Putin's History of Ukraine

Рет қаралды 49,779

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 895

@ApostolicMajesty 11 ай бұрын

If you enjoyed this video, please like and leave a comment. It helps the channel a lot. Also, join the Discord: discord.gg/8cNB39kY. Many thanks.

@_Dovar_ 11 ай бұрын

Is the word "crisis" banned in this comment section?

@r0mi44 11 ай бұрын

Не оправдывай нацизм , потому что нацизм есть нацизм ( это всегда плохо кончается ). Углубись в тему бандеры - это и есть нацизм (цру пытались его оправдать в свих агитках ).

@vinllga 10 ай бұрын

so called Ukraine is the artificial invention of Western propaganda, antiRussian destructive project since Austrian & German special services in 1WW till the modern British &US propaganda. The only aim of this project is the partition of historical Russia into hostile pieces

@OliverNorth9729 10 ай бұрын

Trump 2024🇷🇺🇷🇺

@bigblockman11 9 ай бұрын

I would agree on the conspiracy part if I didn't know about these four things The world economic forum Event 201 The great reset Dr. Steve turley

@ownagesniper1 11 ай бұрын

Tucker: Mr President why did you invade Ukraine? Putin: It began with the forging of the great rings.

@davydacounsellor 9 ай бұрын

Let's explain the statehood, both Kiev and Novgorod including Moscow converted to orthodox Christianity who's patriarch was in Byzantium, the eastern Christian church in 988 after which over a period of over a 1000 years were being crusaded against by the Rome orthodox Catholicism, involving monastic brotherhoods, with regards to the crusades lead by the teutonic knights, the brothers of the sword, the hospitalllers, who then moved onto forming our masonic lodges of today who were given a papal bull from the pope in Rome to ethnicity cleanse the land west of the Baltic states against the Wends in 1147, 1243,nearly 300 years after the kievan rus converted to eastern orthodox Christianity. Fast forward to today as soon as the SMO started, zelensky went to the pope to get his blessings and the pope granted it. Allowing 1.5 billion Catholics to back zelensky. This is a sectarian war that has been raging for over a thousand years between east and west Christian civilizations.

@softdrink-0 7 ай бұрын

@@davydacounsellor but when we’re the rings forged?

@davydacounsellor 7 ай бұрын

@@softdrink-0 these rings have been forged over thousands of years, take the current pope's ring, depecting a fisherman, as the church fishes and harvests people, even the wedding ring you wear, to bind people in marriage, to the russian orthodox ring of jesus in heaven and hell, showing the different theology between Roman Catholicism and the orthodox church. This is a civilizational struggle between east and west, with spiritually being at the fore, with zelensky going to the Pope to receive his papal bull, to conduct the war, permission so to speak, and yes he kissed the pope's ring, the Muslim ottoman seal rings, invoked with talismans, we see this in Gaza with regards to one religion against another. Putin was being metaphorically mystical in describing a clash of civilizations.

@IImus 5 ай бұрын

@@davydacounsellor The Moscow KGB Church is not even Orthodoxy. It is an ethnophyletic syncretic state cult. There is more xenophobic opposition to the West there than Christianity itself. Ukraine returned to normal Orthodoxy from the Ecumenical Patriarch in 2019 and they are fighting against the Moscow sect, among other things.

@davydacounsellor 5 ай бұрын

@@IImus so for the last 10 years when I've watched orthodox monansteries, churches, being burned, priests monks and nuns being beaten and killed, please correct me with facts if they were all KGB bases and agents, the schyum pushed by the western NATO, greek patriarch in 2019 was not a CIA ploy to split the orthodox church in Ukraine. I think you need to do your research. As now the Ukrainian government has now even changed the date of Christmas.

@admontblanc 11 ай бұрын

You see, it all began more than 1000 years ago, during the reign of Yaroslav I, also known as Yaroslav the Wise...

@piotrmadalinski8618 11 ай бұрын

And God said, Let there be Rossiya. And there was Rossiya. And God saw that it was good. xD.

@hokkaidosnow6643 11 ай бұрын

Have you heard the tragedy of Yaroslav The Wise?

@bentrinker1937 11 ай бұрын

yes you see drinking is the joy of the rus

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

@@hokkaidosnow6643 I had the exact same thought! Well done!

@dawsonehlke1290 11 ай бұрын

It’s not a story the Jedi would tell you.

@RussellThompson-m2e 11 ай бұрын

Any people saying they were 'bored' by this must have wandered into the wrong stream! Personally, I would say this was essential listening, and as usual by AM, the most informative 2 hour breakdown of Professor Putin's history thesis that you're likely to find anywhere. Kudos sir!

@sergeyKN115 10 ай бұрын

Professor Putin? He is a liar and a manipulator

@richtea615 11 ай бұрын

The autism is strong with us.

@baileygregory9192 7 ай бұрын

The historical rantby putin felt very autistic. I'm glad to know we're not alone lol

@gabrielschwarz5457 3 күн бұрын

@@richtea615 yes it is 😂

@Birkarl_ 3 ай бұрын

The history Putin laid down was simply the standard Soviet schoolboy history curriculum as set by the Stalinist education reform in the 30s.

@HistoryBro 11 ай бұрын

Bloody great stream... Really, a superb stream.

@GTMancz 11 ай бұрын

Thank you for this! As a Russian who had been exposed to a great deal of our official historiography from school to university, I feel compelled to point out that what the president presented is mostly the old texbook, boilerplate post-Leninist version of Russian history that was taught to me and my 60s-born parents, sans explicit Marxism. None of this, least of all the anachronistic "Hegelian" identification of the historical subject, is at all original to him. I should say, though, that the translation is obviously suboptimal at times. "Российское государство стало собираться как централизованное..." should not actually be translated as "the Russian state started to exist as a centralized state", rather, "it started to coalesce/be gathered as [that is, into] a centralised state". The same note of becoming is present in the baptism of Rus' passage. Putin says "стало укрепляться централизованное государство", which can be translated as "began to strenthen", but I'd say the Russian is vaguer, and the "state" can be plausibly be presented as a terminus of development, rather than an already actual reality, which sense is reinforced by what follows. "Начало складываться централизованное Российское государство", which was more or less accurately rendered as "A centralized Russian state began to take shape" (here the terminal note is very clear, I'd say). I'd also like to draw your attention to the precise phrase he uses, "Российское государство", of Karamzin's magnum opus fame. The identification of Rus' with Russia, and this Russia with Muscovy (with the latter being the most active (surviving) part of Russia/Rus', at least), harkens back to romantic conservative writers of the early 19th century and onwards, which itself can be plausibly traced back to the theorising of post-Union of Brest Eastern Orthodox 'intelligentsia' in the17th century, including, importantly, Kiev (see e.g. Innocent Giesel's circle). So the conflation is something both Russian Orthodox ("disuniate") theorising and the dominant Russian Hegelian-Marxist teleologisms agree on, and arguably commit one to. In a sense, our president stood no chance of avoiding this. Please also note, for context, that, again, *both* tend to consider, if implicitly and only materially, the Russian Orthodox Church to be part of "the Russian state". The fact that the words "Russian/Rusian" historically did, in fact, function as terms of confessional allegiance (cf. the Rusyns of Hungary, who had little connection to "Kievan Rus'" as such), makes the conflation even easier. The ecclesiastical unity - and the historically felt need for it, which I think one has to grant - can thus be taken to ground the statement re: "centralisation", as well explain the in itself rather ludicrous attribution of ethnogenetic causality to "the Poles". None of this is to say that I agree with the version presented by Putin. I'm neither an EO nor a "Marxist" (I am, in fact, a Catholic), so I lack commitments that serve to make this view plausible, unlike many (if not most) Russians and, importantly, Ukrainians. P.S. AFA I can tell, the transcript presented at the Kremlin's website is entirely faithful to the translation in Mr. Carlson's video.

@GTMancz 11 ай бұрын

So I'd say that the "oration" was not at all original. It was, in fact, somewhat boringly conventional, which should suffice to absolve him of the charge of deliberate misrepresentation (even if the historiography behind it cannot be entirely absolved). it's just a very (post-)Soviet thing to do. P.S. The same more or less applies to the Austrian general stuff theory: it's been around for a long time now, and goes back to the emergence of modern Russian-Ukrainian polemics about the time of the "Orange Revolution" of 2004, and has its counterparts in, say, modern Polish discourse, where Central Powers (and ultimately Germany) are seen as the ultimate mastermind weaponising Ukrainians agaisnt Polish statehood, even today. P.S.S. FWIW I'd also venture to say that the (partial and gradual) identification of the Soviet State with Russia is a clearly identifiable Stalin-era phenomenon, like many of the things you mention (I mean, you have Stalin-era historians writing very characteristic tracts about *Vatican* (sic) conspiracies to destroy Russia thwarted by Alexander Nevsky etc. etc.), so I'm somewhat confused by your comments on this subject, Your Majesty.

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

Thanks for the details, sir.

@GTMancz 11 ай бұрын

@@justian1772 You're most welcome!

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

@@GTMancz you're not nearly as lazy as I am :)

@auratheevinkian 7 ай бұрын

I’m Russian and I have no idea what your telling about

@robertmacdonaldch5105 11 ай бұрын

Ignore the hecklers AM, your work is great! I love turning your videos on and chilling in the evening

@januszprzeorek7152 10 ай бұрын

You forget to mention the fact that as the result of the secret part of the Ribbentrop -Mołotow Pact, the Soviet Union ALSO annexed HALF OF POLAND, invading Poland on Sep. 17, 1939. After that, Nazi Germany and the Soviets held a victory parade(!). That is a very troubling ommission :(

@glenthemann 24 күн бұрын

Yes yes, we had to go to war to stop Germany from taking Poland so we could hand it over to the Soviets.

@blindlemonjello 13 күн бұрын

@@januszprzeorek7152 Thank You! This is a crucial point, everyone just ignores the pact and implications for the invasion of Poland by Russia and Germany. Only the Poles remember and report this correctly. I've made this comment previously and was excited to see your note, do tactfully put.

@Svevsky 5 ай бұрын

Its important to notice that neither of the major Russian royal dynasties were ethnically slavic. The Ruriks were of Swedish heritage and the Romanovs of German heritage. That does say a lot about how the Russian civilization is perceived, its a cultural union state, not neccessarily ethnic.

@jester9217 11 ай бұрын

This was exactly what i had been looking for after that interview. Thank you.

@Alex-pd8zi 10 ай бұрын

Historians should use different terms for historical 'nations':not Russians but e.g.: Rus-Varangians Rus-Medieval-East-Slavs(Excluding Novgorod) Rusyns-Ukrainian-Belorus and Ruskie-Moscovites Ukrainians and Belorusians and Ruskie-Rossiyans So term Russian is misleading and should not be used at all. Or we will end up where modern Romanians can claim they're the same as ancient Romans and that Italians do not exist and Rome should belong to Bucharest

@Phangzor98 11 ай бұрын

Definitely NOT boring mate. Very interesting lecture. Thank you!

@EliteBuildingCompany 11 ай бұрын

Really excited to get your takes on this interview, cheers for the stream, AM.

@JoséFernandoBarralDomínguez 11 ай бұрын

Sorry, I meant to say OAN, you got it right never the less. Just finished watching the full stream, really brought me back to the series. Thanks for such a quick review on the matter. Looking forward for more, specially Franco's stream ;)

@phonecallsarejustoverquali1556 11 ай бұрын

Last minute petition for this full video to substitute the Super Bowl commercials.

@YanniEhm 10 ай бұрын

I listened to The Last Briton two nights ago, and this tonight, I liked and subscribed. Bring on the Autism, and throw in some OCD. Great work, thank you.

@Football__Junkie 11 ай бұрын

When the people seek understanding of geopolitics, they go straight to Spiderman for guidance.

@misterkefir 11 ай бұрын

Nuance good, therefore AM's channel good. Simple as.

@joeli.9991 10 ай бұрын

I found this lecture fantastic. Thank you for taking the time to make this video.

@isaaclemmen6500 11 ай бұрын

I wonder if the reason for Putin's need to contextualize the Soviet Union as a part of Russian continuity, as opposed to a break from it which should be reversed, has to do with a psychological need to rationalize his own past. He could have easily constructed a narrative where the Soviet Union was a break from continuity which needed to be reversed, and the narrative would have been much harder to dispute.

@rogerc6533 11 ай бұрын

Much of his voterbase still loves the Soviet Union; I'm sure he himself isn't fond of the USSR (you can sense this bitterness even in the Tucker interview) but the scars and legacy of communism runs too deep to be discarded from Russian canon anytime soon.

@zalozbaignis2229 11 ай бұрын

@@rogerc6533 You both are perfeclty right.

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

The modern Russian population has no desire, for the most part to jettison Soviet history. See how the French love Napoleon? Same idea. I was born in the USSR. I'm not proud of it exactly, but why would I lie to myself about my people's history? The USSR had many good sides and I have many positive memories of it.

@vorynrosethorn903 11 ай бұрын

The older Russian generation lived through it and are still nostalgic. As the younger generation come in and the Orthodox Church expands the perspective will likely shift radically, but that will be outside of Putin's lifespan and WW2 will still be a complicated sticking issue.

@rogerc6533 11 ай бұрын

@@justian1772 I consider communism and international capitalism two sides of the same coin with the same goal of a globalist totalitarian one world order and despise both accordingly. This doesnt in any way take away from the acheivements of the Russian peoples and I can understand having an attachment to the Ussr. I personally celebrate both Russian and western acheivements separate from the self destructive ideologies their Cold War governments adhered to.

@kaewonf8 11 ай бұрын

In fairness, Putin is a politician. The last time I expected a politician to tell the entire truth I was maybe 15. Everyone has an agenda.

@sillysad3198 11 ай бұрын

agenda, yes, but not every agenda has to be THAT deranged.

@fus132 11 ай бұрын

@@sillysad3198 Compared to what?

@sillysad3198 11 ай бұрын

@@fus132 compared amything else, Ivan.

@kaewonf8 11 ай бұрын

Bro I'm an American. I know what deranged looks like.@@sillysad3198

@ElenaKomleva 11 ай бұрын

@@sillysad3198 So killing a million people in Iran (as just one example) is not THAT deranged?

@xsommer8558 11 ай бұрын

Whether the Bolsheviks would have seen the USSR as a continuation of Russia or not the leaders and citizens of NATO see the USSR and Russia as indistinguishable.

@FeHearts 11 ай бұрын

It is undeniable that the Russians came to dominate the USSR despite the intentional Bioleninism at its inception.

@sergeyKN115 10 ай бұрын

The Ukrainian SSR has been in the UN since 1954, separately from the USSR.

@Ihrun 11 ай бұрын

It's not boring, it's absolutely fascinating! Good job!

@markcross8649 11 ай бұрын

And you’d think that David Cameron PM, with the benefit of his Oxford PPP, might at least have hazarded a guess as to what Magna Carta meant in English…

@matthelme4967 11 ай бұрын

Isn't every state artificial?

@EarthForces 11 ай бұрын

The very thing that most of the Putin apologists ignore when it comes to the modern conception of nationhood. They want to think in terms of civilization states that would justify imperialism all over again and would essentially put every state that desire their own self-determination as trivial and under the behest of their regional hegemon. Oh well, if that is their ultimate goal, all the more is the need to stem the tide because the case of Ukraine will not be the last one if they fall.

@mock358 11 ай бұрын

yes

@Андрей-ы9ь1б 11 ай бұрын

Some are more then others

@matthelme4967 11 ай бұрын

Well, no, all of them are. What is natural about a nation state ?

@krkenheimer 10 ай бұрын

Only if you are a midwit

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

I just wanted to say Kudos. I'm so glad to hear another honest and sharp analysis. As a native Russian speaker, having heard Putin speak many times, I know for certain he's aware of how brittle early Russian statehood actually was. It's harder for me to say if he intends to be honest with a large Western audience though. He's anything by ignorant, but he insanely calculating in his own way. Anyway, thanks!

@mitchyoung93 11 ай бұрын

I thought he conveyed that brittleness quite well, how the Russian state started to consolidate itself, had the periods of foreign invasion, etc.

@MooseheadStudios 11 ай бұрын

10/10 thanks for the upload so fast. Your work is important to us all.

@cephlo1 11 ай бұрын

Sweden should really invade Russia as it's their old territory and no one can convince me it's not the right thing to do.

@fus132 11 ай бұрын

{Insert Stockholm as a nuclear wasteland image here.jpg}

@lamogio7938 11 ай бұрын

@@fus132Russia has been threatening with nukes ever since Germany sent helmets to Ukraine

@nick-oi1xf 11 ай бұрын

They can certainly try but my guess is it would have an opposite effect

@derek123wil0 11 ай бұрын

So you have a short attention span. This was addressed in the interview. It's not just territory claims. It's also to save the Donbass from terrorism, which it's baffling to see Christians ignore

@matthiuskoenig3378 11 ай бұрын

@derek123wil0 people ignore it for the same reason they ignore the fact even the us acknowledges that ukriane is comiting lots of war crimes in the current war. They have decided that Russia is the 'bad guy' in the war and so ignore any evidence that would even out the morality of the war.

@matthelme4967 11 ай бұрын

I'm pretty sure the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania captured what is now Ukraine in the 14th century, and the process of differentiation began then.

@sergeyKN115 10 ай бұрын

There was no capture since there was not a single battle between and then Rus'and Lithuania, this was an unification, and what Putin talks about the Moscow Principality is that in those days it was not part of Rus', but was the outskirts of the Golden Horde

@ДунканМакЛауд-п5т 7 ай бұрын

Никакого захвата литвой Руси небьІло так как ето бьІло единое государство которому в ХІV веке уже бьІло 500 и которое в таких границах просуществовало 600 лет а може и больше.

@whiggles9203 11 ай бұрын

“[Tom] decried the fact that Putin was very much invested in history, that he had a particular narrative in history, that he had a conception of nationhood that was vested in the entirety of history and not simply nations as conceived and understood in twentieth-first century language. That was the essence of his argument, to the extent that [Holland] believes that [Putin’s] history has given him some overarching mission or zealousness in terms of being able to wage war on Ukraine, is how he sees it. And of course, he then goes on to claim that Putin’s worldview cannot counter any obstacles, everything he believes as to be the way it was it is a very rigid and uncompromising version of history. The irony of course is that the same argument can be applied to Tom Holland.” Absolutely important and well put AM

@irinam.87 11 ай бұрын

I think Putin just tried to explain that Russian people live in that territory for centuries and it's important to respect their rights in Ukraine instead of killing them. If Ukraine doesn't want to respect Russians, then they can join Russia.

@bezyn2291 10 ай бұрын

@@irinam.87 Russians did not live in that territory for centuries. Ukranians did. Every time russians came to Ukranian territories was as conquerers and even then, before 2014 and russians starting to wage war on us, their rights were respected.

@irinam.87 10 ай бұрын

@@bezyn2291 It's an Ukrainian version of history which didn't exist even 20 years ago. Is killing pro-Russian people in Ukraine or killing their representatives in powers means respect? Is forbidding their language mean respect? You began this war, not Russians. Read Kravchuk's address to Russian counterparts and compare what was promised in 1991 and what you have done.

@bezyn2291 10 ай бұрын

@@irinam.87 Forbiding russian language? Interesting, as a russian speaking Ukranian that`s the first time I heard about it. Please do elaborate on your made up bullshit.

@irinam.87 10 ай бұрын

@@bezyn2291 23 февраля 2014 года на экстренном заседании Верховной рады Украины депутат «Батькивщины» Вячеслав Кириленко внёс в повестку дня заседания Верховной Рады законопроект № 1190 «О признании утратившим силу Закона Украины „Об основах государственной языковой политики“», 232 депутата проголосовали за принятие законопроекта в повестку дня и без обсуждения немедленно приняли его.

@ajsj 11 ай бұрын

Don’t forget to continue the conversation and join AM fanclub Discord: discord.gg/8cNB39kY

@michaelmonastyrskyj955 10 ай бұрын

When I click on the link, I get a message saying Invite Invalid. Do you have to subscribe to the KZbin channel to join the Discord discussion?

@ajsj 10 ай бұрын

@@michaelmonastyrskyj955 here’s an updated link: discord.gg/6ASPUSKF Going forward I will remember to try and update my post once a week or so

@michaelmonastyrskyj955 10 ай бұрын

@@ajsj Thank you.

@Konrad_Festung 10 ай бұрын

A master work from AM here. After I first watched the original Tucker v Putin interview one of my first cravings was for a stream/video breaking down and analyzing Putin's historical conception of Russia as relayed in the interview. Like AM said - despite Putin gravely skewing the narrative through omission & conflation at many points along the way - I can respect the fact that he at least HAS a conception of his nation's history that predates 1945, even If I disagree with it. Also bonus points to AM for finally breaking down what Putin means by 'Denazification' as nobody else seems to be able to tackle that topic. Top quality, keep up the great work.

@cossackhistorian7425 11 ай бұрын

My favourite part was “Here are the letters from Khmelnetsky to Russia from our archives. They are *translated into Russian* you can translate them into English” But to really dig into the historical arguments: > It was not simply because the soviet leadership was composed to a great extent of those originating from Ukraine. This is technically true, and includes Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinovief (Apfelbaum), Larine, Ouritsky, Volodarsky (Bronstein) etc. To portray them as some kind of nationalists pushing korenizacija because they love Ukraine is wrong for obvious reasons > As for Poland, it received, apparently in compensation the lands which had originally been German. The eastern lands of Germany, these are now the western lands of Poland. It’s interesting that Putin can go back to the 9th century for Russian claims but not for the legitimacy of Polish territory. The regions of modern Poland are also the regions of historical Poland from 1000 years ago, however German settler colonisation lead to the Germanisation and consolidation of these regions as German from the 13th-17th centuries, which was part of the pressure pushing poles east into Ukraine. This process was reversed in 1945 with Poland original frontiers in both the east and west being restored. Putin appears to hold a very anti polish sentiment, probably largely relating to his impression that Poles separated Ukrainians from Russia, in a similar way to, for example, how many Bulgarians hold anti Serbian sentiments as they blame Serbs for the unwillingness of Macedonians to be Bulgarians. > Even if we go back to 1654… that area was the size of 3-4 regions of modern Ukraine Yes because Southern Ukraine was controlled by Turkic tribes who were driven out and the territory was slavicised by Ukrainian settlers from those 3-4 regions, meanwhile the west was still ethnically Ukrainian/Ruthenian but under the control of Poland-Lithuania (since 1363). The Ruthenians in this region were subjected to a feudal caste system that placed Jews directly above them and had the worst living conditions for any serf in Europe (facilitating massive Jewish population growth while Ukrainians outside the 3-4 regions previously mentioned relatively stagnated and suffered extremely high mortality rates). This is why Khmelnetsky had rebelled against the Poles & massacred the Jews in the 1650’s to allow Russia to move in. I’m not sure what part of this makes the presence of the Ukrainian state in these regions illegitimate > Ukraine also received, in addition to lands that were part of Poland before the war, part of lands which had previously belonged to Hungary and Romania. So Romania and Hungary had some of their lands taken away and given to the soviet Ukraine, and still belong to Ukraine. Zakarpatia has been inhabited by Rusyns since the 13th century, although other Slavic tribes were also present at earlier times. Budjak was inhabited by Nogais and other peoples of the mongol empire/Golden Horde and was settled by Bulgarians, Ukrainians, Russians, Romanians, Gaguz and Germans in the 19th century. No ethnicity makes up a majority but most of the population is Slavic, and Budjak has never been an important or integral region of any historical state. Bukovina was part of the Kievan Rus however Romanians started to settle in its south and it was annexed by Moldavia in the 14th century. North Bukovina is part of Ukraine today while the south is part of Romania. I’m not sure what part of this makes Ukraine’s presence there artificial or illegitimate It’s unfortunate someone more knowledgeable about history & ethnicity in Eastern Europe couldn’t interview Putin to challenge his claims as the historic argument seems to be the root of his argument, however i doubt that Putin would agree to such an interview.

@misterkefir 11 ай бұрын

"German settler colonisation lead to the Germanisation and consolidation of these regions as German from the 13th-17th centuries" - they were not majority "German" until 18th century. They were majority Polish between 10th and 14th and then mostly mixed (Czech/Bohemian, Austrian, Silesian) with Polish majority between 15th and 17th. Anyways, it's utterly ridiculous to call western Poland as "historically German" I agree.

@FeHearts 11 ай бұрын

@@misterkefir it should also be noted that the first major settlement of Poles in what is known as western Ukraine were invited by the Rus Princes to repopulate the region after the depopulated caused by the Mongols. By the time the Polish Kingdom annexed the region Lachians were already living there.

@matthiuskoenig3378 11 ай бұрын

@misterkefir yes let's conflate all of modern western Poland as historically polish, even though there are parts that even when slavic were never polish untill the forced migrations of the 1940s. As for saying all of it was majority polish in the 17th century. Well the parts that were never polish obviously never had a polish majority. Slavic pomeranians were not polish, there is a greater difference between them and pole's than between ukrianians and Russians. But even if we conflate the various non-polish slavs as polish we would still have parts of modern day western Poland as majority German before 1300AD. Furthermore, if you can go back to medieval times why can't the germans go back even further? As late as 500AD the entirety of poland west of the vistula would of had German majorities (with large slavic minorities) it wasn't untill the late 500s AD that the germans were minorities in all the territories East of the Oder. If the Poles can claim pomerania after over 600 years of German majority why can't the germans claim the lands west of the vistula after after a similar period? (the gap between German migration out and German migration back in to these regions)

@skadiwarrior2053 11 ай бұрын

I'm so grateful my ancestors settled on a little windswept Island.

@misterkefir 11 ай бұрын

@@matthiuskoenig3378 TL;DR. I was mostly talking about the Poznań adjacent territories and Wrocław adjacent south-west btw. Also - Territories as far as Berlin lies today and even further to the west also to the north (sea) also to the south were ethnically slavic until at least 800 AD.

@mmmmmmmm53 11 ай бұрын

As for the whole unified Russian state thing at the beginning, it would be nice to have the Russian version of Putin’s speech. It can simply be a case of “lost in translation”.

@ApostolicMajesty 11 ай бұрын

As I said, I was using the official Kremlin transcript to give them the best possible benefit of the doubt when it came to translation.

@leit420 11 ай бұрын

A lot of the comments on the video of the interview are how good the translation was.

@juliantheapostate8295 11 ай бұрын

Even the best translations involve judgement and could be debated. For example, the book.'My Struggle', should it not be called 'My Fight' in English? @ApostolicMajesty A Panzer IV was not an 'Armoured Struggle Vehicle', for instance

@baneofbanes 11 ай бұрын

@@juliantheapostate8295a struggle is really a form of fight. The two while not the same are often used interchangeably in English as they have overlapping meanings at the very least.

@mitchyoung93 11 ай бұрын

I would suggest Michael Rossi Poli Sci right here on you tube. He's an area specialist that puts out excellent transcription of important Russian political speeches and interviews including this one.

@raspberrytreacle 10 ай бұрын

Thank you AM. Your work is much needed

@RadicalLiberation 11 ай бұрын

Excellent! Thank you. As a one-time student of the Russian language I enjoyed learning more about the history of that area.

@user-qm7nw7vd5s 11 ай бұрын

Tucker Carlson is weird. Anyone notice that? He gives off that buffoonish laugh, at all the wrong junctures. And that perennial deer in the headlights stare? Just weird…

@baileygregory9192 11 ай бұрын

Navous laugh lol

@bellphorusnknight 11 ай бұрын

he was a failed CIA candidate, of course he glows

@metanoian965 11 ай бұрын

he is part of the USA 1% who live in that Swamp which 1% Trump will never drain.

@RussellThompson-m2e 11 ай бұрын

he was way out of his depth, but then Tucker is a product of American MSM, he started at CNN, he's always been a talking head not a journalist. He is so invested in the Putin/Ukraine issue because its been a good stick to beat the Democrats with. But now he's boxed himself into a corner since the brutal invasion and his ego won't allow him to admit he got it so wrong

@justian1772 11 ай бұрын

That's his mask.

@AyatollahS.A.Khamenei 10 ай бұрын

Like it or not, the focus on specific historical justification or territorial is a hallmark of autocratic or royal rule, it doesn’t really “cut the mustard” for contemporary western democracies when used by itself..historically eastern justifications even recently adhere to that “argument from ancient history”it doesn’t mean it’s wrong but the western/eastern divide is no better exemplified in the disconnect between the two parties regarding the Putin interview

5 ай бұрын

1. Ruthenia is a European name for Rus'. Russia is the Greek transcription for Rus' that was then pulled on Rus ambitions in the titles of the Muscovian prince - Ivan 4th the Terrible.. 2. Rus'(Ruthenia/Russia(greek)) is a principality or Dutchy, that existed before the Mongolian invasion in 1240, located from about 700 mentioned in chronicles by several historians and academics line Nasonov and Rybakov(in 70ties and 80-ties) and the area is located in the Northern Ukraine, little bit overlapping south of Belarus and Kursk, Belgorod oblastes. So that historian writing, as France had never been called France before, he can easily prove that Ukraine is almost direct and the most direct "successor" of Rus' - at least in context with Moscovia, that remained Russian Empire by Sinod and Peter 1st the Great. "Rossiya"(taken from greek transcription) - is almost nothing like Rus' also. 3. Anything else wasn't called Rus - it was all invented by the Imperial and Soviet propaganda, like Moscovian Rus, Novgorod Russ, the Great Russ, Kyivan Russ/Principality(which is the Rus from Chronicles) - those all terms are artificial and not actual from the real life. Yeah - those territories were usually controlled by siblings, brothers, and relatives of Rus Ruller in Kiev, and after the Mongolian invasion, it was so so-called split, where those individual dutchies and principalities got yarliks from the Han in Saray. Lithuanians overtook the territory of the former original Rus - and the nearby Rus Kingdom was established by Daniel Romanovich in 1253 - by uniting Galicia and Volhynia. 4. How do Muscovites excuse their Russ-iness? - When "Mongol-Tatars" burned Kyiv and acted horrible afterwards, the "metropolitan of Rus", went from Kyiv to Moscovia and kept his title, though he is outside of geographical Rus, that's how Muscovian tzars were crowned and baptised by a church of the Rus. The church was restored in Kyiv and there were 2 All-Rus metropolites at the same time which is just titling absurd promoted also by Constantinople. The history of Rus/Russian church is complex, especially of their maze of titles, but geographically, politically, and historically Rus is the name of the exact area, which of course, is hidden from pupils of Russia's schools and propaganda.

@bakters 11 ай бұрын

Regarding the narrative, which says that Muscovy are not Russians. Well, that's silly now, but it wasn't so at the beginning. According to Nestor, the area of current Moscow, likely with a keep at Kremlin, was inhabited by people he calls Lachy, which is an alternative Russian name for the Poles. Nestor fairly precisely defines who Lachy are, and for him it means Western Slavs, as opposed to Eastern Slavs. There are linguistic reasons to believe that Nestor was correct, and those places were really settled by two Western Slavic tribes, at least at the time when Rus was initially founded. The areas further to the East and North of Moscow were occupied by Finnic peoples. There is no doubt about that. So there is something to the claim, that Kievan Rus was the real Rus, while Muscovy was an amalgamation of various peoples, who eventually adopted Rus culture. It's not as crazy an idea as it may seem on the surface. Obviously, Russian historians were never allowed to entertain such concepts. Even if they addressed this issue at all, they tended to brush it aside under various pretexts. Understandable attitude, but not necessarily the most convincing.

@matthiuskoenig3378 11 ай бұрын

If you bring up that argument then what is to say what a true rus even is? It's not as if the kieven rus in kiev were not themselves an amalgomous group.

@bakters 11 ай бұрын

@@matthiuskoenig3378 Well, in the older sources the Rus people and the Slavs were distinguished as different peoples. The Rus were the Warangian Swedes, while the Slavs were the Slavs. So yeah, you got a point. However, Vladimir Putin *decided* to bring up those old times, not me. If he did that, he should be prepared to face the facts... ;-)

@ecgwineicling2543 5 ай бұрын

@@bakters While it is undisputed that the areal of Moscow used to be Finnic before the arrival of the Rus, I don't really see how this is a gotcha for Putin. It is undisputed that Attica was inhabited by Pelasgians before the arrival of the Greeks, but that doesn't translate to some kind of argument that Athens in some way isn't central to Hellenic civilization. Of course, by the same standards, the area of Kiev used to be part of the realm of the Greuthungi, and still before I suppose part of Sarmatia. This is all true and also interesting, but it really isn't relevant to Putin's main point, which was to explain how the core territory of Rus shifted from Kiev to what would become Muscovy as a reaction to the Tatar rule, which as far as I can see is entirely correct.

@bakters 5 ай бұрын

@@ecgwineicling2543 " *Moscow used to be Finnic before the arrival of the Rus* " That's not what I wrote. Nestor claims that those areas belonged to two Lach tribes (western slavs), Viatichi and Radomichi. " *before the arrival* " There was no arrival of new peoples. Yaroslav (who was a Swede) simply defeated those Lach tribes and extracted tribute from them. They never moved out. " *part of Sarmatia* " That's correct, however there are good reasons to believe that Sarmatians and Slavs were working together, with Sarmatian elites eventually adopting Slav culture. Long story. Anyway, Nestor describes local tribes around Kiev as Eastern Slavs, while he *does not* say so about peoples in current Moscow area. " *reaction to the Tatar* " The notorious Oprichina... So, according to You, is Putin saying that Moscow was not inhabited by Eastern Slavs, then they became the tax collectors for Tatars, and that's why Kiev should belong to them?

@1GmO2 11 ай бұрын

Thank you for this video. Just subbed.

@danielbwest 11 ай бұрын

This is the type of content that we need. Thank you for this you earned a new subscriber.

@johnmanole4779 11 ай бұрын

1:32:42 those territories from romania given to Ukraine did not have even half of the population that identified as romanian.

@mitchyoung93 11 ай бұрын

What did they identify as?

@johnmanole4779 10 ай бұрын

@@mitchyoung93 in Northern Bucovina most of the population was Ukrainian. It used to be part of the old principality of Moldova. And in the Buceag, West of Odessa, that place was multicultural, Ukrainians, russians, Bulgarians, some turks and tatars.

@HappyMutantSpeaks 2 ай бұрын

Thank you, this is an amazing breakdown - I learned a lot. It's incredible that this level of in-depth historical analysis is available on youtube. That anyone viewing your channel would find it boring is just as mystifying to me as the normie reaction to Putin's relying on historical narrative.

@Martin-w6p Ай бұрын

From all you`ve said I can`t stop thinking about collaborators. The first I remember were teachers. One after another informing us about their unwillingness to cooperate with falling regime not being asked for such self-explaining by anyone. Drawing the line of their resistance back several years. In mid-school they got ideological support: language assistants from abroad. Young people (accused by some of being unable to find employment in their homelands) mostly from English speaking countries wandering these territories freely with little or no attention from the side of state bureaucracy. I`ve observed the scene many times while travelling by train. Compartment packed with people discussing politics with an individual speaking fluent English, mostly wearing a jacket, worn down jeans carrying a bag half-empty. Pre-election. Sure there had to be more important collaborators in the upper structures of state long before the East lost the cold war. Why I mention it? Because it contrasts like hell with big (I mean really big) painting of V. I. Lenin decorating the interior of elementary school I visited and its legend: "Study, study, study". As some people pointed out, he did not say a word about working. Jokes aside I don`t believe there are any values in sight during these `revolutions`. It`s about greediness, bellyworship and lust. Of upper society. Possibly that was your point too.

@_Dovar_ 11 ай бұрын

The best way to prevent this sisirc

@rx0102 11 ай бұрын

based schizo

@unbearifiedbear1885 11 ай бұрын

tahW

@FiikusMaximus 11 ай бұрын

Best? In what sense?

@rx0102 11 ай бұрын

b@sed schizo

@_Dovar_ 11 ай бұрын

@@unbearifiedbear1885 KZbin censorship. It detecs some key words and secretly wipes the comment away after 20 seconds.

@syndicatedpuzzles 11 ай бұрын

Excellent exposition made much more interesting by showing what's at stake in historicism than a straight up 'here's how it was' history piece. Very good.

@joannachodyka2169 11 ай бұрын

Putin describes Russia as a noble civilization spreading humanity and order as opposed to decadent, cynical West always plotting to destroy it. You may not know much about Russian history but ask yourself a question: why all the countries bordering Russia on its Western side rushed to join NATO and EU. Why Ukraine fights so desperately for its independence. If Russia's history is the way Putin describes it - certainly all those states would love to be again close to Moscow.

@ivanschekoldin7315 10 ай бұрын

33:49 But Putin never said the word Ukraine comes from polanization. I don’t even know where you caught this in the interview. Everyone in Ukraine and Russia knows that the name of the country comes from “u kraya” (near the border, on the outskirts)

@Overlord734 9 ай бұрын

Everyone know your parents are siblings.

@ivanschekoldin7315 8 ай бұрын

@@Overlord734 who am I to judge your kinks? Sweeet home Alabama

@IaroslavSavchuk 10 ай бұрын

Well see, your very first argument about Ukraine not existing in 9th century is flawed, as Russia didn’t exist either. There was Rus, which was an identification of one op plenty ethnic or rather even social groups

@sedoskovelha123 11 ай бұрын

You helped me understand the context of "denazification" from Putin's perspective, and when you went into that, and contextualized it with the fact that Putin is not really speaking of Ukranians and Russias in an ethnocentric way, it all made sense to me. I think it was the highlight of the monologue. I'm still curious however if what you identified broadly as the "ukranian supremacist" perspective has more or less merit than this more civic centered notion of Russia and russians as a community of different ethnic peoples, amalgamating both ukranians and russians as more or less the same.

@tak4043 11 ай бұрын

Germany also gave a German town in Czechoslovakia to Poland as a goodwill gesture and spoken promise from Poland to negotiate the return of Danzig to Germany. Poland turned around and declared they're a sovereign state and don't have to negotiate anything belonging to them. Later the British and the French were heavily pressuring Poland to allow Soviet troops access. The French going as far to give Soviets a 'permission', in case of war with Germany, without Poland's acceptance on August 21st. Poles rightly assumed that the Soviet troops would never leave if they allowed that to happen. French were also willing to give Soviets anything they wanted to occupy already in July in exchange for an alliance against Germany. Or like Soviets liked to put it "protecting it's neighbors from indirect threat of Fascism". Molotov-Rippentrop pact gave Lithuania to Germany but Soviets occupied it anyway. Rippentrop wrote a long article back in the day detailing the treaty preaches by Soviet Union, this was one of the big ones. Interestingly the British-French Soviet negotiations had a secret protocol too, defining which countries it applies to. Belgium-Finland-Estonia-Latvia-Lithuania-Poland-Romania-Turkey and Greece.

@billyberrington 11 ай бұрын

> Germany also gave a German town in Czechoslovakia to Poland as a goodwill gesture and spoken promise from Poland to negotiate the return of Danzig to Germany. Poland turned around and declared they're a sovereign state and don't have to negotiate anything belonging to them. What? What German town? What spoken promise? How did Germany give it as a goodwill gesture?

@misterkefir 11 ай бұрын

Incredible are these lies you people continue to spew.

@tak4043 11 ай бұрын

@@misterkefir Viscount Halifax to Sir W. Seeds (Moscow) July 10 French Government are informing French Ambassador that they are disposed to accept M. Molotov's definition of indirect aggression and insertion in Article 1 of words 'direct or indirect' Minute by Mr. Strang August 21 M. Cambon called this evening to make an urgent communication on behalf of the French Government about the question of the use of Polish territory by Russian troops. 4. The French Ambassador and General Doumenc, head of the French military mission in Moscow, therefore think it possible to give the Soviet delegation an affirmative answer in principle which might help on the military negotiations. Sir W. Seeds (Moscow) to Viscount Halifax July 10 Article 1 of the Agreement signed by them today will apply to the following European States: Turkey, Greece, Roumania, Poland, Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Switzerland and Netherlands. Viscount Halifax to Sir H. Knatchbull-Hugessen July 21 We have made the following concessions to the Russians: (2) It shall not cover Netherlands, Switzerland and Luxemburg. 3. The only concession so far made by the Soviet Government is that they have agreed to put the list of States covered by the Agreement not in the agreement itself but in an unpublished Protocol.

@tak4043 11 ай бұрын

@billyberrington @@misterkefir KZbin says I can't give you direct sources so go read Documents on British Foreign Policy 1919-1939 Third edition Vol IV, V, VI and VII

@tak4043 11 ай бұрын

@@billyberrington Source for that exact thing is Hitler himself according to British diplomats so if you're inclined not to believe it then fine. The towns people sent him a letter begging him not to but Hitler told them 'such is the price we have to pay for Danzig'.

@MB-fy8oz 11 ай бұрын

Long man bad? No. Long man good. Detail > all else.

@swejllaetah 8 ай бұрын

This was a fantastic history! I wish I would have found your channel sooner. All the history channels I have found before you have been Ideological and used bully tactics to shut down honest questions. Thank you for doing this!

@jeandubois1048 10 ай бұрын

Liking and commenting for the algorithm. Thank you for this great video, very far above the endless low iq hysterical takes that have come out. You throve for historical accuracy over ideologies and geopolitical interests which is the way History should be tackled. Wonderful work.

@Meppen92 11 ай бұрын

I discovered this channel around two months ago and it has become one of my favourite channels

@АндрійКоваленко-и2й 10 ай бұрын

Thank you for this! As Ukrainian, I really appreciate such videos because the history of our Ukraine is a topic difficult to discuss even in Ukraine itself.

@medicorene 11 ай бұрын

Masterful as always AM

@brock8232 10 ай бұрын

Word of the stream: conflate! Great stuff AM

@moldenhaver 10 ай бұрын

as a descendant of Ruricks and several others of land owners in these lands I am very pleased with your presentation very consistent with my family lore.

@samuraijack7295 11 ай бұрын

A "unified" Russian state can disintegrate and another "unified" Russian state can emerge later. How is that a contradiction? My understanding of Putin is that he views Russia as a "civlisational state". So there might be some conflation between "state" and "civilisation". Anyway, the winners write the history and Ukraine has to survive as a state for all this "debunking" to matter.

@baneofbanes 11 ай бұрын

Ukraine literally has an entirely different language from Russian. History may be “written by victors”, even though that saying is way too simplistic to actually reflect on how real life historiography works, but even if it was the case it doesn’t change the reality which is that nation and state are two every different things, and just because an empire ruled over a people does not mean that they are the same as the empire or that the empire has the right to rule them or conqueror them if they break off. Like it or not But Ukrainians are not Russians.

@samuraijack7295 11 ай бұрын

@@baneofbanes I don't particularly care whether Ukrainians are Russians or not. As for their rights, "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. " - Thucydides

@lokenontherange 11 ай бұрын

@huntersmith761 It's language is just a different kind of Russian. You can argue the Ukies ought to be separate from a Russian national state without having to try and act like Ukrainians aren't Russians. Much in the way a British state can be rejected by the Irish or the English despite claiming to be a British state.

@sillysad3198 11 ай бұрын

@@baneofbanes i actually enjoy the refutation of this popular statement: the history of the (you know what) was written for the most part by the generals of the defeated germany :)

@sillysad3198 11 ай бұрын

@@lokenontherange ivan-linguist in the chat! hide!

@Thomas-oc2ln 11 ай бұрын

Very good show mate

@whiggles9203 11 ай бұрын

Very well done mr AM

@BigBroTejano 10 ай бұрын

For clarification they’re most commonly called “Eastern Catholics.” Being those Catholic communities out in the former lands of the Tsardom and Commonwealth who while being in communion with the Holy See do not follow the Roman/Latin rite. They tend to this day become a bit of a “sore spot” on the topic of Catholic-Orthodox mending of relations as while there is a official agreement that neither group in the east(Eastern Catholics and Orthodox) will try and actively convert the other some among the Orthodox hierarchy view it as really meaning that the Eastern Catholics must return to full communion with the Orthodox Churches before any further steps to mend the schism take place.

@MrDominiqueStewart 11 ай бұрын

This was excellent. I greatly enjoyed the depth and effort dedicated to breaking down what was said

@insomniacresurrected1000 3 ай бұрын

The current name of Ukraine literally comes from the fact that the Rzeczpospolita had borders with the Tatars on the Dnieper. In fact it was only adopted as ethnonym in nineteenth century. Yes, there were other Ukraines historically, it means borderland, and any borderland was called that.

@Football__Junkie 11 ай бұрын

That thumbnail is “ripped from today’s headlines”

@dukeh32 9 ай бұрын

I will admit, my first plan was to listen to you and fall asleep, I can say I failed miserably at that. This is by far the best in context understanding of the Putin "History lesson" I have seen. Its super interesting and I would say as accurate as I have managed verify it. Than you for making it. Now there are a few details when it comes to the Czeck question that you sort of get wrong, or misunderstand, and Putin really blunders it. What I am expecting him to say was that Poland collaborated with Germany over the death of Czeckhoslovakia, yet fell pray for her own policy. That the Soviet state was supporting of the established order after WW1. And that they where working within the framework of the international system. That system fell apart in Munich 1938. After that the Soviet union had to protect itself and signed the M-R pact to avoid the Polish - German - Japanese pact. Now why does he do this, well there are two reasons. 1. The Polish collaboration with Hitler has been erased from every western history book used by the general public. You have to dig very very deep to find it in the western sources. The reason for it is obvious. 2. There is a precedence for this, Putin would prob claim that in the same way Hitler carved up Czechoslovakia, an ally of the Soviet Union, NATO carved up Yugoslavia (Serbia), and ally of Russia. Especially with the Kosovo campaign, an province the the US pushed into independence 2008 just month before inviting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.

@mitchyoung93 11 ай бұрын

There is a reason that we traditionally say "the Ukraine" in English and why until the day before yesterday to express being located on this frontier area Slave used "na", that is 'on' rather than "v" or "u" meaning in. Kraj can mean country in the generic sense...moj rodnij kraj, land of my birth, but has nothing to do with an ethnie or narod.

@epeeypen 10 ай бұрын

the ruso world view is more valid then the western world view especially in term of ww2 and how that war evolved

@SpearsUnclaimed 11 ай бұрын

Excellent insights to what his strategy is based on his choice of historical events to highlight. Very enlightening. Knowledge of history really can change your views of the situation in more than one way actually.

@OlegPasko 9 ай бұрын

8:38 but there were no "Russia" in the documents as well. The name was taken by Muscovy in the 18th century. We can't say "Italy doesn't have Romans ancestry, because of nowadays Romania". To put it roughly. Nothing will be changed if Ukraine will rename itself to Kyivan Rus or just Rus.

@aquatak 10 ай бұрын

The language used in Kiev rus was in no way russian. Its more close to ukrainian with elements used in polish nowadays ( like nevyem - do not know, never said in russian) so ukrainian version is closer to facts