Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I hope that when this shit in Crimea will end we'll see independent Crimea (or independent southern part of it). Country were only Crimean Tatars* will have voting rights

*knowing the language can be a nice qualifier

[Owlbread]

Are we using Aljazeera as a credible news source?

Yes, it is pretty credible apart from in regard to Qatari politics as Sheb says. I trust Al Jazeera more than the BBC.

I hope that when this shit in Crimea will end we'll see independent Crimea (or independent southern part of it). Country were only Crimean Tatars* will have voting rights

*knowing the language can be a nice qualifier

But that would require Russians to actually learn the native language of the area they've brutally conquered settled in. That's like asking rain to fall upwards, and it defeats the entire point of all the pro-Russian unrest.

But yes, if Russians in Crimea could get behind the Crimean Tatar identity in a civic way (a bit like how European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity these days) and try learning the language and create an independent state that way it would be great. Unfortunately Russian ethnic nationalism is so virulent and strong nowadays trying to change things in that direction would be like a struggle with the elements.

[Sheb]

What, all kiwis learn Maori nowadays?

[Comrade P.]

But yes, if Russians in Crimea could get behind the Crimean Tatar identity in a civic way (a bit like how European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity these days) and try learning the language and create an independent state that way it would be great.

Actually, I think the optimal decision would be another federation subject on Crimean territory. If they want it so badly. Thought I'm pretty sure their land problems and self-controlling are solvable without that.

[LordSlowpoke]

(a bit like how European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity these days)

yeah okay because the asians smear a big steaming turd all over the maori

why did you feel the need to point out heritage

[Loud Whispers]

But that would require Russians to actually learn the native language of the area they've brutally conquered settled in. That's like asking rain to fall upwards, and it defeats the entire point of all the pro-Russian unrest.
But yes, if Russians in Crimea could get behind the Crimean Tatar identity in a civic way (a bit like how European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity these days) and try learning the language and create an independent state that way it would be great. Unfortunately Russian ethnic nationalism is so virulent and strong nowadays trying to change things in that direction would be like a struggle with the elements.

Giving tatars exclusive rights is undemocratic and is alongside that one lovely lady claiming the maori should be the only people to control immigration, rather hypocritical. The maori ran genocides, before the russian empire there was the ottoman empire and so on. On a practical level it's hard to see how it would work out any better than splitting british india into india and pakistan. Good luck also trying to take the crimea from russia in the first place.

[Owlbread]

What, all kiwis learn Maori nowadays?

It seems to be getting more popular, but I'm not a Kiwi myself so I can't really comment.

Spoiler: Lengthy post in response to Comrade P., explaining my position in great detail, read it before you attack (click to show/hide)

Actually, I think the optimal decision would be another federation subject on Crimean territory. If they want it so badly. Thought I'm pretty sure their land problems and self-controlling are solvable without that.

The problem is that the entirety of Crimea is Crimean Tatar land currently settled by Russians. I still think that the best way to solve land issues and self determination would be to create a civic Crimean identity that includes the Russians, then create an independent state.

After all, though many Russians seem to see the Crimean Tatars as Muslim Turkic intruders, they're a mixture of everyone that's settled in that peninsula from the ancient Khazars, Scythians and Cumans to the Goths and Greeks and Italians (hence why they are truly Crimean Natives in every sense of the word). Why can't Russians join that mix too?

My preference would be to stop calling them Tatars and just call them Crimeans. "Tatar", though it originally meant something rather different, became a Russian exonym for all Turkic peoples in the Empire. It airbrushes any distinctions and complexities, homogenizing everything. That leads to strange situations where the President of "Tatarstan" has been sent by Putin to Crimea to negotiate with the Crimean Tatars, as if he's some kind of representative from the "homeland", when in reality he belongs to a totally different ethnic group (possibly even Bolghar, if theories are correct) with as much relation to the "Crimean Tatars" as a Frenchman to a Spaniard.

Far better would be to recognise the "Crimean Tatars" for what they are - though they have been Turkicised, they are the native Crimeans, speaking a language that is a mixture of many Turkic tongues and having a diverse ethnic heritage including the peninsula's earliest inhabitants. They're like a snowball that's rolled down a hill.

I would like to see a situation where the native Crimeans can occupy a place in independent Crimean society almost like the Highlanders in Scotland. Nowadays everyone has Highland blood (including myself), though Gaelic can be seen as a waste of money at times by certain bigots and misinformed people, the majority of Scots see it as a part of our complex identity; its prestigious status leads it to be tattooed on patriotic Lowlanders' arms. I think this is very achievable in Crimea, the beast of Russian ethnic nationalism just has to be broken first.

yeah okay because the asians smear a big steaming turd all over the maori

What?

why did you feel the need to point out heritage

Because this is an ethnic conflict and heritage is incredibly important in Crimea.

Giving tatars exclusive rights is undemocratic and is alongside that one lovely lady claiming the maori should be the only people to control immigration, rather hypocritical. The maori ran genocides, before the russian empire there was the ottoman empire and so on. On a practical level it's hard to see how it would work out any better than splitting british india into india and pakistan. Good luck also trying to take the crimea from russia in the first place.

You completely misunderstood my position. Hopefully my lengthy comment will clear things up.

[LordSlowpoke]

yeah okay because the asians smear a big steaming turd all over the maori

What?

i advise reading a little about the ethnic makeup of new zealand before dumping every new zealander who isn't maori into "european"

why did you feel the need to point out heritage

Because this is an ethnic conflict and heritage is incredibly important in Crimea.

except that crimean natives are given the short stick because there are no oligarchs to stand behind them in a conflict whose driving motor is ukrainian and russian oligarchs.

[misko27]

why did you feel the need to point out heritage

Because this is an ethnic conflict and heritage is incredibly important in everything under the sun.

Fix'd. More Owlbread-like now.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Giving tatars exclusive rights is undemocratic

I am kinda confused by that statement
By that definition no country in the world is democratic because adults, unlike children, have exclusive voting rights in every country

[Sergarr]

Giving tatars exclusive rights is undemocratic

I am kinda confused by that statement
By that definition no country in the world is democratic because adults, unlike children, have exclusive voting rights in every country

You said that voting rights should be reserved for only ethnic tatars. Such an action would surely be supported by all Russian-speaking people living in Crimea *sarcasm*

[MonkeyHead]

Giving tatars exclusive rights is undemocratic

I am kinda confused by that statement
By that definition no country in the world is democratic because adults, unlike children, have exclusive voting rights in every country

No country is a 100% inclusive democracy. The line is always drawn somewhere. The age restriction is more reasonable than one of ethnicity for many reasons.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Inclusive or not democracy is a democracy.

Estonia exists with the law like that, with no full citizenship for individuals that don't know Estonian and it works nicely.

[miauw62]

A democracy that only includes people with enough money is (if my terminology is right) a plutocracy, not a democracy.

[Owlbread]

i advise reading a little about the ethnic makeup of new zealand before dumping every new zealander who isn't maori into "european"

Oh right... I see what you're trying to get at. Well, that was unexpected. Right, if I can clarify, if you look at the sentence "a bit like how European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity these days" - I was trying to highlight how even the "Imperialists" i.e. the white Europeans were starting to embrace Maori heritage. I was meaning it in the sense "Even European New Zealanders get behind Maori identity". I wasn't trying to exclude the countless other ethnic groups in New Zealand by referring to New Zealanders as solely Maori/European, I was trying to show a parallel with Crimea.

Surely you would be aware of that too, so I'm not sure why you were even making that point in the first place.

except that crimean natives are given the short stick because there are no oligarchs to stand behind them in a conflict whose driving motor is ukrainian and russian oligarchs.

...Again, I don't doubt this. Don't you remember that link I posted yesterday or the day before about how this entire conflict is about gangsters? The thing is, gangsters are exploiting ethnic/nationalist conflict that already exists in Ukraine and I'm trying to show a way that this could be resolved. Admittedly, a way that accords with my own political ideology.

You said that voting rights should be reserved for only ethnic tatars.

He didn't, he said that voting rights should be reserved for people who speak Tatar. Considering some people in the USA and the UK and most likely in Russia would feel offended if people who couldn't speak English (or Russian, respectively) could vote then that isn't as offensive a proposition as it first seems.

That said, I don't agree with it because I think voting rights should be given to everyone living in a political unit/state, including prisoners.