You should correct yourself and say I'm uninformed about Russian Soviet history, then I'd agree- in my previous studies I just viewed Russian Communists as an outside force. I am more familiar with Ukrainian Communists like Skrypnyk, Khvylovyy and Shumsky. Professor, you've ever read Khvylovyy?
Why not such "improvement" from britons at same time or later? Why ethnic russians would need such "improvement"?
I didn't say 'improvement for Russians', but for minorities. (I even put it in the same sentence so even the kids could make a link). Ethnic Russians (RSFSR) were not effected that the Union had republics- they don't live there. It was all for the minorities.
Accually on earth why ethnic russians would need a state in which they are just biggest minority only? Do russians stupid or what?
Ukraine already separated in 1917- Russians didn't give Ukraine its republic. So when Russia reconquered Ukraine simple re-annexation by the Russians was a step back from the "democratic tradition" of the Communists.
What's with the British analogy? If India had revolted and declared independence from England, and then a British task force was sent to recapture India and in order to ease the resistance, Britain promised more freedoms to India than before, then could you make such a comparison.
to ensure that new state is NOT russian state anymore.
Whose was it? (Georgian ?:)) Soviet Constitution and the (superficial) administrative devision into the republics didn't do anything and Russians remained the nationality in control.
.Why ethnic russians wanted to compromise? They had thier own lands which bigger then of anyone else.
I'm not sure what you're saying. Russians didn't make a compromise with minorities near Moscow, but with Ukraine where Russians were an overwhelming minority and couldn't have been called 'Russian land'.
Britons when thier minorities put up same question just broke up British EMpire and leave it. They were better off.
Ah, but these are Brits. Russians held on to their empire because they're die-hard imperialists, (sing "Shiroka zemlia moya rodnaya" with me) and to Ukraine because it's Russia's younger brother.
to ensure that new state is NOT russian state anymore.
Whose was it? (Georgian ?:)) Soviet Constitution and the (superficial) administrative devision into the republics didn't do anything and Russians remained the nationality in control.==
Yeah yeah.:) Before 1917, there was Russian Empire the state with no minority regions at all. Which was run by russian czar administration with russians at frist roles.
After Civil war 1917-22 which russians lost.
There become SOVIET Union instead of RUSSIAN Empire. New state where goverment included jews and ukranians in majority where georgian Dzhugashvilli(STalin) run political power. Where pole Dzerzginskii run secret police. Where jew Trotskii was military minister and head of staff.
And his goverment you call "russian"?!!!!!
I know that even for russophobes is not logic to call such goverment with 1 or 2 ethnic russians between 20-30 ministers as "russian goverment".
So they do mental trick: they just start to ignore ethnicities of bolshevick ministers and call them all as "russian". Or they call thier govement is "russian" since they sat in Moscow' Kremlin and conviniently to ingnore the fact that Moscow was sieged and occupied in 1918 by Lathvian Rifle division.
FYI lathvians were from Latvia, baltic state. They are NOT russians. And thier rifles surved bolshevicks well. They was pretorian guards of Red power.
Britons when thier minorities put up same question just broke up British EMpire and leave it. They were better off.
Ah, but these are Brits. Russians held on to their empire because they're die-hard imperialists, (sing "Shiroka zemlia moya rodnaya" with me) and to Ukraine because it's Russia's younger brother.==
Do you beleive in it?:))) I regret if you do so.
It is no damage to anyone else then you if you think that way.
Because since you are mistaken and your mistakes will take on you not russians:).
I will try to tell you some sense.
1. Russians are pragmatics same way as anybody else. If some enterprise bring pfofits then russians stick to it. If not then russians don't need it anymore.
2. So russians held to Empire till it was RUSSIAN Empire. The state which was run by russians andf for sake of russian prosperity.
Russians are not fools. So russians do not need state which worked away of russian interests.
3. Red power was non-russian at core since it is internationalists (proclaims no favor to no ethnicity). Why russians would trust internationalists who want to stop thier domination in thier own profounded state? Who of russians in sane minds will submit the new power which wants to stop russian domination in Russin Empire?
4. I admit that russians dominated in Russian Empire and now in Russian Federation. And maybe some minorities don't like it then and today.
BUT Soviet Union was run NON russians and against interest of russian power. Hence russian White movement fought with red power 4 year long Civil war.