Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

odessa massacre

Yugoslavia always feared Serbian nationalism, and as such a lot of Tito's policies were aimed at neutralising that threat. For Russia, I imagine there may have been a similar fear whereby Russian nationalism could tear apart the USSR, this might be evidenced in the persecution of the cossacks who had a big role in expanding Russia's boundaries.
 
Harsh treatment against Coassacks by the central Russian-dominated authorities in the early 20s in the Caucasus? I still don't know what you're getting at, particularly when talking about the nationalities policy of the USSR in the first two decades after the revolution. The attempt to put an end to Great Russian chauvinism in its old imperial form and prevent separatist nationalisms from taking shape in the the former Russian Empire?
 
The attempt to put an end to Great Russian chauvinism in its old imperial form and prevent separatist nationalisms from taking shape in the the former Russian Empire?

I guess that is what I was asking. Whether Russian nationalism was ever deemed the major threat by Soviet policy makers, much in the same way Tito identified Serbian as the biggest threat to Yugoslavian unity.
 
I guess that is what I was asking. Whether Russian nationalism was ever deemed the major threat by Soviet policy makers, much in the same way Tito identified Serbian as the biggest threat to Yugoslavian unity.

Short answer: Yes, for a time. I've already posted about this at length on the Ukraine thread.
 
Would be interested in your view on the resurgence of nationalism across the ex Soviet Union. More than nationalism really, tribalism. Any idea why it has taken off with such force? I mean I know the Soviet Union vacillated between suppression and promotion (within limits) of national identities, I know the internal boundaries changed creating little groups of people who identify themselves with very local national causes, I know most of the countries that succeeded had artificial boundaries and make limited historical sense, but it does seem to have taken off with quite terrifying virulence.

I don't know enough about the post-Soviet nationalisms of other states in Europe and Asia other than in Russia itself (with its myriad republics and regions, itself a legacy of old nationalities policy) to give you a good answer. My interest has mainly been focused on the Soviet experience and the system called socialism that emerged after the civil war and Lenin. I don't see Stalinism in this context as perverse or cynical. To them, nationalism was a necessary 'stage' before the realisation of a unified world, and beyond the borders of the USSR. How that was defined, and the actual experience of it being encouraged in some forms but attacked in others seems overly-complex and contradictory, but there was a thread running through it all, a consistency to it.
 
Back
Top Bottom