Good catch. Ideally, countries will develop a sense of nationalism and national identify, hopefully protecting the physical safety and political rights of minorities. Members of Azov went to Israel and danced the hora, so true nationalists will put the well-being of their own country first, ahead of prejudices.
" hopefully protecting the physical safety and political rights of minorities. "
Good comment, except this obsession with minorities needs to stop. Any outsider group allowed to live amongst the larger, local, native, indigenous population of a nation need sto fully integrate into that country's national identity, thus , negating any need for a " minority" status. The problems ALWAYS arise when the " minority" group fails, or refuses, to do that.
Congratulations to Dr. Livci and RS on their article on Mozgovoi in the Unz Review and Occidental Observer. Maybe as long as you're not Miles Mathis, Unz will accept you!
While saddened at the news of the invasion of Ukraine, my hope and belief was that the ostensibly superior Russian armed forces--a supposed "superpower"--would make quick work of the UAF. Imagine my chagrin following the ignominious Russian retreat from Kiev, leaving scores of tanks and APC's for the UAF to scoop up. It was precisely at this moment that all my reservations and doubts I had about Putin and his "5D chess leadership" were confirmed.
Your declaration that Russian soldiers "have died for nothing" is the raw, unvarnished, and bitter truth of the matter.
I distinctly remember Martryanov responding with a smirk and a "four weeks" when he rhetorically asked himself - first week - Feb 2022 - how long would it last . How many combat casualties? UKR 15K RussFed: 1.5K (one point 5).
It seems Russians and Ukrainians are basically of the same stock, so I would expect their military capabilities to be closer rather than farther. That means no quick victories. The same situation held in the US Civil War. The Confederacy thought the North would fold as soon as they lost a few battles. In the end, the North had to literally overrun the Confederacy before a final peace was attained. And it came as an unconditional surrender. Lincoln was possibly the finest wartime leader in the history of the world. And I'm speaking as one who thinks the Confederate States should have been allowed to secede. Once the conflict was joined, Lincoln was absolutely unwilling to compromise on his wartime objectives.
It wasn't just about slavery. It was about a State's right to determine its own laws. We the United States became The United States. I know you know this and completely agree with you. But now the proganda and bread and circuses have taken hold and the Confederate flag became racist and the Southern War Heroes too. Absolute nonsense! With a population getting more stupid and diluted there is no salvation. Liberal authoritarianism is vogue in the west.
Yes and no. The more I read about the Civil War, the more I'm convinced the question of slavery was central. Of course, Matt Ehret thinks the Civil War was engineered by British intelligence as a means of breaking up the American colossus and opening the door for British imperialism.
As for the South pursuing its own laws, here is an excerpt from Lincoln's first inaugural speech:
"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
"The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices."
Here is an excerpt from a speech by Alexander Stephens, vice-President of the Confederacy: "The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."
In fairness, Stephens talked about many issues where the Confederate constitution was superior (in his judgement) to the US Constitution.
The ban on WII propaganda revisionism was news to this Yankee and gave me a good laugh. NPC's sometimes chant that "The Holocaust is the most documented event in history" but it pales in comparison to what's variously called the Hitler Stalin Pact or more correctly the Molotov von Ribbentrop Agreement. To deny that would require literally Orwellian levels of censorship, doctoring 10s of 1000s of newspapers, newsreels, motion pictures, etc. You might as well claim Alf Landon was president. It demonstrates that once you start making it illegal to question "obvious" historical facts, there is no limit.
I'd rank these as:
Hitler/Stalin: absolute fact, like 13 red/white stripes on the US flag
East European units in the Wehrmacht: not so well known, might come as a surprise, but evidence easily obtained on request.
Icebreaker thesis: well, that's what it's called, a recent historical hypothesis, jury is out on that.
Holocaust: absolute and obvious bullshit, sustained only by total control of all media and now actual laws.
BTW, I recently came across a YT clip of failed academic/Christ sceptic/sex pest Richard Carrier explaining his rejected by most historians but totally valid method, bro, of proving Jesus didn't exist, beginning with contrasting the lack of Jesus evidence with "the mountain of evidence making the Holocaust an undeniable historical fact." So, no Jesus, but yes Holocaust. I wonder who he's working for? (Hint: Columbia University/libertarian/atheist/polyamory background)
I don't agree that the holocaust was bullshit, although the popularly accepted details are wrong. I'm sure you don't want to get into the weeds but some really good estimates are 2.5 to 4.5 million Jewish civilians killed during the war, most by means other than gassing. Contrast this with 27 million Russians during WWII, the Holodomor, the massacre of Armenian Christians by the Ottoman Young Turks and the many millions in Iran who died of starvation during WWI. Genocide is much more common in human affairs than most people think. So it's not unique to a single people or country. And obviously, any and all discussion should be allowed.
If the holohoax is real, why do all the camp "survivors" have tattoo numbers that are under a million ? Wouldnt they have been the first ones killed ? Additionally, why tattoo people you will immediately kill anyway ? I could go on and on and on ..........
Interesting prediction from Clif High. He thinks there will soon be a major exposure of Jewish corruption of history. Maybe there will be a firestorm over a holocaust.
Actually, 2.5 million were killed during German military activities, such as by Einsatzgrupen, special military units assigned specifically to kill civilians. This figure came from internal German documents generated by the top statistician reporting to Goering. Very hard to deny some killing took place. I don't know about the tattoo numbers in particular. Perhaps the tattooed inmates were designated as workers.
As I said, an internal German statistical report meant for the German high command only, specified that 2.3 million Jews had been killed as of early 1943. So that is a floor figure. I'm not trying to trip a guilt wire. I'm trying to drill down to the truth. David Cole, who had to go into hiding because the Jewish Defense League was actively trying to kill him for throwing cold water on the traditional claim of 6 million dead in gas chambers, estimated anywhere from 2.5 to 4.5 million Jews killed, based on the German document itself.
One video pointed out that inmates were issued camp clothing, so piles of shoes proves nothing. I realize the comment was sarcastic and there is an explanation for it.
You're an odd one. You're on a site that tells you that the war in Ukraine, and others, are pretty much deliberate theater, yet you're here spewing the accepted , PTB, propaganda about the biggest theater of all time.
There was no industrial scale, genocide program, targeted at the Yids using gas chambers. All the survivors tattoos are below 1 million, there aren any mass graves with with tens of thousands of bodies, yet alone millions.
Have you seen Shoah? The documentary by Claude Lanzmann and the follow up documentaries he made from this work? I do think something happened. Anyone who says it's a complete fabrication is up their with flat earthers with me. Plus this guy must be an Oscar worthy actor https://youtu.be/JXweT1BgQMk?si=7RROQNd47L061XQ_ how can this be fake?
Moscow’s Anti-Migrant Campaign Accelerating Formation of Ethnic Ghettos in Russia
Paul Goble
Executive Summary:
Russia is now facing a problem that did not exist in Soviet times and one that in the years since 1991, Moscow has denied exists now: the appearance in Moscow and other major cities of ethnic ghettos consisting of members of Central Asian migrants.
This development is linked not only to the transformation of slums into ghettos as poorer immigrants replace the indigenous population but also about social attitudes and government policies that have driven the migrants to band together to defend themselves.
All signs point to an intensification of Moscow’s anti-immigrant campaign and the exacerbation of rising crime and violence in Russia due to xenophobia, all of which come at a time when Russia faces severe labor shortages.
Prior to the Russian Revolution in 1917, Russian cities had ethnic quarters, or ghettos, where members of some minorities lived to maintain their ethnic identities and protect themselves against Russification. Between 1917 and 1991, such ghettos largely disappeared as a result of Soviet policies such as the propiska system, which allowed officials to determine who lived where. Following 1991, the propiska system was formally banned, and neighborhoods began gradually separating themselves again. Russian officials continue to insist that their country does not have any ghettos. In recent years, however, research and reality have forced them to acknowledge that there are, in fact, “ethnic enclaves,” a euphemism for ghettos, a word few are prepared to use (Window on Eurasia, February 23, 2023). The influx of migrant workers from Central Asia and the Caucasus into Russian cities has subsequently caused growing anger among the population and policies against immigrant workers. As a result, real ghettos have emerged in Russian cities, exacerbating tensions between their residents and the surrounding Russian community and creating conditions in which tensions spill over into violence that even the increasingly repressive Putin regime is finding difficult to subdue (see EDM, May 9, 15).
Most discussions about the reappearance of ghettos in Russian cities have suggested this development is simply the result of slums transforming into ghettos, a process in which poorer migrants replace ethnic Russian residents in poorer parts of urban areas (Natsional’nyi Aktsent, February 2, 2023). There can be little doubt that this is the primary factor in the recent rise of ghettos in Russian cities. It is increasingly evident, however, that this issue has been exacerbated by Moscow’s anti-immigrant campaign and how Russian officials and the Russian population have responded. This includes not only refusing to rent to migrants but also educators' and parents’ attitudes toward the increasing number of migrants’ children in schools who do not know Russian well (Window on Eurasia, May 29, 2016). A common narrative is that their presence has the effect of slowing the education for others, leading to declines in all-important test scores—upon which teachers’ and administrators’ salaries depend (RIA Novosti, April 8, 2021; Nezavisimaya Gazeta, April 12, 2021; Zavtra.ru, April 14, 2021).
Declining test scores have led to calls by some Russian nationalists that the children of immigrants be excluded from Russian public schools. These appeals have been dismissed as political grandstanding from parties that would like to expel all migrant workers from Russia, something that the Kremlin cannot afford to do. Such dismissals, however, have failed to recognize that these attitudes are already having an effect, keeping immigrant children from attending many schools.
This is such a politically explosive topic that few studies have been conducted on how ghettoization is affecting urban life in Russia. One study on the situation in St. Petersburg recently released by Russian independent news agency Bumaga provides the clearest indication of just how far ghettoization has progressed. The study found that the situation was developing due to political reasons connected to anti-immigrant campaigns, rather than for economic ones. These campaigns have been carried out in response to a call from the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) to strip children without Russian citizenship of the right to free public education (TASS, September 5). The Bumaga investigation found that in the wake of the Crocus City Hall bombing in March 2024, many Russian public schools are now refusing to admit immigrant children, citing overcrowding or other more spurious reasons. This has led to younger immigrant children being concentrated in certain schools and, in numerous cases, older immigrant children not attending at all, being left to their own devices on the streets (Bumaga, October 17).
Both of these consequences, Bumaga researchers conclude, are leading to the rapid ghettoization of immigrants, to an even slower adaptation of migrant children to Russian life, and perhaps most disturbingly of all, to the emergence of sometimes violent and often fanatically politically radical youth culture (see EDM, March 22, 2018). While there are fewer immigrants to Russia now than in the past, the problems they pose are growing. This conclusion is supported by reports concerning increasing clashes between migrant youth and their Russian counterparts and even the formation of militias by each group to defend against the other (Svobodnaya Pressa, July 24, 2021; Window on Eurasia, September 15, 2023).
Despite these risks, there is broad support both within the educational system and by the ethnic Russian majority for exclusionary policies, according to Bumaga. As previously stated, schools, teachers, and parents of non-immigrant children support excluding immigrant children because their presence means that teachers have to devote more attention and time to those who do not know Russian well. This redirection of educators’ attention means that all get relatively less preparation for government-tested subjects—something which is already sparking calls for the number of immigrant children to be limited to only a handful in each class. As discussed earlier, school directors and teachers’ pay is threatened by a lower average score on said tests, which likewise determine other students’ opportunities to move on to higher education. As a result of this, there is a large group of people whose interests oppose admitting children of non-citizenship immigrants to schools.
The solution in the educational system, activists and experts tell Bumaga, is to establish special schools for immigrants to provide them with the Russian language education they need if they are to remain in Russia. Some acknowledge, however, that there is a danger to setting up such schools, as it could also lead to further ghettoization. While there are no statistics available on how large either of these trends has become due to its controversy, Bumaga suggests that both are large and growing. The issue is expected to negatively impact migrant and non-migrant children in schools and Russian society overall.
In the broader problem of ghettoization, migrant children play only a small part, but the Putin regime has been presented with a Hobson’s choice about migrant workers. On the one hand, the Kremlin recognizes that Russia cannot afford to expel migrants or their children. On the other hand, the Putin leadership has yet to develop a strategy to curb the growth of ghettos and the violence their rise may provoke, especially amid the increasingly nationalist attitudes among the Russian population. Relying solely on repression—a tactic that proved ineffective in controlling such conflicts during the late imperial period—is unlikely to succeed in the current crisis (on that history and that prospect, see EDM, October 15).
“Macgregor, Burns, Carlson, Sachs, Mearsheimer, Luttwak and other “Old Guard” types.”
This is where you get way off base, trying to map the semiotics of the media onto DC power politics. You might derive truth playing around with symbols divorced from reality when it comes to the occult, but that kind of platonic engagement doesn’t work for DC power politics.
That group of goobers isn’t a faction in DC politics. The pro-Russia people in DC are a heterogenous mix and they have no power. Mearsheimer and Luttwak are the closest to an “old guard” bc they are stuck thinking in 19th century and Cold War terms and so think Russia has a natural and permanent “sphere of influence” that means we should let Russia conquer Ukraine. But that was never an institutional view, Kissinger and Brzezinski rejected that view in the 70s and we never looked back.
Macgregor and Scott Ritter failed out of their careers, irrelevant cranks (and Ritter a pedo) who take Russian money for lack of other options and to feel important. If Ritter want a pedo he’d still be on the anti-bush speaking circuit.
Carlson represents a faction of republicans who for the past 25 years have been pro-Putin bc of his Christian cosplay and because they think he creates discursive space for them on the right he same way the USSR shifted the Overton window left in the USA. They are the Lenin to Putin’s Kaiser Wilhelm, used solely as a destabilizing agent against the west.
Sachs’ voucher privatization is what fucked up russia in the first place, and his aid work has been just as big a disaster Its unclear what he’s doing - he’s taking Russian money, but he’s also taking Arab money to pimp those regimes. I assume like with Macgrehor and Ritter it’s a desire to feel important and redeem himself after a career going from one failure to another.
The Fasilandchronicles, you say? I'd take that, and also a large falafel with extra cheese and pepperoni. What? Yes, of course I know what a falafel is!
Thank you, Rurik. It's a shame that these articles of yours don't reach more people, at least the ~5% or so with a functioning brain. Keep it up.
It’s far far less than 5%
I hope people caught these two juicy nuggets.
" Russian negotiators sought specific legal changes, including the repeal of Ukrainian laws that promoted national identity and language. "
" New hate speech laws to be passed banning Holocaust denial, revision of WWII official historical propaganda "
Good catch. Ideally, countries will develop a sense of nationalism and national identify, hopefully protecting the physical safety and political rights of minorities. Members of Azov went to Israel and danced the hora, so true nationalists will put the well-being of their own country first, ahead of prejudices.
" hopefully protecting the physical safety and political rights of minorities. "
Good comment, except this obsession with minorities needs to stop. Any outsider group allowed to live amongst the larger, local, native, indigenous population of a nation need sto fully integrate into that country's national identity, thus , negating any need for a " minority" status. The problems ALWAYS arise when the " minority" group fails, or refuses, to do that.
Congratulations to Dr. Livci and RS on their article on Mozgovoi in the Unz Review and Occidental Observer. Maybe as long as you're not Miles Mathis, Unz will accept you!
https://www.unz.com/article/mozgovoi-the-warlord-of-donbass/
While saddened at the news of the invasion of Ukraine, my hope and belief was that the ostensibly superior Russian armed forces--a supposed "superpower"--would make quick work of the UAF. Imagine my chagrin following the ignominious Russian retreat from Kiev, leaving scores of tanks and APC's for the UAF to scoop up. It was precisely at this moment that all my reservations and doubts I had about Putin and his "5D chess leadership" were confirmed.
Your declaration that Russian soldiers "have died for nothing" is the raw, unvarnished, and bitter truth of the matter.
I distinctly remember Martryanov responding with a smirk and a "four weeks" when he rhetorically asked himself - first week - Feb 2022 - how long would it last . How many combat casualties? UKR 15K RussFed: 1.5K (one point 5).
It seems Russians and Ukrainians are basically of the same stock, so I would expect their military capabilities to be closer rather than farther. That means no quick victories. The same situation held in the US Civil War. The Confederacy thought the North would fold as soon as they lost a few battles. In the end, the North had to literally overrun the Confederacy before a final peace was attained. And it came as an unconditional surrender. Lincoln was possibly the finest wartime leader in the history of the world. And I'm speaking as one who thinks the Confederate States should have been allowed to secede. Once the conflict was joined, Lincoln was absolutely unwilling to compromise on his wartime objectives.
It wasn't just about slavery. It was about a State's right to determine its own laws. We the United States became The United States. I know you know this and completely agree with you. But now the proganda and bread and circuses have taken hold and the Confederate flag became racist and the Southern War Heroes too. Absolute nonsense! With a population getting more stupid and diluted there is no salvation. Liberal authoritarianism is vogue in the west.
Yes and no. The more I read about the Civil War, the more I'm convinced the question of slavery was central. Of course, Matt Ehret thinks the Civil War was engineered by British intelligence as a means of breaking up the American colossus and opening the door for British imperialism.
As for the South pursuing its own laws, here is an excerpt from Lincoln's first inaugural speech:
"I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
"The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere. Where hostility to the United States in any interior locality shall be so great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right may exist in the Government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the attempt to do so would be so irritating and so nearly impracticable withal that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such offices."
Here is an excerpt from a speech by Alexander Stephens, vice-President of the Confederacy: "The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth."
In fairness, Stephens talked about many issues where the Confederate constitution was superior (in his judgement) to the US Constitution.
Sad story, you have convinced me.
The ban on WII propaganda revisionism was news to this Yankee and gave me a good laugh. NPC's sometimes chant that "The Holocaust is the most documented event in history" but it pales in comparison to what's variously called the Hitler Stalin Pact or more correctly the Molotov von Ribbentrop Agreement. To deny that would require literally Orwellian levels of censorship, doctoring 10s of 1000s of newspapers, newsreels, motion pictures, etc. You might as well claim Alf Landon was president. It demonstrates that once you start making it illegal to question "obvious" historical facts, there is no limit.
I'd rank these as:
Hitler/Stalin: absolute fact, like 13 red/white stripes on the US flag
East European units in the Wehrmacht: not so well known, might come as a surprise, but evidence easily obtained on request.
Icebreaker thesis: well, that's what it's called, a recent historical hypothesis, jury is out on that.
Holocaust: absolute and obvious bullshit, sustained only by total control of all media and now actual laws.
BTW, I recently came across a YT clip of failed academic/Christ sceptic/sex pest Richard Carrier explaining his rejected by most historians but totally valid method, bro, of proving Jesus didn't exist, beginning with contrasting the lack of Jesus evidence with "the mountain of evidence making the Holocaust an undeniable historical fact." So, no Jesus, but yes Holocaust. I wonder who he's working for? (Hint: Columbia University/libertarian/atheist/polyamory background)
He also turned on and denounced Robert Price over his support for Trump a few years ago.
Yes, I interviewed Price on his de-platforming:
https://counter-currents.com/2022/04/ten-questions-for-dr-robert-m-price/
I don't agree that the holocaust was bullshit, although the popularly accepted details are wrong. I'm sure you don't want to get into the weeds but some really good estimates are 2.5 to 4.5 million Jewish civilians killed during the war, most by means other than gassing. Contrast this with 27 million Russians during WWII, the Holodomor, the massacre of Armenian Christians by the Ottoman Young Turks and the many millions in Iran who died of starvation during WWI. Genocide is much more common in human affairs than most people think. So it's not unique to a single people or country. And obviously, any and all discussion should be allowed.
If the holohoax is real, why do all the camp "survivors" have tattoo numbers that are under a million ? Wouldnt they have been the first ones killed ? Additionally, why tattoo people you will immediately kill anyway ? I could go on and on and on ..........
Interesting prediction from Clif High. He thinks there will soon be a major exposure of Jewish corruption of history. Maybe there will be a firestorm over a holocaust.
https://clifhigh.substack.com/p/getting-dybbuked-can-ruin-your-day
Actually, 2.5 million were killed during German military activities, such as by Einsatzgrupen, special military units assigned specifically to kill civilians. This figure came from internal German documents generated by the top statistician reporting to Goering. Very hard to deny some killing took place. I don't know about the tattoo numbers in particular. Perhaps the tattooed inmates were designated as workers.
I'll play along. Where are the bodies ?
There are piles of shoes you MONSTER
I repent. I repent.
As I said, an internal German statistical report meant for the German high command only, specified that 2.3 million Jews had been killed as of early 1943. So that is a floor figure. I'm not trying to trip a guilt wire. I'm trying to drill down to the truth. David Cole, who had to go into hiding because the Jewish Defense League was actively trying to kill him for throwing cold water on the traditional claim of 6 million dead in gas chambers, estimated anywhere from 2.5 to 4.5 million Jews killed, based on the German document itself.
One video pointed out that inmates were issued camp clothing, so piles of shoes proves nothing. I realize the comment was sarcastic and there is an explanation for it.
You're an odd one. You're on a site that tells you that the war in Ukraine, and others, are pretty much deliberate theater, yet you're here spewing the accepted , PTB, propaganda about the biggest theater of all time.
There was no industrial scale, genocide program, targeted at the Yids using gas chambers. All the survivors tattoos are below 1 million, there aren any mass graves with with tens of thousands of bodies, yet alone millions.
The "death" camps had maturnity wards, why ?
They had camp orchestras, why ?
They had camp sports teams , why ?
Have you seen Shoah? The documentary by Claude Lanzmann and the follow up documentaries he made from this work? I do think something happened. Anyone who says it's a complete fabrication is up their with flat earthers with me. Plus this guy must be an Oscar worthy actor https://youtu.be/JXweT1BgQMk?si=7RROQNd47L061XQ_ how can this be fake?
" This is the West’s standard MO. They put puppet-leaders into power, and then they ritually depose them. "
However, this is very different. The other puppets were not of the " Happy Merchant" variety, he is. I predict he will ride off into the sunset.
swarthland chronicles sounds great lmao - since it's the next theatre time to start learning the language.
big arab market just waiting for this type of content
Moscow’s Anti-Migrant Campaign Accelerating Formation of Ethnic Ghettos in Russia
Paul Goble
Executive Summary:
Russia is now facing a problem that did not exist in Soviet times and one that in the years since 1991, Moscow has denied exists now: the appearance in Moscow and other major cities of ethnic ghettos consisting of members of Central Asian migrants.
This development is linked not only to the transformation of slums into ghettos as poorer immigrants replace the indigenous population but also about social attitudes and government policies that have driven the migrants to band together to defend themselves.
All signs point to an intensification of Moscow’s anti-immigrant campaign and the exacerbation of rising crime and violence in Russia due to xenophobia, all of which come at a time when Russia faces severe labor shortages.
Prior to the Russian Revolution in 1917, Russian cities had ethnic quarters, or ghettos, where members of some minorities lived to maintain their ethnic identities and protect themselves against Russification. Between 1917 and 1991, such ghettos largely disappeared as a result of Soviet policies such as the propiska system, which allowed officials to determine who lived where. Following 1991, the propiska system was formally banned, and neighborhoods began gradually separating themselves again. Russian officials continue to insist that their country does not have any ghettos. In recent years, however, research and reality have forced them to acknowledge that there are, in fact, “ethnic enclaves,” a euphemism for ghettos, a word few are prepared to use (Window on Eurasia, February 23, 2023). The influx of migrant workers from Central Asia and the Caucasus into Russian cities has subsequently caused growing anger among the population and policies against immigrant workers. As a result, real ghettos have emerged in Russian cities, exacerbating tensions between their residents and the surrounding Russian community and creating conditions in which tensions spill over into violence that even the increasingly repressive Putin regime is finding difficult to subdue (see EDM, May 9, 15).
Most discussions about the reappearance of ghettos in Russian cities have suggested this development is simply the result of slums transforming into ghettos, a process in which poorer migrants replace ethnic Russian residents in poorer parts of urban areas (Natsional’nyi Aktsent, February 2, 2023). There can be little doubt that this is the primary factor in the recent rise of ghettos in Russian cities. It is increasingly evident, however, that this issue has been exacerbated by Moscow’s anti-immigrant campaign and how Russian officials and the Russian population have responded. This includes not only refusing to rent to migrants but also educators' and parents’ attitudes toward the increasing number of migrants’ children in schools who do not know Russian well (Window on Eurasia, May 29, 2016). A common narrative is that their presence has the effect of slowing the education for others, leading to declines in all-important test scores—upon which teachers’ and administrators’ salaries depend (RIA Novosti, April 8, 2021; Nezavisimaya Gazeta, April 12, 2021; Zavtra.ru, April 14, 2021).
Declining test scores have led to calls by some Russian nationalists that the children of immigrants be excluded from Russian public schools. These appeals have been dismissed as political grandstanding from parties that would like to expel all migrant workers from Russia, something that the Kremlin cannot afford to do. Such dismissals, however, have failed to recognize that these attitudes are already having an effect, keeping immigrant children from attending many schools.
This is such a politically explosive topic that few studies have been conducted on how ghettoization is affecting urban life in Russia. One study on the situation in St. Petersburg recently released by Russian independent news agency Bumaga provides the clearest indication of just how far ghettoization has progressed. The study found that the situation was developing due to political reasons connected to anti-immigrant campaigns, rather than for economic ones. These campaigns have been carried out in response to a call from the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) to strip children without Russian citizenship of the right to free public education (TASS, September 5). The Bumaga investigation found that in the wake of the Crocus City Hall bombing in March 2024, many Russian public schools are now refusing to admit immigrant children, citing overcrowding or other more spurious reasons. This has led to younger immigrant children being concentrated in certain schools and, in numerous cases, older immigrant children not attending at all, being left to their own devices on the streets (Bumaga, October 17).
Both of these consequences, Bumaga researchers conclude, are leading to the rapid ghettoization of immigrants, to an even slower adaptation of migrant children to Russian life, and perhaps most disturbingly of all, to the emergence of sometimes violent and often fanatically politically radical youth culture (see EDM, March 22, 2018). While there are fewer immigrants to Russia now than in the past, the problems they pose are growing. This conclusion is supported by reports concerning increasing clashes between migrant youth and their Russian counterparts and even the formation of militias by each group to defend against the other (Svobodnaya Pressa, July 24, 2021; Window on Eurasia, September 15, 2023).
Despite these risks, there is broad support both within the educational system and by the ethnic Russian majority for exclusionary policies, according to Bumaga. As previously stated, schools, teachers, and parents of non-immigrant children support excluding immigrant children because their presence means that teachers have to devote more attention and time to those who do not know Russian well. This redirection of educators’ attention means that all get relatively less preparation for government-tested subjects—something which is already sparking calls for the number of immigrant children to be limited to only a handful in each class. As discussed earlier, school directors and teachers’ pay is threatened by a lower average score on said tests, which likewise determine other students’ opportunities to move on to higher education. As a result of this, there is a large group of people whose interests oppose admitting children of non-citizenship immigrants to schools.
The solution in the educational system, activists and experts tell Bumaga, is to establish special schools for immigrants to provide them with the Russian language education they need if they are to remain in Russia. Some acknowledge, however, that there is a danger to setting up such schools, as it could also lead to further ghettoization. While there are no statistics available on how large either of these trends has become due to its controversy, Bumaga suggests that both are large and growing. The issue is expected to negatively impact migrant and non-migrant children in schools and Russian society overall.
In the broader problem of ghettoization, migrant children play only a small part, but the Putin regime has been presented with a Hobson’s choice about migrant workers. On the one hand, the Kremlin recognizes that Russia cannot afford to expel migrants or their children. On the other hand, the Putin leadership has yet to develop a strategy to curb the growth of ghettos and the violence their rise may provoke, especially amid the increasingly nationalist attitudes among the Russian population. Relying solely on repression—a tactic that proved ineffective in controlling such conflicts during the late imperial period—is unlikely to succeed in the current crisis (on that history and that prospect, see EDM, October 15).
“Macgregor, Burns, Carlson, Sachs, Mearsheimer, Luttwak and other “Old Guard” types.”
This is where you get way off base, trying to map the semiotics of the media onto DC power politics. You might derive truth playing around with symbols divorced from reality when it comes to the occult, but that kind of platonic engagement doesn’t work for DC power politics.
That group of goobers isn’t a faction in DC politics. The pro-Russia people in DC are a heterogenous mix and they have no power. Mearsheimer and Luttwak are the closest to an “old guard” bc they are stuck thinking in 19th century and Cold War terms and so think Russia has a natural and permanent “sphere of influence” that means we should let Russia conquer Ukraine. But that was never an institutional view, Kissinger and Brzezinski rejected that view in the 70s and we never looked back.
Macgregor and Scott Ritter failed out of their careers, irrelevant cranks (and Ritter a pedo) who take Russian money for lack of other options and to feel important. If Ritter want a pedo he’d still be on the anti-bush speaking circuit.
Carlson represents a faction of republicans who for the past 25 years have been pro-Putin bc of his Christian cosplay and because they think he creates discursive space for them on the right he same way the USSR shifted the Overton window left in the USA. They are the Lenin to Putin’s Kaiser Wilhelm, used solely as a destabilizing agent against the west.
Sachs’ voucher privatization is what fucked up russia in the first place, and his aid work has been just as big a disaster Its unclear what he’s doing - he’s taking Russian money, but he’s also taking Arab money to pimp those regimes. I assume like with Macgrehor and Ritter it’s a desire to feel important and redeem himself after a career going from one failure to another.
Russia really 'demanded' laws against 'Holocaust denial' to stop the 'heroization of Nazism'.
So basically Russia demands a new Minsk agreement with bans on alternative historical narratives to quell the Nazi uprising in Ukriane lol
This is the dumbest war
So what is the real reason this war happened?
We know both 'the west' and russia's offical explanations are nonsense .
I know an Afghan girl I can talk with. She's up on a lot of this news.
Interesting build-up near the Baltics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmMNXY2aFpk
The Fasilandchronicles, you say? I'd take that, and also a large falafel with extra cheese and pepperoni. What? Yes, of course I know what a falafel is!
Learn Farsi.
It is all going swimmingly:
https://x.com/intelFromBrian/status/1848094341556052231
Brian’s Breaking News and Intel
@intelFromBrian
Iranian Military source to Tasnim Agency:
Our hand is on the trigger and the biggest surprise awaits the Zionists
In the event that Israel attacks military sites, the Iranian response will be certain and at a level higher than the Zionists’ estimates.
If the Zionists attack Iranian nuclear sites, Iran will also consider nuclear policies in response.
9:10 AM · Oct 21, 2024