Protests in Belarus over vote fraud turn violent as police fire at protesters and government shuts down internet

[Love Mountain]

In the Soviet Union, whilst still inhumane, this happened during a war, and with a significantly lower percentual death toll than the American one. The people were later allowed to return. Now you tell me again how you think this comparison is appropriate, and how many of the Native American languages have an official status in the US today.

Many of the population transfers preceded WWII, the right to return took decades to achieve, and I never said which instance was "morally superior" as if this is a scoreboard. Both events were abhorrent and irreversibly damaged many ethnic groups. The comparison is appropriate, as both were politically motivated population transfers that resulted in deaths of thousands. I struggle to justify why we should score either event when both vividly demonstrate why such policies are wrong. I would also venture to say, that both instances demonstrate that the problem is not with the economic or political structure of either country, but with absolute apathy and racism.

The Soviet Union did attempt to "re-educate" minorities in a similar way that United States attempted to "culture" Native Americans. Perhaps the scale of crimes is different, but they are similar in nature.

[Cookiegod]

First of all, I want you to quote me on where I'm justifying anything. - We had here the very far fetched fearmongering that the Belorussian identity might get suppressed by the evil Ivans - which simply won't happen, and also did not happen previously. Not even in the darkest days of the Soviet Union.

Secondly, I'm not rating anything. My great grandfather had the "privilege" of being put into the Gulag thrice (!) for no other reason than him being an ethnic German and not an ardent communist in the Soviet Union during ww2 - I have the aluminium bowl + spoon from one of those occasions. He actually managed to survive that (likely because he had always been asketic and did not need much food), and was until his death long after the end of the war not allowed to enter Moscow - even though that was his home. It was only after his death that the authorities bothered to send his widow a letter: "Oh btw... Your husband is rehabilitated. lulz" And this is but one of many trials my own family had to endure in the Soviet Union. It's from the Russian side of my family that I actually know such trauma can be inherited. Never mind that my parents then became well connected members of the emigré community in Western Europe including to figures such as Solshenizyn and that I have enough such anecdotes. But the claim that the Soviet Union engaged in intentional ethnic or cultural genocide is plainly wrong. It did a lot of killing, but for other reasons. And the Soviet Union did "reeducate" all the peoples in its realm to the Soviet ideal. It did not, however, reeducate minorities to make them somehow Russian. Not least because the Russian national identity was very much despised by the Soviets.

One can find beautiful quotes from Lenin about Russia if one wants: "The Russian is a bad worker." etc. Some are fake, but plenty are not.

Lenin was of mixed ethnicity with a mother of Jewish and German/Swedish origin and father of Kalmyk origin.
If we consider Jews a separate nationality, which the Soviets pretty much did, then all Soviet leaders except maybe Andropov and Gorbachev were non-Russians. Stalin was Georgian, while Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Chernenko were Ukrainians. Andropov had Jewish mother and the only thing we know for sure about his father is that he wasn't there to raise him. Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, was half Ukrainian.

Very similar can be said about especially the early commissariats and other high echelons of the Soviet Union - iirc then the early one featured 3 ethnic Russians out of 23, and none of the three holding any of the particularly important ones - it changed a little bit over the years, but Russians continued to be underrepresented if one looks at the genetic makeup of the Soviet Union. Yet we're to believe that a predominantly non-Russian Soviet leadership somehow wanted to make everyone Russian.

Or the so called Holodomor, which would have to be the most incompetent genocide ever if it actually had been intended as such - which it wasn't.

The areas in Ukraine with the smallest percentages of the population being Ukrainian were the hardest hit - and as a result of the famine the Ukrainian share of the population went up rapidly, to 75% by 1959 when the next census was held, whereas the shares of the other demographics declined.

And yet we're informed by the Russophobes that all that hungering wasn't targeting specific classes - which it absolutely and demonstrably did (kulaks, those living in the countryside in general, and also the "bourgeois" in the cities), but a genocide by the evil Russians even though they did not hold power in those years.

Not only was there no Russification by the Soviets, they did the exact opposite: Korenisatsya. Or in other aspects of life too. If you were a Muslim or a Jew, you had far better conditions to practice your religion, which in those years still formed an inextricable part of anyone's cultural heritage and national identity, than if you were orthodox.

TL;DR: There's fake news, and there's fake history. Stop both of it.

[Love Mountain]

First of all, I want you to quote me on where I'm justifying anything. - We had here the very far fetched fearmongering that the Belorussian identity might get suppressed by the evil Ivans - which simply won't happen, and also did not happen previously. Not even in the darkest days of the Soviet Union.

I want you to read my post again, carefully, and reflect on how silly this statement sounds.

Secondly, I'm not rating anything. My great grandfather had the "privilege" of being put into the Gulag thrice (!) for no other reason than him being an ethnic German and not an ardent communist in the Soviet Union during ww2 - I have the aluminium bowl + spoon from one of those occasions. He actually managed to survive that (likely because he had always been asketic and did not need much food), and was until his death long after the end of the war not allowed to enter Moscow - even though that was his home. It was only after his death that the authorities bothered to send his widow a letter: "Oh btw... Your husband is rehabilitated. lulz" And this is but one of many trials my own family had to endure in the Soviet Union. It's from the Russian side of my family that I actually know such trauma can be inherited. Never mind that my parents then became well connected members of the emigré community in Western Europe including to figures such as Solshenizyn and that I have enough such anecdotes. But the claim that the Soviet Union engaged in intentional ethnic or cultural genocide is plainly wrong. It did a lot of killing, but for other reasons. And the Soviet Union did "reeducate" all the peoples in its realm to the Soviet ideal. It did not, however, reeducate minorities to make them somehow Russian. Not least because the Russian national identity was very much despised by the Soviets.

Lack of total success is not an excuse for trying. Moreover, USSR engaged in long-term nation building by creating Socialist parties in the countries under their sphere of influence. Local movements and heritage was co-opted in order to integrate ethnic groups better into the system. And the main language of instruction in USSR was Russian, existence of other languages in schools and local organizations was tolerated out of necessity, but as the lingua franca of Soviet space, Russian was the primary tongue of all USSR.

One can find beautiful quotes from Lenin about Russia if one wants: "The Russian is a bad worker." etc. Some are fake, but plenty are not.

Lenin was of mixed ethnicity with a mother of Jewish and German/Swedish origin and father of Kalmyk origin.
If we consider Jews a separate nationality, which the Soviets pretty much did, then all Soviet leaders except maybe Andropov and Gorbachev were non-Russians. Stalin was Georgian, while Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Chernenko were Ukrainians. Andropov had Jewish mother and the only thing we know for sure about his father is that he wasn't there to raise him. Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, was half Ukrainian.

Very similar can be said about especially the early commissariats and other high echelons of the Soviet Union - iirc then the early one featured 3 ethnic Russians out of 23, and none of the three holding any of the particularly important ones - it changed a little bit over the years, but Russians continued to be underrepresented if one looks at the genetic makeup of the Soviet Union. Yet we're to believe that a predominantly non-Russian Soviet leadership somehow wanted to make everyone Russian.

Yes, how strange that the Soviet regime looked upon Imperial Russia with distaste. I wonder why that is? Meanwhile, the Soviet curriculum routinely taught Russian culture through poetry, history, and art to its student. It really demonstrated its hate for its own Russian heritage and culture by praising figures like Lomonosov, Peter the Great, Tolstoy, and Pushkin. This self-loathing even reflected itself in modern mediums like film, where Imperial Russia was demonized in films like A Cruel Romance, or War & Peace.

Or the so called Holodomor, which would have to be the most incompetent genocide ever if it actually had been intended as such - which it wasn't.

The areas in Ukraine with the smallest percentages of the population being Ukrainian were the hardest hit - and as a result of the famine the Ukrainian share of the population went up rapidly, to 75% by 1959 when the next census was held, whereas the shares of the other demographics declined.

And yet we're informed by the Russophobes that all that hungering wasn't targeting specific classes - which it absolutely and demonstrably did (kulaks, those living in the countryside in general, and also the "bourgeois" in the cities), but a genocide by the evil Russians even though they did not hold power in those years.

You're arguing against a ghost. I never made any comments regarding Holodomor in this thread, and people who would guess on my stance regarding the subject will tell you that I don't consider Holodomor to be an ethnic cleansing or genocide.

Not only was there no Russification by the Soviets, they did the exact opposite: Korenisatsya. Or in other aspects of life too. If you were a Muslim or a Jew, you had far better conditions to practice your religion, which in those years still formed an inextricable part of anyone's cultural heritage and national identity, than if you were orthodox.

TL;DR: There's fake news, and there's fake history. Stop both of it.

Korenisatsya was not an "anti-Russification" program, nor was it the opposite of "russification". It was an expansionist Soviet doctrine meant to co-opt local leadership into the Soviet bloc. Even in Central Asia, a relatively remote region of the USSR, public schools were taught in Russian, youth was indoctrinated into Soviet ideology in Komosomols, and bureaucracy, administration, and any intellectual pursuit, was dominated by Russian. While not Nationalist, the Soviet Union was nevertheless instrumental in spreading Russian culture, values, and influence beyond its borders in a way that Imperial Russia could only dream of.

[Heathen Hammer]

Political structure of USSR was dominated by non-Russians throughout USSR's existence until Gorbachev.

[Love Mountain]

Uh huh, totally. That's why the vast majority of the Politburo was composed of Slavs.

[Heathen Hammer]

Uh huh, totally. That's why the vast majority of the Politburo was composed of Slavs.

Not all Slavs are Russians. There are also Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussians, Serbs, Croatians, Czechs, Slovakians, etc. Just because now they all wear Adidas tracksuits and drive loud cars doesn't mean you have a right to generalize them.
But seriously, Brezhnev was Ukrainian, Khruschev was "technically" an ethnic Russian, but he identified with Ukraine more then Russia (hence annexation of Crimea to Ukraine without asking population whether they want that, which wasn't rectified until almost half a century later in 2014). Lenin was a mix of ethnicities, mainly Chuvash and ethnic German. I don't think anyone thinks that Stalin or Trotsky were ethnic Russians as well. So yeah, that leaves Gorbachev, and I think Andropov, although I'm not sure and he ruled for a very short period of time anyways.

[Love Mountain]

Not all Slavs are Russians. There are also Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussians, Serbs, Croatians, Czechs, Slovakians, etc. Just because now they all wear Adidas tracksuits and drive loud cars doesn't mean you have a right to generalize them.
But seriously, Brezhnev was Ukrainian, Khruschev was "technically" an ethnic Russian, but he identified with Ukraine more then Russia (hence annexation of Crimea to Ukraine without asking population whether they want that, which wasn't rectified until almost half a century later in 2014). Lenin was a mix of ethnicities, mainly Chuvash and ethnic German. I don't think anyone thinks that Stalin or Trotsky were ethnic Russians as well. So yeah, that leaves Gorbachev, and I think Andropov, although I'm not sure and he ruled for a very short period of time anyways.

Let me make it simple for you. The vast majority of the Politburo was ethnically Russian, throughout its entire existence. The entire military, intelligence, and economic apparatus was dominated by Russians. Russians. Russians. So the idea that the country was led around by non-Russians against their interest is false and we can leave it at that.

[Heathen Hammer]

Let me make it simple for you. The vast majority of the Politburo was ethnically Russian, throughout its entire existence. The entire military, intelligence, and economic apparatus was dominated by Russians. Russians. Russians. So the idea that the country was led around by non-Russians against their interest is false and we can leave it at that.

Um, source?
Also being from Russia/RSFSR =/= being ethnic Russian.
General Secretaries tended to have most of power concentrated for them, and we already established that USSR didn't have an ethnic Russians on that post until 1980s.

[Love Mountain]

Um, source?
Also being from Russia/RSFSR =/= being ethnic Russian.

Says the guy who's quibbling over Khrushchev being "technically" a Russian.

General Secretaries tended to have most of power concentrated for them, and we already established that USSR didn't have an ethnic Russians on that post until 1980s.

Brezhnev's Minister of Defense was Dmitriy Ustinov, a Russian. His Chairman of KGB was Andropov, a Russian. Andrei Gromko, the foreign minister, was a Belarussian. Brezhnev had 3-4 Chiefs of staff throughout his tenure. Zakharov (60-63), Russian. Biryuzov (63-64), Russian. Kulikov (71-77), Russian. Head of the Air Force, Veshinin, and later Kutakhov, both Russian.

Taking the 20th Politburo as an example, at least half of the members were Russian. At least, I stopped checking after a while, and we can go and check every single Politburo member and see the same pattern, the vast majority of members in any Soviet institution are Russian. As for the source, you basically have to cross reference lists of the Politburo members, and their documents on official internet archives such as ргани.рф for example. It's very annoying and time-consuming work and cyrillic doesn't even link properly in this forum. To suffice it is painfully obvious that the vast majority of people running Soviet institutions and organs were ethnically Russian.

[Heathen Hammer]

Says the guy who's quibbling over Khrushchev being "technically" a Russian.

He was a close associate of a dictator that murdered millions of Russians. He himself annexed Russian region to Ukrainian SSR. Its like Hitler having a ethnically Jewish advisor helping him round up other Jews into concentration camps.
In general I just find it ridiculous how can one label regime that did that as pro-Russian. Ethnic Russians were the biggest victim of USSR. Russian elite was murdered or forced out of the country. Not just Romanov-era politicians - everyone: scientists, inventors, doctors, writers, academics, etc. Millions of Russians were murdered by Cheka, millions more were starved to death. Communists forced ethnic Russians out of lands where they lived for centuries, as part of "korenization" and forced de-Russification there. Russians that were in Soviet government were cosmopolitan filth that murdered and oppressed their own. Like I said, the first person to not do that was Gorbachev.

[Love Mountain]

He was a close associate of a dictator that murdered millions of Russians. He himself annexed Russian region to Ukrainian SSR. Its like Hitler having a ethnically Jewish advisor helping him round up other Jews into concentration camps.

Far-fetched, as almost none of these fantasies have much to do with Ukraine or Russia. Moreover, if Khrushchev was so blatantly anti-Russian, (or indeed, any of the General Secretary) they would've lost power as both the Politburo, the Supreme Soviet of SFSR, the armed forces, were all dominated by Russians.

In general I just find it ridiculous how can one label regime that did that as pro-Russian. Ethnic Russians were the biggest victim of USSR. Russian elite was murdered or forced out of the country. Not just Romanov-era politicians - everyone: scientists, inventors, doctors, writers, academics, etc. Millions of Russians were murdered by Cheka, millions more were starved to death. Communists forced ethnic Russians out of lands where they lived for centuries, as part of "korenization" and forced de-Russification there. Russians that were in Soviet government were cosmopolitan filth that murdered and oppressed their own. Like I said, the first person to not do that was Gorbachev.

The USSR did not discriminate on the basis of race. Millions of people from all ethnic groups, all religious denominations, etc suffered at the hands of the Soviet Union. Fact remains, that the vast majority of the Soviet apparatus was dominated by Russians. The lingua franca, or really just the de-facto language of USSR was Russian. This theory that USSR was "anti-Russian" is preposterous and no academic, historian, or really any normal person would agree. The fact that Russians suffered the most at the hands of disastrous Soviet policies is because they are the largest group, Russians were also the incumbent political leadership before any regime change occurs, and Russians are the nationality closest to the Kremlin. Thus, any policy would affect them most, and first.

USSR was not anti-Russian, in fact it was a Russian project. It's eventual demise was due to the shortcomings of its version of Communism, not because Russian people got tired of "foreign overlords".

[Cookiegod]

I want you to read my post again, carefully, and reflect on how silly this statement sounds.

lol. The discussion did not start with you. Not everything pertains explicitly to you. I want you to go back a page, carefully, and see how silly your statement is.

You're arguing against a ghost. I never made any comments regarding Holodomor in this thread, and people who would guess on my stance regarding the subject will tell you that I don't consider Holodomor to be an ethnic cleansing or genocide.

And again - not everything pertains directly to you. I'd like you to read my post again, carefully, and check where I said "Suki claims that the Holodomor is real". The reality is, however, that the holodomor is a frequent claim brought up in this same context, so I destroyed it whilst we were talking about the general topic to which it was a prime example even when not mentioned.

Lack of total success is not an excuse for trying.

I like how you strawman my argument into: "Hey they didn't succeed, so that means it wasn't half bad", when what I said was "It did not happen, if they wanted to, like the French did, but with advantage of even fewer scruples, they absolutely would have succeeded." Go back over your posts, read them carefully, and tell me where you established this in such a way that I am to take your claim for granted.

Moreover, USSR engaged in long-term nation building by creating Socialist parties in the countries under their sphere of influence. Local movements and heritage was co-opted in order to integrate ethnic groups better into the system. And the main language of instruction in USSR was Russian, existence of other languages in schools and local organizations was tolerated out of necessity, but as the lingua franca of Soviet space, Russian was the primary tongue of all USSR.

Let's start with the less ridiculous part of that paragraph, the part that I marked in red. You have clearly not paid attention. There was absolutely zero necessity to it. If they wanted to russify the population, they would have done what the French did, plus more. Beat the schoolchildren the second they utter a word in their native tongue. Fine and jail people speaking the wrong language in the open. FORBID the teaching of indigenous languages in the schools. This is what France has done, this is what the Soviets could have done easily, plus more, and you would have seen the results within very few generations.

Now to the ridiculous part: You're absolutely admitting defeat here. Having a main national language, a lingua franca is a completely different thing from exterminating languages and cultures, which is what this discussion circles around currently, and which is a claim you at least tacitly agreed to.

Yes, how strange that the Soviet regime looked upon Imperial Russia with distaste. I wonder why that is? Meanwhile, the Soviet curriculum routinely taught Russian culture through poetry, history, and art to its student. It really demonstrated its hate for its own Russian heritage and culture by praising figures like Lomonosov, Peter the Great, Tolstoy, and Pushkin. This self-loathing even reflected itself in modern mediums like film, where Imperial Russia was demonized in films like A Cruel Romance, or War & Peace.

I like how you make a (frankly completely irrelevant) rant and at the end kind of destroy it yourself. What is your claim here? That the Soviet movies prove that the Soviets absolutely loved Russia? lol. Fun fact: My mother made fun of me when I still went to school in Germany that she learned more German literature in the Soviet Union than I did in Germany. Clearly that must mean the Soviets were Germanifying the population!

Also funny is that what you were responding to with the above was this:

One can find beautiful quotes from Lenin about Russia if one wants: "The Russian is a bad worker." etc. Some are fake, but plenty are not.

Lenin was of mixed ethnicity with a mother of Jewish and German/Swedish origin and father of Kalmyk origin.
If we consider Jews a separate nationality, which the Soviets pretty much did, then all Soviet leaders except maybe Andropov and Gorbachev were non-Russians. Stalin was Georgian, while Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Chernenko were Ukrainians. Andropov had Jewish mother and the only thing we know for sure about his father is that he wasn't there to raise him. Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, was half Ukrainian.

Very similar can be said about especially the early commissariats and other high echelons of the Soviet Union - iirc then the early one featured 3 ethnic Russians out of 23, and none of the three holding any of the particularly important ones - it changed a little bit over the years, but Russians continued to be underrepresented if one looks at the genetic makeup of the Soviet Union. Yet we're to believe that a predominantly non-Russian Soviet leadership somehow wanted to make everyone Russian.

And not only did your rant have no relevance to it, two posts on you then say the following:

Uh huh, totally. That's why the vast majority of the Politburo was composed of Slavs.

Well clearly you have not been reading my post carefully. Now I'd like you to substantiate your claim. What year are you talking about? Are you saying that the Russians were over represented compared to their share of the population?

Korenisatsya was not an "anti-Russification" program, nor was it the opposite of "russification".

lol it absolutely is the opposite of Russification. If you were Russian, and moved to an area that did not speak Russian originally, in the years where Korenisatsya was enforced the strictest (it was toned down a little after a while), you were required to learn the local language.

It was an expansionist Soviet doctrine meant to co-opt local leadership into the Soviet bloc. Even in Central Asia, a relatively remote region of the USSR, public schools were taught in Russian, youth was indoctrinated into Soviet ideology in Komosomols, and bureaucracy, administration, and any intellectual pursuit, was dominated by Russian. While not Nationalist, the Soviet Union was nevertheless instrumental in spreading Russian culture, values, and influence beyond its borders in a way that Imperial Russia could only dream of.

And this part has no relevance to either your unsubstantiated claim about Korenisatsya, nor the fundamental claim we're arguing about and which you at least tacitly agreed to, that the Russians eradicated other cultures and minorities. I'm still waiting for that.

[Sir Adrian]

Tell me again how did Catherine the Great do that when the Bucovina wasn't part of the Russian empire save, if one's generous, the 1915-1917 wartime years at which point Catherine's corpse had been rotting for over a hundred years?

There's a difference between the Soviets being (an understatement) in general and deportations, which in the Crimean Tartar case happened as the Soviets were fighting a war, and them trying to stamp a culture out, which again they did not. Otherwise they would without a shadow of a doubt have succeeded. Nothing stopped the Soviets from starting China style ethnic internment&reeducation camps,

As I pointed out for France here, it's really not that hard nor does it take long to destroy the identity of minority, even if you're not as ruthless as the Soviets were. The languages in Russia that went extinct or died out did so as part of natural processes, such as their population spread being very small to begin with.

All of Moldavia was under russian influence/military control at the time, as part of the never-ending Russian-Turkish war. Part of what would become Bucovina was also in Russian hands

Russificiation was much stronger under the tsars than the soviets actually, not that the soviets did not forcibly russify a lot of the population. Ans yes, russification was real, claiming it never happened is a bold faced lie.

[Heathen Hammer]

Far-fetched, as almost none of these fantasies have much to do with Ukraine or Russia. Moreover, if Khrushchev was so blatantly anti-Russian, (or indeed, any of the General Secretary) they would've lost power as both the Politburo, the Supreme Soviet of SFSR, the armed forces, were all dominated by Russians.

Irrelevant, since Khruschev de-facto participated in genocide of Russians by USSR government.

The USSR did not discriminate on the basis of race. Millions of people from all ethnic groups, all religious denominations, etc suffered at the hands of the Soviet Union. Fact remains, that the vast majority of the Soviet apparatus was dominated by Russians. The lingua franca, or really just the de-facto language of USSR was Russian. This theory that USSR was "anti-Russian" is preposterous and no academic, historian, or really any normal person would agree. The fact that Russians suffered the most at the hands of disastrous Soviet policies is because they are the largest group, Russians were also the incumbent political leadership before any regime change occurs, and Russians are the nationality closest to the Kremlin. Thus, any policy would affect them most, and first.

USSR was not anti-Russian, in fact it was a Russian project. It's eventual demise was due to the shortcomings of its version of Communism, not because Russian people got tired of "foreign overlords".

Russians were discriminated on basis of ethnicity, since Russians are an ethnicity, not race, so your point about "no race discrimination" doesn't even make any sense. Soviets did try to enforce imaginary "Soviet man" identity on everyone, but they clearly prioritized suppressing ethnic Russians first and foremost. Soviet governmental apparatus enforced discrimination of Russians, trying to go through mental gymnastics and saying that just because some minister happened to be Russian doesn't change the fact that overall USSR was literally murdering Russians by millions through famines and political terror. Dzhugashvili wasn't Russian, neither were Lenin, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky, Beriya, Yagoda, Bela Kun, etc.
Denying that is equivalent of Holocaust denial or denial of Armenian genocide, IMO.

[Cookiegod]

All of Moldavia was under russian influence/military control at the time, as part of the never-ending Russian-Turkish war. Part of what would become Bucovina was also in Russian hands

So now that we've established that you mixed up what you were talking about, let's look at Moldavia, shall we?

Russificiation was much stronger under the tsars than the soviets actually, not that the soviets did not forcibly russify a lot of the population. Ans yes, russification was real, claiming it never happened is a bold faced lie.

A claim without any supporting arguments can be rebutted without any supporting arguments, so: Nuh uh.

[Love Mountain]

Irrelevant, since Khruschev de-facto participated in genocide of Russians by USSR government.

That wasn't a genocide.

Russians were discriminated on basis of ethnicity, since Russians are an ethnicity, not race, so your point about "no race discrimination" doesn't even make any sense. Soviets did try to enforce imaginary "Soviet man" identity on everyone, but they clearly prioritized suppressing ethnic Russians first and foremost. Soviet governmental apparatus enforced discrimination of Russians, trying to go through mental gymnastics and saying that just because some minister happened to be Russian doesn't change the fact that overall USSR was literally murdering Russians by millions through famines and political terror. Dzhugashvili wasn't Russian, neither were Lenin, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky, Beriya, Yagoda, Bela Kun, etc.
Denying that is equivalent of Holocaust denial or denial of Armenian genocide, IMO.

They were not discriminated, this is clearly evident by the fact that ethnic Russians dominated the political apparatus. Allegations that there was "discrimination" or "genocide" specifically against Russians makes no sense in light of basic facts and logic.

lol. The discussion did not start with you. Not everything pertains explicitly to you. I want you to go back a page, carefully, and see how silly your statement is.

This reply makes no sense. I didn't accuse you of "justifying" anything.

And again - not everything pertains directly to you. I'd like you to read my post again, carefully, and check where I said "Suki claims that the Holodomor is real". The reality is, however, that the holodomor is a frequent claim brought up in this same context, so I destroyed it whilst we were talking about the general topic to which it was a prime example even when not mentioned.

I don't recall anybody bringing up Holodomor, nor do I see how it pertains to any conversation or topic in this thread.

I like how you strawman my argument into: "Hey they didn't succeed, so that means it wasn't half bad", when what I said was "It did not happen, if they wanted to, like the French did, but with advantage of even fewer scruples, they absolutely would have succeeded." Go back over your posts, read them carefully, and tell me where you established this in such a way that I am to take your claim for granted.
Let's start with the less ridiculous part of that paragraph, the part that I marked in red. You have clearly not paid attention. There was absolutely zero necessity to it. If they wanted to russify the population, they would have done what the French did, plus more. Beat the schoolchildren the second they utter a word in their native tongue. Fine and jail people speaking the wrong language in the open. FORBID the teaching of indigenous languages in the schools. This is what France has done, this is what the Soviets could have done easily, plus more, and you would have seen the results within very few generations.

Now to the ridiculous part: You're absolutely admitting defeat here. Having a main national language, a lingua franca is a completely different thing from exterminating languages and cultures, which is what this discussion circles around currently, and which is a claim you at least tacitly agreed to.

This makes no sense, nor do my arguments represent any form of "admission". As was exhaustively explained to HH, the Soviet identity, for better or worse, is part of the "Russian" identity. The Communist Party was dominated by Russians. The main language of USSR was Russian, and Russian was the primary language used in education, military, and any other intellectual pursuit at its highest level. "Russification" or any other type of assimilation policies are not limited to what you can conceive of. Nor is there a mere binary choice of "ethnic cleansing" and no "ethnic cleansing". This is false.

I like how you make a (frankly completely irrelevant) rant and at the end kind of destroy it yourself. What is your claim here? That the Soviet movies prove that the Soviets absolutely loved Russia? lol. Fun fact: My mother made fun of me when I still went to school in Germany that she learned more German literature in the Soviet Union than I did in Germany. Clearly that must mean the Soviets were Germanifying the population!

This rant doesn't "destroy itself". On the contrary, if you cannot make the distinction between Russian Empire as regime and political apparatus, vs Russia the nation, culture, and history, then we don't have much to discuss here. It is beyond your understanding.

Also funny is that what you were responding to with the above was this:
And not only did your rant have no relevance to it, two posts on you then say the following:
Well clearly you have not been reading my post carefully. Now I'd like you to substantiate your claim. What year are you talking about? Are you saying that the Russians were over represented compared to their share of the population?

The Politburo was not a democratic institution. Your questions don't make any sense, insofar as their relevance to their conversation. Additionally, I'm a little tired of doing all of the work for everyone else. I already spent several hours, sifting through Soviet archives to get the ethnicity of officials I named previously. If you want to make a claim in regards to representation or political power within the USSR, you're more than welcome to look for proof yourself.

lol it absolutely is the opposite of Russification. If you were Russian, and moved to an area that did not speak Russian originally, in the years where Korenisatsya was enforced the strictest (it was toned down a little after a while), you were required to learn the local language.

Uh huh. That policy was so successful, that all institutions and people of any note spoke Russian. In fact, to this day, Russian is still one of the main languages used in post-Soviet Republics today, and in some of them, it's even a de-facto requirement for meaningful employment or achievement in any field.

And this part has no relevance to either your unsubstantiated claim about Korenisatsya, nor the fundamental claim we're arguing about and which you at least tacitly agreed to, that the Russians eradicated other cultures and minorities. I'm still waiting for that.

You're more than welcome to sift through my posts and quote me when I made such a claim.