this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
16 points (62.9% liked)
Socialism
5695 readers
146 users here now
Rules TBD.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's not a poinyt. It is a question. But it seems like you wanted to use the question to make a point. Something negative.
But I'm not going to try and pull teeth to get you to be straightforward.
You also framed this as a question, actually. And you didn't say anything about killing. You are also being vague.
So clearly you do have something to say. But something is keeping you from just plainly stating your point. I think it's the snarky Redditor in your brain that has made you forget how to communicate with other people.
I clearly had "moved populations around to wipe out ethnic locals" in my first post. I'm sorry if you can't understand that to mean that USSR was doing a genocide (killing) a lot of the enthic minorities and replacing them with their main ethnic group. It's one reason why Russia today keeps saying that countries adjacent to them (who were former USSR like Ukraine) are ethnically Russians and belong as part of the Russian state.
Kindly pick up some reading comprehension.
Forced migration is not the same as killing. Are you trying to say it is? Was that what everyone was supposed to automatically understand as part of your still instated point?
So is that your point? You see a graph of Estonian population decline starting around the fall of the USSR and say it has something to do with the USSR killing ethnic minorities and replacing them? First, that was opaque. Second, tell me those that happened around 1990, O Great Sleuth.
It actually is not. And the USSR itself was pivotal in the creation of the Ukrainian identity and republic, per Lenin's advocacy for semi-autonomous member states for, get this, ethnic minorities. Eastern Ukraine has had ethnic Russians (previously termed things like Muscovites or Cissacks depending on how uou wsnt to split hairs) for hundreds of years, primarily moving there after proto-Russia pushed out Nogais. In terms of displacing ethnic Ukrainians, this primarily occurred by anticommunist Poland during the civil war following the October Revolution where surrounding powers invaded the former Russian Empire. Poland took large regions to their East and South and forced Ukrainians out of acquired lands. This contributed to Ukrainian nationalist revanchism that ended up rhetorically fueling Banderites, who killed masses of ethnic Poles when given the chance - which was ended by the Soviets. Incidentally, modern Estonia supports modern Banderites.
So tell me more about your theory of what happened around 1990.
Oh I have no trouble with this. You just speak like a Redditor, expecting people to fill in your vague emotional content with their own context. Please do some self-criticism in this regard. Note that we are 3 comments in and you have yet to clearly make a point about what this has to do with OP's graph.
I notice you're not going after OP for his vague title with picture, but I'm fair game.
To make it abundantly clear (which you can infer from the other chart posted in the thread), the population change was mostly non-Latvians entering before the USSR splintered and leaving afterwards. I made a reference to habits in that region of wiping out locals and replacing them with ethnic "russians" to rebut the vague sarcastic "the decline was after the USSR splintered so communism=good" title.
Was that clear enough?
OP is just noting that "under communism" the population was increasing and aftetwards it was decreasing. And making a joke about some anticommunist orgs. Easy to understand for the intended audience. Happy to explain more if you don't understand.
Yes someone posted a graph from Wikipedia. It refers to ethnicity. And it does not discriminate between entering, leaving, or having children / dying, though a lot is likely migration.
This was your point? It seems like a pointless fact.
Oh? Is that what the graphs are showing? Tell me about the ethnic cleansing of Latvians from 1970-1990.
Or were you saying something that has nothing to do with either graphic? Are you confused about timelines or are you confused about events? It's one or the other.
Well I still don't see any coherent point so I'm going to go with no. You also ignored everything I said in my reply. So I think you should consider working on your communication skills.
And I was noting that the USSR had a tendency to shift their ethnic populations around to wipe out (still don't understand how you took that term to mean anything other than killing local populations, it's "wipe out" as in "erase") other local ethnic populations. We saw the numbers increase until the USSR splintered and then fall off because there was no longer a system to support that shifting of ethnic populations. This crowd should know about it unless they only believe in or talk about the beneficial parts of communism and ignore the ugly parts that regularly get implemented.
You still don't understand the difference between forced migration and mass killing? The latter can be a consequence of the former but it is not always. If you need me to explain the difference between moving to a different location versus dying I think there are even deeper issues in conceptualization that are preventing communication, here.
In the period of this graph? Like I've already suggested twice, tell me more about Latvia from the 1970s and on. I know the factual history re: migration in Latvia and what you are suggesting is, to put it simply, bullshit. This may be why I didn't understand your reference to something that didn't happen there - except by the Nazis, who got their shit kicked in by the Soviets, a fact for which reactionary Latvian nationalists never forgave them.
This is why you should try clearly stating your point. We are 4-5 commrnts deep and I guess you don't really have one outside of an ahistorical reference with no relevance to the graphic.
Here you are conflating ethnic Russians living in Latvia and ethnic cleansing. This is not a rational point and is again why you should try explicitly stating your ideas. You might notice that they do not make sense if you actually did so. You kind of already know this, right? It's why you don't respond to 90% of the things I say to you. I'm not stupid or obtuse, I am giving you opportunities to gracefully bail on what you might be implying with incomplete thoughts.
I keep asking you to specifically describe Latvian migration and just state your point clearly and you keep chickening out and trying to ignore those requests along with most of whay I say. Now you are trying to pretend I'm avoiding the reality of those things. I'm just waiting on you, bud.
What would I be projecting, exactly?
And I'm not being obtuse, their point is actually unclear aside from snark and a vague allusion. Re-read OP and tell me what specific events in Estonia around 1990 they might be referring to. Have fun trying to figure it out.
Yeah, you're just going to write walls of text about it. Since you don't have physical access to the guy.
You think my replies were walls of text?
Have you ever read... one page of one book?