Crimea’s ‘return home’ shows love for motherland, says Putin

[uhnope]

Source: Euronews

Russian President Vladimir Putin said in his new year address that the Crimean peninsula’s “return home” to Moscow’s control is an important chapter in Russia’s history.

“Love for one’s motherland is one of the most powerful and uplifting feelings. It manifested itself in full in the brotherly support to the people of Crimea and Sevastopol, when they resolutely decided to return home,” Putin said in the televised address, adding: “This event will remain a very important moment in domestic history forever.”

Ukraine and the West view the annexation of Crimea as illegitimate. Meanwhile German Chancellor Angela Merkel delivered a strongly worded address that condemned Russia for its actions in Ukraine. She also said that Russia had shaken the “foundation of Europe’s peaceful order.”

“There is no question at all that we want security in Europe together with Russia, not against Russia,” she said. “But equally, there is no question that in Europe we cannot and we will not accept a so-called right of the strongest who violates international law.”

Read more: http://www.euronews.com/2014/12/31/crimea-s-return-home-shows-love-for-motherland-says-putin/

---

Hail the Motherland and New Russia

[Hulk]

1. The fool is delusional.

Probably true that most of the citizens of Crimea are happy to be part of Russia. I think the rest of it is egotistical bull shit. Never thought I'd say another leader of a powerful nation is dumber than W, but I think we have a close race here.

[Duckhunter935]

2. yep

I do feel sorry for the native Crimean Tartar population. They were forcibly deported once by Russia and are being arrested, harrassed or banned from entering Crimea. I am not sure they are happy Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.

[BillZBubb]

3. Putin is right about one thing: it is a very important event in Russian history.

It is going to bring about the biggest economic contraction there since the fall of the USSR.

[freshwest]

4. They do say Motherland, don't they? Better than Fatherland or Homeland, I guess:

And despite the hysteria about 'plans for nuclear war with Russia' earlier this year, that didn't happen, either:

President Obama Brilliantly Take Down a Heckler Who THINKS He’s Going to BLOW UP RUSSIA

During his speech at the DNC, President Obama was interrupted by a heckler who claimed that he is planning a nuclear war with Russia. The president’s reaction was priceless.

Transcript:

AUDIENCE MEMBER:

Mr. Obama!

THE PRESIDENT: — I consider Republicans patriots who love this country just as much as we do.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Tell us about your plans for nuclear war with Russia!

THE PRESIDENT: I’m sorry, who’s that back there? (Laughter.) What the heck are you talking about? (Applause.)

AUDIENCE: Obama! Obama! Obama!

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, don’t worry about it. We’re okay. Have a seat. I don’t know anything about that plan. (Laughter.) I don’t know what you’ve been reading. (Laughter.) Let me return to what I was talking about. (Applause.) See, he thought happy hour started earlier. (Laughter and applause.)
The look on President Obama’s face was priceless. If that wasn’t the ultimate WTF look, I don’t know what is. When protesters have an issue that they care about, this president has been very generous in letting them speak. However, this particular heckler was a crackpot. President Obama doesn’t want to go to war with Russia. He most definitely has no interest in starting a nuclear war. This isn’t the Cold War. Obama isn’t going to nuke Russia over the events in Ukraine. It’s silly to think that is a possibility.

It is even less likely to happen because the president made a statement today that emphasised that the consequences for Russia’s actions in Ukraine will come from the international community. For the millionth time, Barack Obama is not George W. Bush. Even George W. Bush wasn’t cowboy enough to threaten to drop a nuke on somebody. This heckler was a bit of a paranoid freak, and the president handled this individual’s rude interruption incredibly well.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/02/28/president-obama-brilliantly-heckler-thinks-blow-russia.html

to Segami:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024582939

The video was shorter than this one, but a great time was had by all. Was at it for days!

From your thread in May:

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=193323#

The first video is LOL but the second is ROFLMAO funny. Good for a laugh and a nice way to remember what's been as the New Year begins.

Happy New Year, uhnope!

[Igel]

6. There are two words.

The first is "rodina." It means "motherland" or "homeland." It's where you are homesick for. You don't return to your "country" (strana), you return to your "rodina".

That's true for everybody. Americans and Germans, in returning to their home countries, return to their rodiny. (A final -y or -i means plural.) "Home country" is how I usually put it, but in sufficiently maudlin contexts it "feels" like the English word "motherland." It's what you love and miss, not what you feel proud of. And duty to your rodina is a pull on the emotions not on duty.

Rodina is clearly has the root "rod-". Rod, by itself, means "clan." Rodskoy means "native" but often has a warm and fuzzy feeling. Rodit' is "to give birth", roditel' is "parent" (with roditeli 'parents). Blagorodnyi is "well-born" or "noble." Rodnoy means little more than "your own"--it's like the family house, but can refer to more than a "house". Your rodina is, in some sense, your rodnoy house. It's where your safe. And it's at least as much connected being with being among those rodnoy to you--both related and dear, because you can only really trust your family and, after your family, your clan or tribe. (In fact, rodina meant something like your clan's or tribe's territory, where you get support and where you show support for those like you as opposed to those nasty other people.)

The word for "mother" is mat' or mama. And what's odd is that "the Rodina loves you" is something that sounds strange to me, meaning I've never or seldom heard it. Love is owed and natural for rodina. It's less common the other way round--it's more assumed, and that love provides both loyalty and obedience to the group, to the collective.

Russian for "father" is otets. And just as Latin pater 'father' yielded both Spanish padre 'father' and Spanish patria 'country,' and from that same root we get "patriotic," so otets gives us Russian otechestvo "fatherland" and the adjective made from that word, otechestvennyi "patriotic". WWII was the Great Patriotic War. You should feel patriotic. Patriotism is important. The word otechestvennyi is so common that it often means just "domestic": Gross Domestic Product, "domestically manufactured goods," "domestic apples." Pretty much any place you can use the adj. "Russian" it's replaceable by "otechestvennyi"--history, culture, politics, political parties, government, currency, railroads, vodka. And there it strikes a contrast with outsiders (you really, really have to strain to find a place where a non-native can say otechestvennyi and have it mean "German" or "Venezuelan.&quot It's like a super-beefed up "buy American" or "made in America" campaign. This is more sense of duty and responsibility. You are proud of your otechestvo. It's something you you can be proud of.

You can also return to your otechestvo. It's not like it means "patriotic" and nothing more. If you return to your otechestvo, it can be forcible--you deport people to their otechestvo, unless you want to convince yourself that you're doing the kind thing by doing so, then you deport them to their rodina. When you're done trying to convince somebody to go home because they miss their rodina you appeal to senses of honor and patriotism. You fight for your rodina, but your otechestvo destroys its enemies.

Otechesvto is fatherland. Oddly, though, it's Rodina that sounds a lot more like Vaterland to me. Vaterland is what pulls on the emotional strings and rouses defense. It's home, where those nasty outsiders can't hurt you and where you're protected and kept ... like a dog on a leash. (German also has heimat, 'homeland', which is a bit mushy at times, too, but can lack a lot of the emotional baggage.)

Putin's words:
Любовь к Родине - одно из самых мощных, возвышающих чувств. Она в полной мере проявилась в братской поддержке жителей Крыма и Севастополя, когда они твердо решили вернуться в свой родной дом. Это событие навсегда останется важнейшей вехой в отечественной истории"

Love for (your) Rodina is one of the most powerful, uplifting feelings. It was fully shown in the brotherly support of those living in Crimea and Sevastopol', when they firmly decided to return to their rodnoy house. This event will forever remain one of the most important mileposts in otechestvennyi history.


Oddly, the support was shown by the Crimeans and Sevastopolites to the Russian homeland.. They love their rodina and supported her by returning to her. And their decision will remain an important milepost in otechestvennyi or "patriotic" history. The word "milepost" is a big one: It's a huge Soviet word and rings with echoes of both WWII, the Revolution, and the battles and events between the two. Spaceflight was a vekha "milepost."

[pampango]

5. "One ideological doctrine unites the far-right worldview, it is that of nationalism."

The racist movement is comprised of white supremacy groups such as the KKK, neoNazi groups such as the National Alliance and Skinheads groups such as the Hammerskin Nation. The groups comprising this movement are interested in preserving or restoring what they perceive as the appropriate and natural racial and cultural hierarchy, by enforcing social and political control over non-Aryans/nonwhites such as African Americans, Jews, and various immigrant communities. Therefore, their ideological foundations are based mainly on ideas of racism, segregation, xenophobia, and nativism (rejection of foreign norms and practices).

The antifederalist rationale is multifaceted, and includes the beliefs that the American political system and its proxies were hijacked by external forces interested in promoting a “New World Order” (NWO) in which the United States will be absorbed into the United Nations or another version of global government.

Lastly, the fundamentalist stream, which includes mainly Christian Identity groups such as the Aryan Nations, fuse religious fundamentalism with traditional white supremacy and racial tendencies, thus promoting ideas of nativism, exclusionism, and racial superiority through a unique interpretation of religious texts that focuses on division of humanity according to primordial attributes. More specifically, these groups maintain that a correct interpretation of the holy texts reveals that it is not the people of Israel but the Anglo-Saxons who are the chosen people and therefore assert their natural superior status.

If there is one ideological doctrine about which there is almost full consensus regarding its importance for understanding the far-right worldview, it is that of nationalism. Historically, the literature on nationalism has taken diverse directions and is extremely rich, but in its varying guises it usually refers to the association between ethnic, cultural and/or linguistic identity and political expression, or more simply put, the convergence of a cultural framework with a political entity.

http://publicintelligence.net/ctc-violent-far-right/

[Igel]

8. That's only because in the West

"liberal" or "left" has primarily a social meaning, not an economic one. Over time in the West it's split from focusing on the role of the state to also include changing society's values at the individual level or fighting specifically for group-based identity and rights instead of individual rights. (There's not one "liberalism", as many of the spats on DU show.)

However it's perfectly possible for a leftist economic program to be wedded with a right-wing racial or values program.

Note what national socialism was like soon after its birth before WWI. It was originally anti-corporate and pro-distribution of economic power. Companies should be privately held, but held by small family units or small groups of workers who collectively owned the means of production. They'd profit directly from the work of their hands. Large organizations wouldn't happen, and few companies would have more than a couple of employees. Without corporate legal theory or some way of expanding the mangerial base beyond family, family businesses tend to break up and seldom get really large for very long. At the same time, those socialists were nationalistic in that they wanted a revival of folk identity, language, group cohesion, and a preservation of their own culture without having it assimilated by others or altered from outside, something that many Latino-American and Native American activists can identify with. The focus wasn't on keeping others out so much as a resurgence and preservation of indigenous culture. In other words, their "socialism" wasn't some sort of mockery of the word. It was a type of honest to goodness socialism, and far closer to the classical view of communism than most socialists hold. All such nationalisms are easily warped from ethnic pride into ethnic chauvinism.

Over the next 20 years it morphed into Nazism as the state controlled more of the economy and nationalism went from pride in one's own culture and advancing it to hate for others and destroying or dominating theirs. It was a small movement and easily co-opted into something much worse when issues of national pride and humiliation were at stake. (Notice that with Svoboda and some Ukrainian parties, it's gone the other way: They started far more fascist in the mid '90s than they are now--having a lot of moderates made them reposition themselves to retain power, and even then it ain't much. And there are still good "Communists" in Russia that are fervent nationalists, even calling for two-tier citizenship and rights inside Russia itself for native-born Russians versus non-Russians or non-Slavs.)

[pampango]

10. I think the point was that liberals/progressives/socialists can be (but often are not) nationalistic

while the far-right is united by nationalism.

There are certainly nationalists on the left but there are also internationalists, e.g. FDR and the European left, who believe in multilateral cooperation and lowering national barriers/sovereignty for the sake of a regional/global good.

The far-right seems much more wedded to a nationalism based on race/ethnicity/language/religion (leading to their "us vs them" mentality) with little concern for any greater good. They seem to despise the UN, the EU and most other international institutions because they infringe on national sovereignty.

[Cooley Hurd]

7. Appropriate video...

[moondust]

9. Putin: Annexation of Crimea a "historic landmark"

Putin calls annexation of Crimea a historic landmark

"...that may end up destroying Russia's economy because for some reason the world does not look kindly on land-grabbing dictators," he failed to add.