You see, I just can't get what do they actually want. You say in your post that Russians conquered the land they once owned.
They did, and more recently in the 1940s kicked them out of their houses and in the 1990s refused to allow elderly survivors of the deportation to return. It was kind of hard considering the houses had been inhabited by good ethnic Russian families (the people the Tatars were cleared to make for) for decades by then.
Right now, they are building their shacks in the middle of nowhere or right near to the villages (saw that myself in 2010) and then want government to make sure it is now completely legal.
Well, considering they were kicked out of their houses by the Soviets, possibly the same houses in the villages they're settling next to, you can understand why they'd try to build shacks next to them. If Americans conquered Russia and kicked you out of your family home and sent you off into the middle of Kazakhstan for a few decades, then when you came back you discovered Americans living in your house and telling you you don't live there anymore, wouldn't you try to live close-by? Especially when there's a dearth of available housing for someone of your socio-economic background.
There is only a little sense about it - they really lack proper houses, but that should be solved somehow else I think.
Yeah, here's a crazy thought;
build more houses for the Tatars. Unfortunately the Crimean Government hasn't bothered to really do that in the last 20 years because they prioritise the needs of ethnic Russians over Tatars. If building houses is too difficult, allow the Tatars to live in their shacks and give them support.
Then, they want the entire Crimean Republic (excluding Sevastopol) to be declared an ethnic autonomy. I respect their right to national self-determination, but they are about 10% of population. Their rights should be protected for sure, their language is one of the three governmental languages at last. But ethnic autonomy? A bit too much.
Crimea is their
homeland. It is their "nation", their country. They have nowhere else. Why is it so hard to understand that they want their homeland to be recognised as such, considering others in Russia have received such rights? I prefer the term "national republic" anyway as opposed to ethnic because Russians could belong to the Crimean nation in the same way that Russians in Tatarstan are beginning to belong to the Tatarstan nation.
It's interesting that you'd consider such a proposal to be "too much" when the "Karelians" of the Republic of Karelia make up less than 9.2% of the population, yet their republic is an "ethnic" republic.
Next, they want to be represented in government. Great initiative! Educate yourselves and rule the peninsula! Our government has no national quotes! But you don't want to see a yesterday farmer handling state budget, don't ya? And that's what they want exactly. No offence, but there are much less educated Tatars (Crimeans, whatever) than Ukrainians or Russians in Crimea right now.
Regardless of the last bit (which Mictlantecuhtli has already answered), are you aware of a concept called "Affirmative Action"?
You kinda let your media's bias slip in there a little.. So, Russia is just helping to govern people too stupid to govern themselves? Forgetting the rampant corruption issues and absolute lack of governmental and societal progress in the Kremlin, of course.
Is this the first time you've heard it? I've heard Putin himself argue this (not in the same words i.e. he omitted "stupid", but that was his meaning). The entire argument from Russians across the Federation about keeping the Caucasian Republics in the Federation rather than allowing them to be independent is that "they're too stupid/Muslim and they'll destabilise the entire Southern section of the country".
Poll
Author
Topic: Sheb's European Megathread: Remove Feta! (Read 1776761 times)