. Under Soviet rule Ukraine was still much poorer than Russia. Since then it was ruled by a Moscow-imposed Soviet elite that had not really distanced themselves from Russia or pursued close integration with the West. All the post-Soviet countries who, unlike Ukraine, focused on Westward integration have done much better than has Russia itself, without Russia’s natural resources. Poland has gone from being about at Ukraine’s level to surpassing Russia. Romania went IIRC from 30% of Russia’s level to 60%. Ukraine was just falling behind.

2. When Galicia was part of Austria-Hungary it was wealthier per capita than Russia, Greece, Serbia, Portugal. It was tied with Slovakia and Croatia. I don’t have data for the 1920s and 1930s in Galicia, but contrary to Soviet propaganda that described Galicia as backward, actual Soviets who moved there (such as one of my grandparents, who arrived in Lviv from Kharkiv in 1939) saw it as much more prosperous and civilized than their impoverished Soviet homeland. It was a funny situation – in 1939 the Soviet government brought Soviets to Lviv in order to make the place more pro-Soviet, and provided Galicians with tours of Soviet Ukraine to sell them on the benefits of Soviet rule. The Soviet newcomers – the ethnic Ukrainians, not so much the Jews or Russians – immediately focused on how backward and pathetic their homeland was relative to the West, and many became “infected” by Ukrainian nationalism; the Galicians touring the Ukrainian SSR, rather than becoming pro-Soviet, were not so impressed by the massive dams or whatever, but by the squalid living conditions of the people living there and recognized that they were becoming part of a nightmare.

specifically, Israel is over 20% Muslim and has neither gone to Hell nor lost its pre-existing (Jewish) character.

Actually, Israel is around 15% Muslim. It is 25% non-Jewish but the rest of those are Christians and Druze, primarily. Otherwise, point taken.

As a result of transition under the authority of the Moscow tsars ( from the Polish authorities), serfdom in the left Bank Ukraine was destroyed.

Again, nonsense.

Serfdom in Left-Bank Ukraine was destroyed as a result of the native rebellion. Moscow was chosen, as a last resort, as a patron several years after this rebellion. Although Moscow was the patron, under conditions of very broad local autonomy serfdom was (not destroyed) but severely curtailed – much lighter than either in Poland or in Russia proper.

About a hundred years later under pressure from the Ukrainian landowners Catherine II introduced serfdom again, but in “Russian” version (more soft than the Polish serfdom)

1. Good that you admit that under Russian rule serfdom got much worse than it would have been had Ukrainian landlords not had Moscow’s power to back them up vis a vis their peasants.

2. In an earlier discussion you conceded that under similar climate and social conditions Russian and Polish serfdoms were about the same.

Oh how many swineherds (who instead work in the fields of the Polish landlords, have become composers, artists, scientists,..) lost the Ukraine because of the damned Muscovites

None of those people were swineherds or peasants – all were from noble or officer families and all took their talents from Ukraine and to Russia, as your examples demonstrate. Russia’s gain was Ukraine’s loss. Those are simply notable examples. There were also many less famous bright people leaving Ukraine to pursue opportunities in the civil service and in the church. There were so many of them in St. Petersburg in the early 19th century that Taras Shevchenko directed a poem towards them, admonishing them for turning their back on their motherland who weeps because she becomes childless.

So we have a flow of educated, bright Ukrainians to Russia but not vice versa. This is called a brain drain.

There are a lot of bright, educated successful Russians who went West (or did their parents) in the last century. Who knows how successful they would have been had they stayed in their homeland. Still a brain drain.

Russia and Belarus are part of the Eurasian Customs Union

As most countries in your proposed Intermarium are currently part of the EU. My point is that of the two hypothetical new arrangements, a union of the three East Slavic states makes more sense. It would be slightly less European than Intermarium (though still over 90%), but much more populous, powerful, and able to stand up to the globalist, multicultural West. And it would be much more linguistically and culturally homogeneous.

with some central Asian countries; the total Muslim population is about 20%; by 2050 it will be much higher.

Do you think that Kyrgyzstan will still be a member of the ECU in 2050? I doubt it- given the trends there, it seems unlikely to me that it will go for over 30 years without an anti-Russian color revolution.

And in a scenario where Ukraine is an ECU member (which an argument against Ukraine joining based on the ECU’s Muslim % must assume), the ECU including Kyrgyzstan would be about 20% Muslim in 2050. While that would still be higher than Europe’s 11-14%, Europe’s Muslim population would still be less secular, dumber, and much less geographically segregated, since 80% of the ECU’s Muslim population lives in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia’s historically Muslim regions, while most of Europe’s Muslim population is concentrated in its major cities.

Past integration projects have been detrimental to Ukraine. 18th-19th century saw expansion of serfdom to Russian norms and brain drain; 20th century saw mass starvation and Russification of the population. Third time a charm? No thanks..

What is best for Ukraine depends on the circumstances that exist now, not those that existed 80+ years or centuries ago. Making policy based on historical grievance is not rational: Your thinking is essentially the same as that used to justify race-based affirmative action. Russia is not going to bring back serfdom or Stalinism. Not to mention that when Ukraine was most recently united with Russia, it was much wealthier relative to Russia than it is today.

Moscow?

I didn’t mean there is no place in Russia outside the Muslim regions with a Muslim % over 5%. I meant that outside those (geographically small and peripheral) Muslim regions, the average Muslim % is only about 5%. Or possibly slightly higher- I didn’t crunch the exact numbers for every region- but certainly less than 10%.

And even Moscow’s population might be no more than about 5% Muslim if you don’t include non-citizens (who have far less societal impact than those with voting rights).

“Most likely either the EU will no longer exist in its current form in 2050, or Poland will no longer be a member, or (if the EU has succeeded in moving forwards towards a United States of Europe),Poland will no longer exist as a sovereign state.”

I think that’s a good analysis. The EU is a chimera and a mirage. Despite the religious adherence to 4 Principles, countries have widely varying national arrangements for everything from VAT to access to residency and healthcare to imposition of Directives on Quality Standards via Regulations; animal welfare being a case in point.

The UK’s Achilles heel was the generosity of existing public services, which generosity had therefore to be made available to all EU citizens. If Poland’s national policies are more robust, such as 10yrs to residency instead of the UK’s 5yrs, that’s helpful.

But if Soros really has given Open Society 18bn to help persuade East Europe that the 4 Principles are good for the Soul, Poland is up against big money. And since Poles are returning now to a growing economy it seems likely Poland is in the sights of the nation-busters. But Poland has huge areas of natural forest so it will take decades for immigration to really impact on the landscape.

One thing that is certain is none of the major Western European states will be exerting any power aboard, I expect all of them, the UK, France and Germany to become increasingly embroiled in internal ethnic, religious and social conflicts as they become more heterogeneous.

The Western European elites seems to be actively rejecting the nation state model where each ethnicity had its own state and which arose over the course of the 19th and 20th centuries, often at the cost of great bloodshed and are adopting the Middle Eastern model, where you have multiple peoples contained within a single state all vying for power.

Personally, I think this will end in disaster, as the major states of Western Europe become more heterogeneous, social capital will collapse and they will lose what little power they had left in the post WW2 world, it is somewhat interesting that Russia which was always the most heterogeneous nation among the major states of Europe will be the most homogeneous by way of comparison going forward. The future of Europe insofar as stability is concerned does seem to lie in the east, Poland, Czechia and so on.

But think of the new fast food options!

Nonsense. Serfdom prior to Russian direct rule:

As a result of transition under the authority of the Moscow tsars ( from the Polish authorities), serfdom in the left Bank Ukraine was destroyed. About a hundred years later under pressure from the Ukrainian landowners Catherine II introduced serfdom again, but in “Russian” version (more soft than the Polish serfdom)

As for “brain drain” – did Gogol stay in Ukraine? How about the composers Maxim Berzovsky, Dmytro Bortniansky?

Maxim Berzovsky “On 29 June 1758 he was accepted as a singer into the Prince Peter Fedorovych capella in Oranienbaum (now known as Lomonosov), near Saint Petersburg. Berezovsky participated in Italian operas and his name appears in printed librettos of the operas Alessandro nell’Indie by Francesco Araja and La Semiramide riconosciuta by Vincenzo Manfredini given in Oranienbaum in 1759 and 1760.
In 1762, he became a singer of the Italian Capella of the Saint Petersburg Imperial palace, which was the palace chapel choir. Here he studied under singer N. Garani and Capella director F. Zoppis and likely under composers Vincenzo Manfredini and Baldassare Galuppi. He continued as court musician and composer for the majority of the 1760s.”

Dmytro Bortniansky “prodigious talent at the local church choir afforded him the opportunity to go the capital of the empire and sing with the Imperial Chapel Choir in St. Petersburg. There he studied music and composition under the director of the Imperial Chapel Choir, the Italian master Baldassare Galuppi. When Galuppi left for Italy in 1769, he took the boy with him. In Italy, Bortniansky gained considerable success composing operas”

“In 1828, on leaving school, Gogol came to Saint Petersburg, full of vague but glowingly ambitious hopes. He had hoped for literary fame, and brought with him a Romantic poem of German idyllic life – Hans Küchelgarten.Gogol was in touch with the “literary aristocracy”, had a story published in Anton Delvig’s Northern Flowers, was taken up by Vasily Zhukovsky and Pyotr Pletnyov, and (in 1831) was introduced to Pushkin.
In 1831 Gogol brought out the first volume of his Ukrainian stories (Evenings on a Farm Near Dikanka), which met with immediate success….At this time, Gogol developed a passion for Ukrainian history and tried to obtain an appointment to the history department at Kiev University. Despite the support of Pushkin and Sergey Uvarov, the Russian minister of education, his appointment was blocked by a Kyivan bureaucrat on the grounds that Gogol was unqualified…
In 1834 Gogol was made Professor of Medieval History at the University of St. Petersburg,”

Oh how many swineherds (who instead work in the fields of the Polish landlords, have become composers, artists, scientists,..) lost the Ukraine because of the damned Muscovites. But what a happy fate was in the “Polish” Ukraine and “Polish” Belarus – in the era of Gogol and Bortniansky (also Levitsky and Ostrogradsky) these lands have not generated any minimally talented figures.

I don’t recall anarchists targeting concerts full of children.

I am unsure if anarachist terrorism specifically killed children. However, some anarchist terrorism–such as the bombing of the Barcelona Opera House–certainly wasn’t pleasant in any sense:

https://listverse.com/2014/05/04/10-acts-of-anarchist-terrorism-that-shocked-the-world/

Indeed, while I don’t know if children were killed by anarchist terrorism, civilians certainly were.

Also, the Global Terrorism Database might be of interest to you:

https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/

You are more than welcome to look at it and see what you can find. In addition, you are welcome to take a look at Randall Law’s book about the history of terrorism:

https://books.google.com/books?id=gyP3DAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=randall+law&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiy3anJsO3XAhVQ7mMKHV__C-MQ6AEIJjAA#v=onepage&q=randall%20law&f=false

As I said, Muslims certainly don’t have a monopoly on either terrorism or on killing civilians.

A blockade is an act of war.

Why would, say, strict immigration control elicit a declaration of war? That’s extremely unlikely. Even America despite its hostile relationships with Iran doesn’t block the Persian Gulf.

I didn’t quite say that they *would* engage in a blockade, though. Rather, my point is that the threat of a blockade could be discomforting to the Intermarium–just like Russia was concerned about foreign powers controlling the Straits.

Also, you’re assuming that policymakers will always be rational. I don’t know if I can entirely agree with you on that. For instance, we currently have an immature blowhard as President here in the U.S. right now!

100 million is after population loss, many decades from now. Currently Intermarium has about 153 million people (143 million if you don’t include Belarus).

I suspected that your numbers were low, but I didn’t bother checking. Anyway, an Intermarium would have enough problems for the time being in dealing with Ukraine’s poverty and in ensuring that its standards of living would converge to Western European ones.

Also, I am unsure if Intermarium’s population will stop falling at 100 million. After all, I don’t know how long it will take for the breeders to halt the population decline in Intermarium.

Germany can buy food from Intermarium.

I was talking about living space–not food–here.

But its population is not projected to explode – natives are dying out, and newcomers experience decreased fertility rates. Overall population won’t be much higher, it will just be heavily Islamic.

You don’t know for sure how many new migrants will come, though. Indeed, Steve Sailer once speculated about an extreme scenario where hundreds of millions of Africans moved to Europe (in response to global warming, extreme poverty, wars, et cetera) and turned Europe into Detroit. In such a scenario or even in a somewhat milder scenario, I could certainly see Europe experiencing a large-scale population increase.

Nobody is predicting total loss of border control.

Very true.

A population of elderly Germans and not-too-bright migrants probably isn’t much of a military threat.

First of all, it’s not like the population of Intermarium is going to be free from dysgenics. Based on the IQ and fertility data here, I expect Intermarium’s average IQ to fall by several points or even more once breeders become a larger and larger percentage of its total population:

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/nor-breeding-their-best/

Also, I wasn’t only talking about Germany here. After all, there would probably still be an E.U. (which might become a federal state by this point in time) in such a scenario which will comprise the countries of Western Europe plus Scandinavia. Thus, the Intermarium might have to deal not with Germany, but rather with the entire E.U. (plus Britain, of course).

In addition, what we are going to see in both the E.U. and Intermarium are native populations which are getting both older and dumber. Indeed, the E.U. will simply have a lot of low-IQ Muslims on top of that. Of course, what will be interesting is whether IQ-enhancing technologies would become widespread in either the E.U. or Intermarium. Indeed, if so, I wonder what effect they would have.