Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by strlen 4532 days ago
> No, I am not Ukranian, nor Russian. Also I don't support either side. I think either regime is equally corrupted.

I am sorry, but as an ethnically Jewish, Belarusian-born, Russian-speaker residing in US, I have to say what you're engaging in is the equivalent of "mansplaining" (EDIT: or "patronizing" if you prefer).

To wit, on my Facebook, the only person who is presently in Ukraine (who attended school and a university in US before moving back to Ukraine after graduation) is also Jewish, takes his Jewish roots far more seriously than I do (he had his icons set to the Israeli flag a multiple times), and is posting protest related pictures, and reposting _Russian language_ messages like "My dad was seized by Berkut. Are there any lawyers here that can help out?"

In terms of Ukrainian-Americans posting on this that I know none shown any signs of ultra nationalism and have plenty of Jewish, Russian, and other former-USSR friends in US, and in terms of religion happen to include agnostic, Orthodox (Western Ukraine has a larger Catholic presence as it was part of Poland and Austro-Hungarian Empire), and a Muslim.

Here's an article on this, by the way, about Jewish community's view of this: http://www.jta.org/2013/12/08/news-opinion/world/young-jews-...

(I tend to note that Passionate Americans That Know Everything Because They Read it On the Internet Somehow are going to likely 'splain this way with a Zionist conspiracy -- in a language very similar to what ultranationalists themselves use, ironically -- but Israel itself generally takes a "realpolitik" approach to these kinds of situations and the Israeli _government_ has made no statements).

My personal view of this is the extent to which the Western Media is under-reporting this story (and in my view they are: this has rarely, for example, come up on my Yahoo News pager which is generally syndicated from mainstream sources) is playing into the hands of ultra-nationalists. Keep in mind that Ukraine is far from the only country in Europe to have ultra-nationalist voted in as part genuine views and part protest votes: Golden Dawn in Greece had far greater electoral results and is far scarier, there's also Jobbik in Hungary, BNP in UK, National Front in France, and so on...

It is very much in Russia's interest to make sure ultra-nationalists become the dominant party in this: should the leader of Svoboda run against Yanukovich, the result would be a land-slide for Yanukovich. The best analogue for this is actually probably when David Duke (a KKK leader, anti-Semite, the full nine yards) ran for governor of Lousiana against a known crook (the bumper stickers were "vote for the crook, it's important"). He received many votes as a protest, but it would be insane to think his views represented the mainstream conservative US politics (he ran as a republican party candidate, but his opponent was endorsed by the republican party).

I should also note that generally in former USSR "right" doesn't mean what it means in US: the political spectrum there is best describes as a circle: mix of left-wing and right-wing liberals on one end (a spectrum between those who favour a Scandanvian-style welfare state and those leaning towards classical liberalism -- essentially the entire US/UK/Canada would simply be called "liberalism" in former USSR) and a "red-brown alliance" on the other.

I'd also add that Svoboda is actually very much anti-EU (again not much different from other far-right morons in Europe) and realistically speaking, should they come to power in any shape or form (they will never win a democratic election), they'll be overthrown far quicker than you can say "faster than Morsi/Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt". Since anti-Nazism is a very strong unifying theme between Russia and Western Europe, no one will actually tolerate a neo-Nazi state in Europe.

3 comments

Can we please drop this 'mansplaining' bullshit? It's as offensive as referring to feelings of being othered as 'girlfeeling'. These kinds of sordid, petty, gendered derogations have no place on HN. There is literally no need for an insultingly sexist synonym for 'patronizing', when 'patronizing' already exists as a less offensive (and better understood) equivalent.

It's a shame really, because you've clearly taken the time to write a well structured and thoughtful response to the parent, and the use of that sexist slur in the first line sets a terrible tone for the rest of the comment.

I see what you're you're trying to say, but as a man (who was introduced to this term by a girlfriend who caught me 'splaining myself) I personally find the term to be both hilarious and -- most importantly to -- somewhat more explicit in what it is (explaining away while lacking context) as opposed to the term patronizing. Then again English is not my native language, so perhaps I'm reading the word "patronizing" too literally here.
I can see that you clearly meant no harm, but the problem with the term is that it creates divide between men and women where there need not be one. It attempts to gender the concept of being clueless and patronizing solely with men. For this reason, it is clearly sexist, and I'm uncomfortable with sexist language being bandied around.

I fail to see what good can ever come of using language that would cause division among people, when there are other ways of communicating the same concept just as effectively. Of course, speech should remain free and should you wish to use the word then that should be your right, but use it knowing that -- for people like me -- it not only offends, but immediately lessens your credibility.

EDIT: Sorry, that comes off as a little hostile, but that word pissed me off. Still, you don't deserve any particular rage since your explanation shows you clearly meant nothing by it and didn't realize it'd offend.

> It is very much in Russia's interest to make sure ultra-nationalists become the dominant party in this

Honest question: How is this in Russia's interest? The paramilitary UNA­-UNSO helped fighting the Russian military in both the Abkhazian and the Chechnya conflicts, according to their own account.

For the same reason David Duke winning the Republican primary would be in Democrats' interest and for the same interest Russia's Duma includes very few liberals but lots of communists and "red-browns". Given a choice between corrupt pro-Russian parties and ultra-nationalists/un-reformed communists/fascists/etc..., vast majority of Ukranians would vote for pro-Russian parties ("lesser of the two evils").

Think logically: if you're a corrupt stooge, would you rather run a less corrupt stooge (I don't have any illusions here -- Yuschenko/Timoshenko/Klichko are no saints, they are just better than the alternative) or against an ultranationalist?

That JTA article is almsot 2 months old. A lot has changed since then. A lot has changed just in the last 5 days.
The politics here, however, is far older than two months. Participation by my Russian-speaking Jewish friend is current as of today and the Russian language message I mentioned is from January 23rd (four day old).