Given that Putin is repeating his version of Ukrainian history, it's a good time to share these excellent series of Yale talks about Nationhood, Identity, Culture and History itself. Focused on Ukraine, but lessons for us to think about in our own countries.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/making-of-modern-ukraine-lecture
@davoloid Oh I so want to read it but have to focus on the people / myself through others... but if you want / don't mind then list some main things to learn. But thanks either way...
@freeschool Key points of top of my head: "the state" and national identity is something that is not fixed in stone. New nations and arise often out of cultural exchange and conflict. Putin's view of history is one typical of most governments, who sanction one particularly useful narrative, at the exclusion of other aspects of recorded history. Authoritarian states weaponise this narrative frequently: the UK and the USA are prime examples, which is what made them easy to manipulate in the past decade or so, and why there remains so much domestic strife.
In reality, what we now think of as "Ukraine" has a rich and interesting history at the heart of Europe, most prominently through the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. That was a remarkable democratic institution which is not so well known.
It can also be argued that by contrast, "Russia" is a continuation of tribal hordes, Moscow being founded several centuries after Kyiv. Without any incentive or forcing of cultural exchange over 900 years, Muscovy has retained that feudal attitude in its culture and institutions.
Breakup of Soviet Union allowed Ukraine to reclaim their national identity, and they saw a different future aligned with Europeans. Russia took that as a slight and (correctly) a threat to their Empire. For Ukraine, this war has only reinforced their sense of nationhood, calling back to the previous time Russia tried to wipe them out, which was the 1933 Holodomor genocide.
There's a lot more in there, a whole chunk of European and global history that I'd never really considered.
@davoloid Great stuff and just few key points that resound are:
- exclusion of other aspects of recorded history
- Authoritarian states weaponise this narrative frequently: the UK and the USA
- Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. That was a remarkable democratic institution which is not so well known.
The above last one I'd like to know more how it was a "remarkable democratic institution"
(but don't t expect you to do more, just is interesting from a new-to-me stand-point)
Thanks for that. Did Help!
@freeschool For that, there's an excellent episode from the BBC radio show In Our Time.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010f8z
It was a European Republic, a federation consisting of many different nations and cultures, languages and religions. Stretching all the way from the Baltic to almost the Black Sea. They elected Kings and generally did quite well for several centuries.