I don’t speak for Steophan, though. I speak for me.
Did fascists play a role in the overthrow of Yanukovych? Absolutely.
Were they the only factor? No.
Do these fascists now run the government? No - but they’re part of it, which is extremely worrying.
Does it also worry me that there are fascists in other “positions of power all throughout Europe”? Absolutely, yes, but right now we’re talking about Ukraine.
I can think of one borderline one in the top position of power in Russia.
What do you know, we fully agree;)
But to return to the original topic of the thread, I’m not so sure that Crimea is free of the extreme-right-wing issues of the rest of Ukraine. Already some of the stories I’ve heard surrounding the Tatar minority in Crimea are extremely worrying.
Could you link to some of them? I’ve heard that there are worries, I’ve not heard of any concrete threats or actual harm.
First, have you heard of “concrete threats or actual harm” done to Crimea’s Russian population? And if not - why are applying a double standard here?
Second: Crimea Tatars: ‘Homeland’ at stake | Opinions | Al Jazeera
Crimea’s Tatars are well aware of the deep problems facing their fellow Tatars in Russia’s Volga-Ural region, especially with regard to education, preserving their language and maintaining their media. Russia’s central government is pursuing a new policy of “Rusification”, undermining the Tatar language , just as it was in the Soviet Union.
While championing Russian Orthodoxy, Moscow retains a blatantly untransparent and hostile attitude towards Muslim communities in Russia, as security services intimidate and persecute them, misusing anti-terror efforts. If Crimea falls to Russia, it will become a brutal reality for Crimean Tatars, and end to the measure of freedom Tatars enjoyed within the Ukrainian state.
I have heard stories all week about houses where Tatars live having their walls painted. The only graphic evidence I have is from the headquarters of the Tatar political organisation Meclisi, hence my reason for talking of ‘stories’ rather than ‘confirmed fact’.
Unknown individuals have seriously damaged a monument commemorating victims of the deportation of the Crimean Tatars in Ukraine’s Crimea region.
More than a dozen memorials, cemeteries, and cultural centers related to Crimean Tatars have been vandalized in Crimea in the last several years.
I’m still interested in the "attempts to ‘ban their language’ " issue.
Svinbra, kompis. 
Of course the repeal of the older law was never meant to “ban their language.” Just your standard nativist bigotry, meant, instead, as a hard slap right in the face of the country’s minorities - primarily, it seems, the Russians. Thank God Turchynov vetoed it. Even so, a very ugly episode, and one which rightly caused a lot of concern about which direction the country might be heading.
Speaking of, I wonder: Which direction is the country heading? Whatever happens to Crimea, I can only assume that Yatsenyuk and his pro-EU, pro-IMF, USA-approved lot will sooner or later get into a power struggle with the extreme right-wingers who serve (amongst others) in his government. If so, who will win? Who enjoys the greatest popular support?
Going by a quick and simple Wikipedia check, Yatsenyuk hasn’t really enjoyed a great deal of personal popularity so far - back in the 2010 presidential election, he received a humbling 6.69%. In the 2012 parliamentary election, though, his list did well, receiving 25.55% of the votes. The Ukrainians might grow to like him even more now, of course, if he plays his cards well.
Tyahnybok - the head of Svoboda - fared even worse back in 2010, with a pitiful 1.43% of the votes. In 2012, his party got 10.44%.
How things stand now, post-Maidan and post-Yanukovych, I do not know.
I guess Yatsenyuk and Tyahnybok are keeping it together, for now, due to a common external enemy (Russia) - but sooner or later, they’re gonna have to tangle, no?
If that’s the case, what’s your thought on Russia - which, as pointed out, doesn’t have such a law itself? Is the fact that Ukrainian isn’t an “official language” in parts of Russia with 10% Ukrainian speakers a " hard slap right in the face of the country’s minorities" as much as the mere attempt to repeal Russian being an ‘official language’ in parts of Ukraine with 10% Russian speakers?
Is this “standard nativist bigotry”? Is any country lacking such a law demonstrating “nativist bigotry”? Because, again, Canada lacks such a law - only English and French are ‘official languages’ here. Other minorities need not apply.
I have no idea where they are headed. One think is for sure - Russian aggression appears to be tying the country together more than it otherwise would be (that is, those parts not occupied by Russian troops).
I think it sucks. Russia definitely should have such a law, and many others like it, to ensure that all the rights of all their minorities are protected. For that matter, I also think Chechnya should be a free country. Those are my “thoughts on Russia.”
Now, your turn.
Why do you think the Ukrainian parliament voted to repeal that law? And why now, just after Yanukovych was overthrown?
Honestly, I’m struggling to see how it could be seen as anything but a slap in the face of the country’s Russian minority.
Yes, certainly. Having a common enemy usually does that.
Because it was a law put in place by Yanukovych in the first place, only two years before - and Yanukovych is widely regarded as a Russian puppet (an impression strengthened by his support, after his ouster, of a Russian invasion of his homeland)?
Because it was seen, rightly or wrongly, as part of a Russian attempt to split the country - a position that hardly seems crazy in hindsight, as Russia is, right now, attempting to split the country?
Because having multiple “official languages” (not only Ukrainian and Russian, but also Hungarian and Romanian), presumably requiring multiple translations of every government document and all sorts of bureaucratic fuss and bother, is a bizzare thing for an almost-bankrupt country to be doing - something that not even much richer countries, such as Canada, have bothered to do?
There are three reasons.
And yet, I’ve named three.
Another is that there is hardly a country in the world with a similar law, and yet minorities do not feel “slapped” by this lack. It is not generally considered necessary for minority protection that their languages be made official languages of the country.
The New York Times reports here that
Never heard of this Poroshenko character, but googling him turned up some good news. A few recent polls indicates that
Tiahnybok, thank God, gets no more than 1.7-2.2%. Quite a relief.
Spiting Yanukovych by striking at the country’s minorities? Taking revenge on a man by trampling on the rights of his people and his voters? Uh, OK. That’s one reason, I guess. Just not a very good one, if you ask me.
Protecting the rights of minorities is “splitting the country”? Does not compute.
“Almost-bankrupt” countries don’t get to trample the rights of their minorities any more than rich countries do.
But when such a law does exist, and then parliament votes to repeal it, that is, naturally, seen as a slap in the face of that minority. Just imagine how the Québécoise (I think that’s the correct plural?) would react if the Canadian parliament voted to remove French as one of the country’s official languages. They wouldn’t be too happy, I’m sure.
You are begging the question here (that is, assuming as your premises that their intent was to “strike at minorities”).
It isn’t necessary, or necessarily desireable, to ‘protect the rights of minorities’ by making their language an official language of the country. Once again, you are begging the question.
The notion (whether you accept it or not) is that the intent of the legislation was not to “protect the rights of minorities”, but to favour Russian interests in the country.
Once again, you have yet to demonstrate that the lack of such a law “tramples minority rights”. The evidence is against you, as, if your theory were correct, pretty well every country in the world “tramples minority rights” in exactly the same way - as they generally lack such a law.
Need it be pointed out that having a patch-work of local ‘official languages’ makes little sense? Or that none of these ‘rich countries’ have even attempted such a thing?
No doubt they would not, but in the case of Quebec, French has been an official language for as long as Canada has existed, and the duality of French and English was part of the constitution, and Quebec is rather a larger part of Canada than 10%.
In the case of Ukraine, the law was passed in 2012, and makes a patch-work of “official languages” wherever more than 10% speak one.
Are you seriously arguing that such legislation, once passed, can never be repealed - or even attempt to have it repealed, as in this case - without it being a “slap in the face” and an example of “nativist bigotry”? My, that’s a low standard for abuse.
It was their intent, though. Repealing that law is a Svoboda pet cause, and has been ever since that law was first signed. In everything that they do, Svoboda does “strike at minorities.” It’s just what they do.
No, but it is one of the many ways in which a country can signal tolerance and acceptance to its minorities. But tolerance and acceptance aren’t really what Svoboda is all about. They’re all about kicking the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia” out of the country. Repealing this law was a step towards that goal.
That “notion” is a xenophobic conspiracy theory, quite common among bigots.
Different versions in different countries, depending on the circumstances, but it’s usually something like “oh, today they want their religion/language/whatever accepted - but if we give them that, tomorrow they’ll steal our women/children/jobs/money/precious bodily fluids! it’s a power grab I tell you!!”
Indeed.
No, I’m arguing that in this case, with fucking Svoboda protesting against the law for two years straight and driving the effort to repeal it, it very clearly is nativist bigotry of the ugliest kind. These are not your kind, friendly, well-meaning bureaucrats here, aiming for neater paperwork and less “fuss and bother” with all those pesky translations and whatnot. These are fire-breathing fascists, aiming for an ethnically pure Ukraine-for-Ukrainians-only.
You assert it, but you have offered no proof - and it wasn’t only Svoboda members who voted for repeal.
It isn’t one of the many ways that makes sense.
… or, perhaps, Crimea.
The difference here is pretty obvious: this particular country is, in point of fact, under assault by Russia, which expressly wishes to hack of chunks of it using the excuse that it contains Russian ethnic minorities … and, unlike other places, that isn’t some fantasy “xenophobic conspiracy theory” that only a “bigot” could believe, but a reality. Or do you deny it?
Moreover (and once again) you are shifting the goalposts. Acceptance or rejection of “official language” status is not the same as acceptance or rejection of a language or a religion. This is not the same as (say) the French attempt to legislate Islamic headscarves. No-one is threatened with being restricted in what languages they speak.
This seems a tired reiteration that Ukraine contains ugly bigots, and so ‘of course’ the only reason for Ukrainian votes is ugly bigotry. Yes, Ukraine contains bigots - as many places do. The notion that specific acts must therefore be motivated by bigotry simply an empty smear, in the absense of proof.
Giving a minority’s language the status of official language isn’t the same as allowing that minority to take over the country, or parts of the country; and it certainly isn’t the same as allowing a foreign country to invade. These are separate issues.
That Russia attacked Ukraine doesn’t mean it’s suddenly OK for Ukraine to lower the status of the country’s minorities.
Ultimately, Ukraine can either try to welcome its minorities into an open, multi-ethnic society, or it can tell them to fuck off. If they tell them to fuck off, they shouldn’t act all indignant when these minorities do, in fact, attempt to fuck off - in Crimea’s case, to go fuck off back to Russia.
Where did I say anyone was getting threatened with being restricted in what languages they speak?
Right. I have no proof that Ukraine’s fascists are motivated by xenophobia, and you have no proof that Ukraine’s fascists are in fact simply trying to simplify the bureaucracy’s messy paperwork.
Looking at Svoboda’s track record, though, which would you say is the more reasonable assumption?
That article speaks about the uprising; it says precious little about parliament’s attempt to repeal the language law in question.
But thanks for playing.
Meanwhile, even more fascists in “positions of power”:
And if that wasn’t enough:
The article is from Counterpunch.org - hardly a bastion of pro-Kremlin sentiment.
