#russian colonization

[thenuclearmallard]

[irithnova]

hey ! You seem to know a lot about siberia so i have a question. When the russians conquered siberia, how much of the indigenous population died, i've heard that actually because siberia is for a huge part non-settled the natives were just overflooded by the russians kind of like in canada but i was wondering if it was true.

Also the cossacks played a big role in the conquest of siberia but i've seen people saying they were russian cossack which i find weird because i was always told cossacks were ukrainians and those who speak russian are just russified due to imperial russia policy. So i wanted to hear your thought because you look like to know about it

I hope it didn't sounded weird or arrogant btw ^^'.

Hey, thank you for this ask.

The Russian conquest of Siberia was a process that happened over several centuries, and it did have significant implications for the indigenous populations of the region. Historical accounts on the casualties can vary though, due to limited records at the time

When the Russians began their expansion into Siberia in the late 16th century, they encountered a diverse range of indigenous peoples. The interactions between the Russians and the natives were often characterised by conflict, disease, and displacement, which of course, led to the decline of some indigenous communities.

We must remember though: The impact of Russian colonisation varied from region to region and depended on factors such as the local policies of Russian authorities, the resistance of the native peoples, and the availability of natural resources in the area.

However, it is widely acknowledged that the conquest resulted in significant demographic changes and hardships for many indigenous groups of Siberia.

Siberia was indeed sparsely populated in comparison to its vast size.

However it's an oversimplification to just say that the reason why Siberia was flooded by Russians was just because Siberian peoples were sparsely populated and "non settled".

Further I have an issue with projecting concepts such as settled or non settled onto indigenous groups. The terms "settled" and "non-settled" are often rooted in a Eurocentric colonial perspective, implying that European-style sedentary settlements are more advanced or superior to nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyles, and during discussions about indigenous peoples, these concepts are weaponised against them to downplay or even justify their colonisation.

The Russian conquest of Siberia had devastating effects on the indigenous populations. The arrival of the Russians brought deadly diseases that led to a significant reduction in native numbers. There were conflicts and violence with indigenous groups, causing loss of life and displacement. Forced labour and exploitation also took a toll, disrupting traditional ways of life, and many indigenous communities were displaced from their ancestral lands, leading to cultural disruption and challenges.

Regarding the comparison to Canada's history with its indigenous populations, there are some similarities in terms of the impacts of colonialism, disease, and displacement. Both regions experienced significant changes to the indigenous populations due to the arrival of European settlers and the expansion of colonial powers. So yes, it's similar, but not in the way that you said it was (both groups indigenous peoples being "non settled" so that's why they were flooded/successfully colonised).

Regarding the role of the Cossacks in the conquest of Siberia, you are correct that they played a crucial part. However it was primarily Russian Cossacks as opposed to Ukrainian Cossacks.

In the context of Siberian conquest, the Russian Cossacks were an instrumental force in expanding the Russian presence eastward.

On the origins of the Cossacks in case some people are confused: The Cossacks emerged as a social and military phenomenon in the 15th and 16th centuries, primarily in the frontier regions of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Grand Duchy of Moscow, and the Crimean Khanate.

Originally, the term "Cossack" (from the Turkic word "qazak") referred to individuals living on the borderlands, often engaged in various military and raiding activities. Over time, Cossack communities formed and theh developed their own structures and traditions. They were known for their horsemanship and guerrilla warfare tactics, which made them valuable assets for the expanding Russian state.

Cossacks were largely autonomous and governed themselves through a form of self-rule known as the "Cossack Host".

As the Russian Empire expanded into Siberia, the Russian Cossacks became instrumental in the conquest of the vast region. They were well-suited for long-distance travel and warfare in the challenging Siberian environment. The Russian Cossack expeditions into Siberia involved trade, hunting, and conflict with local indigenous peoples.

I need to make clear here that Cossacks were/are not a homogenous group. They came from various ethnic backgrounds, including Ukrainians, Russians, Belarusians, and others. While Ukrainian Cossacks were prevalent in the areas of modern-day Ukraine and Southern Russia, Russian Cossacks were more common in the areas closer to the core Russian territories.

I'm also sorry if it seems like I'm teaching you to suck eggs here but I just want to make this clear:

There is a historical distinction between Russian and Ukrainian Cossacks, but it's important to understand that both groups shared similar origins and cultural ties.

As previously mentioned, Cossacks were originally formed in the borderlands of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Grand Duchy of Moscow (early Russia). Over time, they developed different branches: the Ukrainian Cossacks and the Russian Cossacks being two of them.

The Ukrainian Cossacks were primarily based in the territories of modern-day Ukraine and Southern Russia. They played a significant role in defending the Ukrainian territories from various threats, including raids from the Crimean Tatars and the Ottoman Empire. The Ukrainian Cossacks established semi-autonomous communities with their own elected leaders called Hetmans. One of the most famous Ukrainian Cossack groups was the Zaporozhian Cossacks, who were based in the Zaporizhzhia region along the Dnieper River.

The Russian Cossacks, on the other hand, were based closer to the core Russian territories, particularly in the regions of the Don and the Volga rivers. They were instrumental in expanding Russian influence and control over the vast frontier areas, including Siberia. The Russian Cossacks were organised into various hosts (military units) and were involved in both military campaigns and other activities such as exploration, trade, and agriculture.

While Ukrainian and Russian Cossacks had regional differences and distinct traditions, they shared common cultural and historical roots as East Slavic-speaking people.

Note: terms "Ukrainian" and "Russian" Cossacks don't solely refer to the ethnic background of the individuals but rather to the geographical areas where their respective Cossack communities were predominantly located

As the Russian Cossacks ventured deeper into Siberia, they encountered diverse indigenous populations. Yes; the Russian Cossacks played a crucial role in expanding Russian influence and control over Siberia.

The Ukrainian Cossacks on the other hand, had very little involvement in the expansion into Siberia. The majority of their activities were focused on defending the territories of present-day Ukraine and Southern Russia.

So, yes. Russian conquest of Siberia did have a devastating impact on the indigenous populations. It was also primarily Russian cossacks who were involved in the expansion into Siberia, not Ukrainian Cossacks.

However, I do need to touch upon this. Throughout their history, Cossacks have also faced oppression and challenges under the Russian state. They experienced forced labour  and serfdom in the 18th and 19th centuries, losing their traditional freedoms. Russian policies of Russification aimed to assimilate them into Russian culture. Cossack rebellions, like the Pugachev Rebellion, were brutally suppressed. The Russian government also disrupted their communities through demographic changes and curbed their autonomy over time. 

So. In summary:

We can't put a number on exactly how many of the indigenous population died due to limited records.

It is an oversimplification to say that the "non-settled" nature of the indigenous peoples is the reason why Siberia became flooded by Russians 

The Russian conquest of Siberia was devastating on the indigenous populations.

Projecting European colonialist concepts such as "settled" and "non settled" onto indigenous groups ignores their unique ways of life and implies that a European "settled" lifestyle is superior to the indigenous "non settled" lifestyle and is often used to downplay or even justify their colonisation.

There is a difference between Russian and Ukrainian Cossacks, Russian Cossacks were the ones who were primarily involved in the expansion of Siberia.

Cossack groups themselves have faced oppression under the Russian state.

I hope this was helpful.

[dontforgetukraine]

"We were taught that Russia's presence in Kazakhstan was a generous gift of civilization. We were taught that Russian language was our lifeline to modernity. We were taught that Kazakh language was archaic and unsuitable for science and technology." —Dr. Azamat Junisbai

Source: Matryoshka of Lies. Episode 1: Confusion

[zaryathelaika]

The reference about colonization of laika types can be found here:

Popov, Aleksander V. “Hunting Laika” [PDF, 1.91 MB]. Journal of the International Society for Preservation of Primitive Aboriginal Dogs 31 (2012): 29 – 37. Retrieved March 2, 2024. Archived from the original on March 18, 2015 via Wayback Machine. Would put the screenshots up in the reblog post, but there are too many quotes to draw from and they are from different stages of Russian history. But yes, Moscow was (and continues to be) extremely paternalistic towards Indigenous peoples.

A majority of “indigenous dog breeds” are colonized in some way. Options include:

Given an arbitrary kennel club standard based on a limited population owned by aristocratic white people.

Stolen with their history completed rewritten and mythologized.

Created by white kennel club people and falsely attributed an indigenous past through breed myth.

Have their populations no longer under control of the population that made them in the first place.

Has its actual name replaced with a slur

“Breed split” where the actually indigenous dogs still owned by indigenous people have to go through meticulous trial and breeding to be accepted by the kennel club.

All of the above and more!

[panimoonchild]

"Don't escalate" - they said

Say that fucking Russians for who peace talks never work. Especially now, when aid to Ukraine keeps postponing. 

Today, my hands are shaking and my heart hurts, even though it shouldn't. The fear of the number of human victims because of Russia is killing me. 

Please keep spreading our voices and donate to our army and combat medics (savelife.in.ua, prytulafoundation.org, Serhii Sternenko, hospitallers.life, ptahy.vidchui.org and u24.gov.ua).

The Ukrainian mental health is held on this every day. 

Yes, please don't be ignorant. Ukrainians need that energy and hope boost to hold on now.

[leroibobo]

vainakh tower architecture is a historic style of architecture characteristic to chechnya and ingushetia. they've been noted as far back as the 1st century, but most we see today were built between the 15th-17th. the towers are built with stone blocks, range from 10-25 meters high, and feature walls which taper the higher the tower reaches. they were multi-purpose, used as silos, residence, and fortresses. wealthier families usually had at least one built for their community.

these towers, located in niy, ingushetia, are clustered together because they were built for defensive purposes. the "pyramid roofs" are unique to ingushetia, but similar roofs can be seen in other types of caucasian architecture, such as in nearby ossetia.

[hussyknee]

I just want to make one thing very clear. Black and brown people, especially Muslims right now, don't owe white people for your allyship in racial justice. Not even those who are themselves systemically marginalized in some way. Not white Jews, not white queers, not white disabled, not white working class, not white poor.

Whiteness is the most lethal kind of oppression because it built the current colonial capitalist, imperialist world order. Every white person benefits from and is complicit in its systems in some way because white supremacy is global. Whatever marginalization has white people in it can be and is easily weaponized against the mellanated. When charged with your racist, exclusionary and oppressive behaviour you hold up Black and brown people of the same marginalizations as tokens. This is the only time they are ever visible; more often than not you profit off their labour, hoard their gains, throw them under the bus and make them part of your iconography for liberal progress points once they're dead and have no inconvenient opinions about your conduct.

This is why it's very hard for Black and brown people to take accusations of bigotry towards you in good faith. We also have a duty of care towards others but more often than not it feels like you want us to do what you want while holding a knife to our necks. Even when you don't do it directly, you issue demands like "if you don't do x and y you clearly don't care about my people and deserve the worst!!!" without considering for a moment that the full brunt of that policing will always fall on Black and brown people, because punitive justice exercises itself first and foremost on the vulnerable. If your demands for allyship carry disproportionate punishment for Black and brown people should we refuse, you're just on some power trip and never needed our help in the first place. This also obfuscates the needs and disenfranchisement of BIPOC Jewish, queer, poor, disabled and Global South people, because without racial justice, few of your gains will ever materialise in their lives. It's always trickle down liberation for the rest of us.

Your allyship is supposed to be the work of conscience, a recognition of injustice and a drive towards privilege equal to your own. For white people, it's an individual reparation on your part. It is not an act of kindness, or benevolence, or a transaction that must be repaid in kind. The worst of us deserve the same rights the worst of you already have. That's the meaning of equality. If you're willing to let us get fired, deported, or brutally murdered for bad behaviour, then not only were you never an ally, you were also just waiting for the opportunity to use that weapon you claim you never wanted. There is no justice in an asymmetry of power.

[nyxx-nth]

Ghost is the type of mfer to sleep in such a wide array of things every night. Sometimes just boxers. Sometimes a pair of sweats. Sometimes just a shirt. Sometimes Toast’s shirt. Sometimes matching pajama set. Sometimes mix n matched pajama sets. Sometimes onesies. Sometimes a robe. Sometimes entirely nude. Sometimes the entire outfit he wore that day (shoes probably included too cuz he is a bastard). When Toast opens his door in the morning it’s a slot machine of What Will It Be This Time.

AND WHILE IM ON THE SUBJECT—

You know this meme?

Toast is the left and Ghost is the right. No I do not take criticism.

Listen. I would say they’re interchangeable. BUT. Toast is SUCH a honkshoomimimi mfer. Literally the most honkshoomimimi ever to exist. Laying in bed on his back, snoring and blowing the ball on his hat up and then it floats down to almost touch his face and he snores it back up again, feet sticking out of the end of the blanket. Honkshoomimimi.

AND ANOTHER THING—

I feel like Ghost has two (2) ways he sleeps every night and, again, Toast never knows which he’ll walk in on in the morning. One is the inconceivable “that can’t possibly be comfortable” position probably featuring drooling and snoring. The other is the damsel in distress dainty pretty princess sleeping beauty position. There is no in between.

[redjaybathood]

Honestly, this is such a great video about russian culture and how it is weaponized, how it corrupts. How russian imperialism uses culture, especially literature, to expand their empire. Even fucking Voltaire... Even him.

Please watch this, especially if you are NOT Ukrainian! Especially if you're Polish. The video has English subtitles!

[auilix]

Hear me out, what if period drama but make it Kalmyk?

[nando161mando]

on colonizers and their maps

— jenan matari on https://www.instagram.com/jenanmatari

[willtheweirdrat]

You guys. Fellow leftists. I don't know if you get it but when you have two imperialist countries, one with a population of 140 million and one with a population of 330 million, you cannot put the blame on ALL the ~470 million people living there. Do you think the working class in those countries has any realistic power over what the government does? Do you think that the millionaires and billionaires and politicians do not hold the power? Like come on. You can be against war crimes and imperialism in a country without acting like every person living there is actively responsible.

[ketrindoll]

Russian imperialism and colonisation as a twin to Western colonial culture

Translated from the original post written by Ukrainian historian Yevhenya Havrishenko. [While mainly focusing on Ukraine, it applies to all countries formerly occupied by Russian Empire, USSR, or Russian Federation.] It’s a long text, but worth the read if you’re interested in colonization and examples of it beyond Western states.

So there is this post-colonial theory. It is a theory that has been developed by scholars in post-colonial countries who are trying to revise the established cultural attitudes about their occupants. For a long time, this discourse was confined to a reassessment of the position of the former colonies of Western Europe, but guess what happened? A little spoiler. The research concluded and proved the colonial nature of Russia (RI, USSR, and RF are just different names for the same empire).

In this post, I will try to briefly outline the main colonial narratives that the metropolises imposed on their colonies in order to: a) justify predatory exploitation and b) keep the colonies docile by convincing them that this is the way it should be. This was when the "sharovar" stereotypes began to form, and these ideas spread. Transculturation (the replacement of an enslaved culture with an alien one) was perceived by Ukrainians as a transformation of themselves and increasingly used as a representation of themselves. The acceptance of a surrogate culture as one's own is rooted in stigma - if the stigmatized (in our case, those discriminated against on the basis of ethnicity) see that resistance is impossible, they try to gain secondary benefits and start playing along with the stereotype.

1. Exoticizing colonized space The colonizer traditionally depicts the colony as something exotic, fantastic, highly romantic, and even erotic. Everything that happens there is exalted and overly emotional and fun. The purpose of colonized culture is to entertain the white master with a safari helmet, and therefore, it should not be overloaded with content. Bright, unpretentious, and silly "so as not to disturb the authorities with its sophistication," and, God forbid, if it leads to complexity. In our case, a striking example of this is, unfortunately, Gogol's "<...>Little Russia", where Ukraine is portrayed as a place full of idyllic or fantastic adventures, jokes, and artificial villages. Because of their exotic nature, the stories were popular in St Petersburg's high society circles. The same can be said of the welcoming of delegations dressed in national costumes, with songs and soldiers. Many of the former colonies have something similar - local exoticism.

2. Objectification All colonialists describe the enslaved as a community that is not only non-subjective, i.e., lacking a will, but has never had one, and therefore needs the firm hand of a master and the supervision of a "truer nation." If you portray the indigenous as infantile and helpless, then it is easier to explain the need for colonialism, whereby the 'master' supposedly brings order and civilization and helps the immature to manage themselves. In Russian historiography, in whose paradigm we have been living up to now, there is a gaping hole between Ruthenia and the time of the Khmelnytsky uprising because it is striking to some people that we have had a wonderful life without the advice of the Big Brother. The stereotypical Ukrainian is either an apolitical villager who cares about his own backyard or a narrow-minded nationalist (in the sense of aggressive, not determined, liberation). And Russians, in the same Soviet cinema, have always been assigned the role of committee chairman, militiaman, and teacher. Because he is a representative of the government, who looks at a broader context, thinks more globally, and is a representative of the "statist" and "mature" people, who are paternally concerned about the interests of the whole empire.

[The same was done to Lithuania. Lithuanian Grand Duchy achieved statehood earlier than Russia, went through Renaissance with all of its ideals, unlike Russia, and was a large and powerful central Europe nation. However, during the Empiric and Soviet occupations, Russia tried to erase that history. Present Lithuania’s past as flawed and corrupt, or inherently Polish and thus not national at all.]

3. Cruelty, chaos, and reservoir of the colonizer's fears The general tendency of colonizers when describing the indigenous population is to attribute savagery and cruelty along with infantilism. If the former is always well-adjusted, highly educated, rational, and truthful, the enslaved is the embodiment of the local devils, who are frightening, elemental, irrational, dark, superstitious, villainous, hostile, cunning, and lustful. Despite the generally accepted canon of witty, good Ukrainians who will eat dumplings and sing a song, Russian propaganda has always been full of horror stories about Petlirovtsy/Banderovtsy/Azovtsy, who is a threat to the civilian population that must be 'saved' from everyone. Gogol's evil spirit also comes under this heading because the colony is a 'demonic' place that can only be cleansed by the 'blessing' of the emperor's boot.

[During Soviet occupation, national resistance to occupation and guerrilla warfare in Lithuania was depicted as a vile bandit movement, who assaulted civilians and only wanted money. That belief was so strong, a lot of people born between 1940 and 1980 still believe in it. There is proof that NKVD - later renamed KGB - officers and local collaborators would dress up as guerrilla fighters to terrorise rural populace in order to extinguish support.]

4. Primitivity Of course, the culture of a colony must be more primitive than that of a colonist, and it doesn't matter if this is true. This thesis is the basis for the many prohibitions against modernising Ukrainian culture on its own ethnic basis. By introducing various rules and orders and by artificially preserving it in an archaic, censored, castrated folklorism on a social-domestic level. As a result, the best representatives of science, art and culture have been repressed for centuries, and simulacra have been created in the form of various unions and collectives which were supposed to control the development of culture, preventing it from overstepping the set boundaries. Is it really worth wondering at the vast amount of literary works about serfs, the obsession of theatre, choral and dance groups with domestic and rural themes, as this was all that was allowed, and anything that was created that was different remained outside the law? The Ukrainian was to be portrayed as something parochial, rustic, without glamour, manners and high culture, which only opened up through the mediation of the elder brother and the master. Slavist Eva Thompson refers to the terminological appropriation of one culture (the colony) by another (the colonist) as a distinct feature of Russian colonialism - a stabilization method that consists in the regular, systematic, and purposeful incorporation of the "25th frame" into mass culture. That is to say, by inserting hidden narratives that Russians are civilizationally superior to the people of the national republics of the empire and that they are capable of doing everything better. These were unobtrusive messages, allusions, and comparisons, often deliberately distorted and completely false, disseminated through films, television programs, magazines, textbooks, fiction, and the like, where Russia, Russians, and Russian culture were elevated, and local culture was presented as inferior, provincial and backward.

[Despite Lithuania having theatres, operas, and Universities centuries before Russia did, Soviet occupiers tried to present themselves as givers of high art and culture. As a teacher of all that is culturally superior. To this day, we are reminded, sometimes by fellow Lithuanians who grew up with this propaganda, that they built us hospitals and schools - regardless of the fact that we had those before they came and many they destroyed while annexing us. Even earlier, during the Empire’s occupation, Russians closed our University, which was one of the beacons of Enlightenment in Europe - the Metric system originated in Vilnius. During the 50-year era of Soviet occupation, the idea that Lithuanian national identity was kept alive purely by serfs and farmers got planted into the national psyche, with many folklore festivals and museums originating specifically during this period of time. So many of our writers and scientists were denied submissions for Nobel awards as well.]

5. Deprivation of ownership rights to national history As in the case of Orientalism as described by Said, the Russians have not given up trying to prove that the local ancient culture, which, as in the case of the Eastern Europe and Ukraine, is older and more pronounced than the culture of the colonizer, is more likely to be the cradle of their own culture than that of the Ukrainian. The local population is not allowed to identify itself, and in films, cartoons and fiction, medieval Ruthenia is portrayed only as Russian. Ancient artefacts are plundered to appropriate and represent their own culture, while Ukrainian history is uprooted all the way back to the Enlightenment and presented as lacking a serious tradition of statehood, aristocracy and politics.

[Lithuanian royal palace and Vilnius Museum of Antiquities had a large collection of artwork by history’s most renowned artists, as well as archeological artifacts. Lithuanian nobleman Tyshkevich had the largest collection of Ancient Egyptian artifacts - all collected decades before Carter and with official permits from the local officials - which he donated both to local Museums, the Louvre, and other notable places. All that was in Lithuania disappeared during WWII - stolen by both Nazis and Soviets alike, likely taken to Russia, never to be returned or sold by looters.]

Russia's national policy in Crimea was similar but with some differences. For several centuries, the indigenous population of the peninsula has been orientalized and humiliated, discriminated based on their religion, Islam. Most of the indigenous population were exiled from their homeland or forced to emigrate to save their lives, even during the Empire era. After the Bolshevik occupation and annexation by the USSR, despite a brief period of so-called "indigenization," Soviet policy reverted back to what D. Brandenberger calls "Russocentrism". The Crimean Tatars were expelled from Crimea and replaced by Russians and later by loyal Ukrainians, who finally established the peninsula as a colony. Crimea was turned into a cauldron of nationalities in which absolute supremacy was given to the Russians and Russian culture, from which a new type of identity was to be born: the Soviet man. As a result, the descendants of the settlers developed a separate local identity and, through the mediation of birthright, could already claim this territory. As you can see, the indigenous peoples of Crimea were not even left with the option of a kitsch culture but were simply wiped off the face of the earth.

[USSR did the same to the Baltic states, replacing whole families exiled to the Siberian wilderness to die with the Russian population, most moving into the houses of exiled people, with their belongings still left there. Russian Federation is doing this to Ukrainians nowadays, where locals are replaced by Russians who then participate in “referendums.”]

Whatever name it picks over the years, Russia has always been a colonizer. An Empire of Evil that plagues its neighboring states. Equally genocidal, equally cruel as its Western counterparts. And while many Western states are now moving towards a reevaluation of their history, presenting it in a negative light, Russia never did. Russia invaded Ukraine on that same false pretense that Ukraine is “theirs.” You cannot support Russia or its culture without also being pro-colonialism and pro-Imperialism.

[they-call-me-hippie]

It sure is telling that every time a moron defends Biden as a "moderate, better, less damaging choice" in their braindead post unable to criticize his own failling political choices that will lose him all significant support of US voters that aren’t imperialist selfish ghouls because he's a monster who doesn’t have to care about "being pushed to the left" or ever losing votes from spineless liberals who can't even threaten him with their weakest tool in the arsenal - not voting for him, they decide to turn off the replies on their post because if they kept them on they'd be eviscerated by 10 to 20 actual communists and socialists unlike their pathetic apolitical liberalism posing as a pretend "leftist" personal alignment

[panimoonchild]

The Russians are bloody butchers - now this will finally see the light of day

We know that it is not difficult for Russians to cut off an ear or something else, especially with our soldiers and patriots under occupation. Or just because we are Ukrainians.

Please keep spreading our voices and donate to our army and combat medics (savelife.in.ua, prytulafoundation.org, Serhii Sternenko, hospitallers.life, ptahy.vidchui.org, and u24.gov.ua).

Ukrainians, please take care of yourselves, and react to the air alarm. I wish everyone sweet dreams, except Russians and their supporters.