Interesting. A cute gay couple lol, with one of them crossdressing as a woman but without actually shaving!
Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
- Thread starter ParadiseLost
- Start date
Interesting. A cute gay couple lol, with one of them crossdressing as a woman but without actually shaving!
From 1700 till 1920,and 1939 till 1990,yes.But our country existed from about 900 AD,so - germans,for example,was fucked longer.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
Blame one of their leaders for that. He could've but he got too greedy after occupying Moscow and wanted them all to become catholic rather than letting them be orthodox.You Poles at least had your golden age in the form of the PLC. Too bad that it didn't last.What would have been really epic would have been having the PLC conquer all of Russia and then creating a Slavic super-race!
Secularization would have solved the religion problem lol.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
It already has. As I said their leader got greedy. There were elements that wanted a new liberal tsar rather than the old despotic one and would support a Polish prince once they converted to orthodoxy and gave back the fortresses they captured. The son was willing but the father was not and wanted to have his cake and eat it so they resisted and those that were willing to capitulate joined them and the fabled Polish Lithuanian Muscovite Commonwealth was gone just like that.
Very sad.
The father should have choked to death on a kielbasa or died of a heart attack or something at the right moment. What year was this in? 1612?
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
From 1610 to 1612.Very sad.
What year was this in? 1612?
Ah, Yes, the glory days of the PLC. Sad that just 150 years later the PLC was already in terminal decline.
I suppose it's similar to the Byzantine Empire's condition in 1180 vs. 1330. Huge difference!You Poles at least had your golden age in the form of the PLC. Too bad that it didn't last.
Yes,we had few such chances.Last in 1611,unfortunatelly King was too pious and instead of trying to made stronger Poland wanted catholic Russia.
Bad decision,if Russian get polish tsar they would become catholics on their own,just like orthodox gentry in Lithuania.
It would take 100-200 years,but it would be done.
Smoleńsk was Lithuanian stronghold taken by Moscov in 1514,so no - but making one of his son tsar would worked.He had 3 after all.
Unfortunatelly,he was not greedy,but pious - and want save moscovite souls now,not waiting 100-200 years.
Both russians and poles suffered for it.
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
What has happened before will happen again as man loves to experiment.
Even if the Russians would not have become Catholic, it would not have been a huge deal once the era of mass secularization would have come around. Nowadays, even in the more religious US, people generally don't care whether one is Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, or Jewish. Muslims might arouse more eyebrows, though.
I've previously discovered something interesting:
In western, central, and southern Ukraine, support for having Russia and Ukraine become one state fell significantly between February and May 2014:
In the east, however, this figure remained unchanged. (It did subsequently significantly drop in September 2014, though.) I suspect that about half of the decline in southern Ukrainian support for this between February and May 2014 was due to the loss of Crimea, as is probably most of the subsequent decline in eastern Ukrainian support for this between May and September 2014.
February 2014 -> May 2014
Western Ukraine: 0.7% Ru-Ukr one state -> 0.0% Ru-Ukr one state
Central Ukraine: 5.4% Ru-Ukr one state -> 2.7% Ru-Ukr one state
Southern Ukraine (with Crimea in February 2014 and without Crimea in May 2014): 19.4% Ru-Ukr one state -> 6.3% Ru-Ukr one state
Eastern Ukraine: 25.8% Ru-Ukr one state -> 25.8% Ru-Ukr one state (unchanged)
This explains why exactly a separatist/autonomist insurgency began in the Donbass but nowhere else. And a part of the Donbass separatists appears to have only wanted greater autonomy within Ukraine rather than outright secession and joining Russia, at least initially.
In western, central, and southern Ukraine, support for having Russia and Ukraine become one state fell significantly between February and May 2014:
In the east, however, this figure remained unchanged. (It did subsequently significantly drop in September 2014, though.) I suspect that about half of the decline in southern Ukrainian support for this between February and May 2014 was due to the loss of Crimea, as is probably most of the subsequent decline in eastern Ukrainian support for this between May and September 2014.
February 2014 -> May 2014
Western Ukraine: 0.7% Ru-Ukr one state -> 0.0% Ru-Ukr one state
Central Ukraine: 5.4% Ru-Ukr one state -> 2.7% Ru-Ukr one state
Southern Ukraine (with Crimea in February 2014 and without Crimea in May 2014): 19.4% Ru-Ukr one state -> 6.3% Ru-Ukr one state
Eastern Ukraine: 25.8% Ru-Ukr one state -> 25.8% Ru-Ukr one state (unchanged)
This explains why exactly a separatist/autonomist insurgency began in the Donbass but nowhere else. And a part of the Donbass separatists appears to have only wanted greater autonomy within Ukraine rather than outright secession and joining Russia, at least initially.
Secularization also brought you the modern West, but with Wokeness and whatnot, you might also consider that to be a defect as well.
TheRomanSlayer
Kayabangan, Dugo, at Dangal
There was the proposal made by Lew Sapieha about a potential union between the PLC and Muscovy, but that went nowhere. Coupled with Muscovite (later Russian) antipathy towards Roman Catholicism in general, the union between the PLC and Muscovy was never going to work.
I mean, there was also the possibility of Russia becoming Greek Catholic, as opposed to Roman Catholic, though as I have said, that idea would have gone down the drain. In addition, a Catholic Russia of either the Latin or Uniate kind might result in souring of relations with its non-Christian minorities. I could guess that the only reason why OTL Orthodox Russia was able to expand easily was because of its prior relations with non-Christian states in the area.
Last edited:
Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
America has done the same with Iraq, Afghanistan and South Vietnam.
What makes Ukraine so different? I thought differently but I forget Ukraine used to be part of the Soviet Union and after it's dissolution remained as part of those bits in eastern europe with a long legacy of corruption that can't be stamped out in the short term.
You say it's a way to try and stop the west ha! They're going to keep sending it anyway until they don't want to regardless of the consequences.
Would a Catholic Russia have been more inclined to go Inquisition on its minorities?
TheRomanSlayer
Kayabangan, Dugo, at Dangal
Possible, although that would have resulted in a much more costly expansion.
Another thing that comes to mind is that a Catholic Russia would have required a massive change of mindset in how they run their government. Orthodox Russia still has that Byzantine influence in how they run things, but mixed it with Mongol influence.