Really, now? That's nice. I live outside Turkey, too -- I actually live in America. Where are you studying now?
Advertisement
by Al-Harakut al-Islami » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:11 pm
by Soviet Russia Republic » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:19 pm
by Al-Harakut al-Islami » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:24 pm
by Al-Harakut al-Islami » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:25 pm
by Velerik » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:28 pm
Sudenbergreich wrote:It takes women 20 minutes to reach orgasm, men 2 minutes (on average). What more proof do you need that there isn't a God?
by Soviet Russia Republic » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:31 pm
Al-Harakut al-Islami wrote:
Oh, how interesting! How do you like it here?
And where in America do you live? I live in Pennsylvania, which is sort of to the East.
by Soviet Russia Republic » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:31 pm
Solokia wrote:Anyone else disappointed there isn't anyone on the irc channel as mentioned in the first post of the thread?
by Al-Harakut al-Islami » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:32 pm
by Shofercia » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:33 pm
Al-Harakut al-Islami wrote:Hey everyone, as a Turk, it's my duty to stick my nose into your business.
So, how are you doing? Miss the good ol' days of the Ottoman Empire~?
Y'know, maybe it's just that I don't like nationalism in general, but I think it's very interesting to see that a big part of national identity is its exclusiveness. For example, a big part of being Irish is being not English. For many groups in the Balkans as well (especially the Serbs), a big part of their identity is being not Turkish.
And those in the Balkans can be (mostly) united by their hatred of the Turks. So, as a Turk, I feel as though it's my duty to just drop by and say hello.
by Al-Harakut al-Islami » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:33 pm
by Soviet Russia Republic » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:37 pm
by Shofercia » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:50 pm
by Soviet Russia Republic » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:53 pm
by New Rogernomics » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:53 pm
The Normans invaded and imposed their language and culture, British and French culture is very similar in several respects; so much so that despite previous hostility they formed an Anglo-French alliance; the Slavic states never had such unity. Russian and Polish culture is different, a lot so; Soviet repression hurt a lot of nations in Europe and imposed a 'Soviet' culture, so your argument is misleading at best. I couldn't equate Poland with Russia, any more than I could equate France with Britain. I could argue further on that point, but I see no reason to. I said western [European] nations are similar, as are Slavic nations; but not to the extent you are describing. The only fallaciousness is your claim that Slavic states are united, just a look at the map and foreign affairs of Slavic states would illustrate to the contrary.Mehden wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:Hardly, equating a group as the same based on race ignores cultural and religious differences. Slavic unity was tried before and it failed with the break up of Yugoslavia, a sign of the significant differences between one slavic group and another. You can't call Slavs the same, any more than you can western Europeans the same; what you are suggesting is that the British are French and the French are British because they share ancestry and traditions. A notion which is amusing, reminds me of the disastrous attempts at Arab unity or Pan-Turkism, and attempts at Slavic unity have been just as disastrous.
Every nation has differences, racial theory is cultural not backed up by science, indeed there are slight genetic differences, but not enough to proclaim we are so divergent to be as different species i.e. differences in how fat is stored, skin pigmentation, facial structure and muscle development (according those that subscribe to the notion that Polynesians are genetically ideal for rugby).
I never equated any configuration of Slavic peoples as 'the same' (a gross generalization that I’d be the first to admit is wrong), nor did I say anything about race, or racial theory. The word was 'ancestry,' and my point was that vague or not, the idea is moreso based on a shared culture and historical memory, which nations of 'Slavic' origin have. The ancestry thing is just a garnish.
Comparing French culture to British culture is not the same as comparing, for example, Polish and Russian culture, which is the fallacious argument Disserbia pointed out. I agree, the French and British have an entirely different cultural identity. The Poles and Russkis, on the other hand, aren't so dissimilar. Your relativist dismissal of the concept is the type of oversimplification that you've lodged I'm guilty of, and only exposes your loose, wiki-based familiarity with the subject matter.Disserbia wrote:Don't encourage me lol its pun time in the Muslim thread too. Death by puns!
*encourages*
I’m sure the hardliners just love you there, what with you sharia stories of your love for intoxication. I bet they think with enough encouragement of their own, they can be Quran you of your sinful ways!
by Disserbia » Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:54 pm
Al-Harakut al-Islami wrote:Oh, there's an Austrian here? Whoa, this is going to be a real party!
Which would y'all have preferred -- the Austrian (and later Austro-Hungarian) Empire, or the Ottoman Empire?
The Ottomans did have that whole devşirme thing, but we also gave you nominal independence over internal affairs with the millet system. The Austrians...I honestly don't know much about how they treated their Slavic subjects, but I do know that the Hungarians were given their own parliament eventually, and along with that the right to oppress other groups who wanted out of the Empire.
by Shofercia » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:02 pm
Disserbia wrote:Al-Harakut al-Islami wrote:Oh, there's an Austrian here? Whoa, this is going to be a real party!
Which would y'all have preferred -- the Austrian (and later Austro-Hungarian) Empire, or the Ottoman Empire?
The Ottomans did have that whole devşirme thing, but we also gave you nominal independence over internal affairs with the millet system. The Austrians...I honestly don't know much about how they treated their Slavic subjects, but I do know that the Hungarians were given their own parliament eventually, and along with that the right to oppress other groups who wanted out of the Empire.
Well that would depend upon a few things, in general I feel like a kid in a candy store though. Anyway I like Turkeyas a country, and I might be going there for my internship.
by New Rogernomics » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:06 pm
Well I am not saying that Slavic states don't share things culturally, but I am skeptical that unity is possible even due to cultural ties; if you want an example Australia and New Zealand are very close, yet we do things differently and think differently. I think European Union membership (and working towards membership) may ease the conflicts between Slavic states especially between Serbia and the rest of what used to be Yugoslavia. But till then it is difficult to say, I put Pan Turkism as an example because race riots broke out in Turkic states (largely as a result of economic problems and differences in language i.e. dialect); despite clear ancestral links, similar language and cultural ties.Shofercia wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:
I don't see how any concept of Slavic unity is possible, the nation-state acts as a source of division as does economics and politics; there are many historical and territorial grievances throughout Europe, many of those are held by Slavic states against other Slavic states. This undermines the whole concept of 'Pan-Slavism', just as Pan-Arabism and Pan-Turkish-ism is undermined by religious, cultural and economic differences despite what you describe. Merely because a racial group shares traits or even traditions does not create unity; the best case of Slavic disunity is the corrupt and authoritarian government of 'Macedonia' which declares itself 'Macedonian' and actively discriminates against other Slavic groups.
Further note: As an internationalist I oppose artificial race division, there is no such thing as 'race'; there are only different cultures, religions and ideological groups. The notion of race division was one of the causes of the first world war, second world war and the Yugoslavian war; frankly the world doesn't need a repeat. The sooner race theory dies off the better.
Not really. The grievances are with our governments, not amongst ourselves, and Pan-Slavism only requires that our governments not attack each other, which they can't do under CoE and EAU rules, anyways. Pan-Slavism promotes Slavic Culture and Slavic Unity; it doesn't enhance any Slavic Government that's seeking to either destabilize Slavic Culture, or destabilize Slavic Unity. And yes - we have retarded governments. But Slavs aren't the same as Slavic Governments. For instance Czechoslovakia has yet to have a decent government, fucking Brezhnev. Russians didn't have a good government, for at least a century. We're used to working with crappy governments. The fact that some of our governments are decent, is already awesome
Additionally, we're not excluding anyone solely on the basis of race. If you want to participate, learn Slavic Culture, and join the festivities
Pan-Slavism is primarily culture-driven. We're tired of being forced to fight each other, cause inept communism/gangster capitalism led us to idiot governments. We're tired of having our taxes go to enrich those in government, instead of being spent on services, like schools with a rich Slavic Humanities Program. We're tired of fucking stagnation, of answering to unknown banks, or massive corporations. We're tired of all that shit. We want to live as our culture would have us live. And if you want in, pick up War and Peace, pick up the Adventures of Shveikh, pick up Pushkin's Poems, or other great Slavic writings and come on in!
I mean, look, Ris feels at home here, as he should, cause he gets our culture. It'd be foolish for us to limit it just to race. Besides, if we did that, who'd cook us pizza?
Edit: just to address your points on religion: we're ok with religious integration. We're ok with religious separation. As long as your religion doesn't mess with my religion, I'm ok with that. We're ok with that. I get along with Slavic Muslims. They get along with me. And then we all party in Kazan
by Mehden » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:11 pm
New Rogernomics wrote:the Slavic states never had such unity.
The only fallaciousness is your claim that Slavic states are united, just a look at the map and foreign affairs of Slavic states would illustrate to the contrary.
by Shofercia » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:12 pm
New Rogernomics wrote:Well I am not saying that Slavic states don't share things culturally, but I am skeptical that unity is possible even due to cultural ties; if you want an example Australia and New Zealand are very close, yet we do things differently and think differently. I think European Union membership (and working towards membership) may ease the conflicts between Slavic states especially between Serbia and the rest of what used to be Yugoslavia. But till then it is difficult to say, I put Pan Turkism as an example because race riots broke out in Turkic states (largely as a result of economic problems and differences in language i.e. dialect); despite clear ancestral links, similar language and cultural ties.Shofercia wrote:
Not really. The grievances are with our governments, not amongst ourselves, and Pan-Slavism only requires that our governments not attack each other, which they can't do under CoE and EAU rules, anyways. Pan-Slavism promotes Slavic Culture and Slavic Unity; it doesn't enhance any Slavic Government that's seeking to either destabilize Slavic Culture, or destabilize Slavic Unity. And yes - we have retarded governments. But Slavs aren't the same as Slavic Governments. For instance Czechoslovakia has yet to have a decent government, fucking Brezhnev. Russians didn't have a good government, for at least a century. We're used to working with crappy governments. The fact that some of our governments are decent, is already awesome
Additionally, we're not excluding anyone solely on the basis of race. If you want to participate, learn Slavic Culture, and join the festivities
Pan-Slavism is primarily culture-driven. We're tired of being forced to fight each other, cause inept communism/gangster capitalism led us to idiot governments. We're tired of having our taxes go to enrich those in government, instead of being spent on services, like schools with a rich Slavic Humanities Program. We're tired of fucking stagnation, of answering to unknown banks, or massive corporations. We're tired of all that shit. We want to live as our culture would have us live. And if you want in, pick up War and Peace, pick up the Adventures of Shveikh, pick up Pushkin's Poems, or other great Slavic writings and come on in!
I mean, look, Ris feels at home here, as he should, cause he gets our culture. It'd be foolish for us to limit it just to race. Besides, if we did that, who'd cook us pizza?
Edit: just to address your points on religion: we're ok with religious integration. We're ok with religious separation. As long as your religion doesn't mess with my religion, I'm ok with that. We're ok with that. I get along with Slavic Muslims. They get along with me. And then we all party in Kazan
by New Rogernomics » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:16 pm
That isn't all Slavic nations united as one (either in alliance or in a physical sense), and I seem to remember the Ottoman Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire were both blocks on Slavic unity for a significant amount of time; as well as the Balkan wars. I am not trying to be an ass, but I disagree with the concept that Slavic unity is achievable or that it has been achievable in the past.Mehden wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:the Slavic states never had such unity.
What about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? What about the current Visegrad Group? Just some off the top of my head. Or do you mean something very specific when you say 'unity'?The only fallaciousness is your claim that Slavic states are united, just a look at the map and foreign affairs of Slavic states would illustrate to the contrary.
I've never made that claim, though. I did, however, resort to ad hominem, so I'll call myself out on it for you.
by New Rogernomics » Sun Sep 30, 2012 10:18 pm
I am trying to say it isn't the 'goal', but the journey. European Union membership or the suggestion of it, has encouraged Slavic states to put grievances aside and work together.Shofercia wrote:New Rogernomics wrote:Well I am not saying that Slavic states don't share things culturally, but I am skeptical that unity is possible even due to cultural ties; if you want an example Australia and New Zealand are very close, yet we do things differently and think differently. I think European Union membership (and working towards membership) may ease the conflicts between Slavic states especially between Serbia and the rest of what used to be Yugoslavia. But till then it is difficult to say, I put Pan Turkism as an example because race riots broke out in Turkic states (largely as a result of economic problems and differences in language i.e. dialect); despite clear ancestral links, similar language and cultural ties.
You're thinking of unity as in "all governments form megazord". That's not what we're going for. EU membership is odd, because that would mean handing our national sovereignty over to a bank that just screwed over Greece, so I'm not sure if that'll help, prolly not. It's not about states united, it's about people starting to feel comfy with one another, and defending one another, and if that helps our governments sort their shit out - why not? But that will be a side effect, not the main purpose.
Nor will linguistics be a barrier, because we respect each others' languages, and being multi-lingual is part of being Slavic
Users browsing this forum: Arvenia, Ecotoria, El Lazaro, Galloism, Greater Arab State, Ifreann, Lord Dominator, Neu California, Ryemarch, Valyxias
