The Ukrainian Revolution

What's the OG know about this conflict? 

One of these docs popped up on my YouTube feed the other day, and the second followed. They both present a very one-sided view of the conflict that was opposite of the way it was portrayed in the US media. They basically say it was a well planned coup, financed largely by Western money and diplomats. Elements of neo-nazism and fascism were supposedly instigators in the violence that was blamed on the government. Lots of blame placed on the US State Dept, Merkel, and others. 

Second doc has interviews with many of the players from the displaced government- the former president of  Ukraine, Putin, security services, etc. They paint a picture of a divided country that was dismantled by one side with the backing of the West. I guess the fuckers are still going at it. 

I won't pretend to know much of anything about this, but it was a very interesting take on it all. Sort of scary if it much of it is true. Lots of suffering and the destruction of an elected government that represented at least half a country. Supposedly of course. I know to take docs like this with a grain of salt. 

 

 

 

 

 

Their women are hot. Sometimes 

Soros.

I live in Ukraine, know plenty of people who were directly involved in the protests, and a disproportionately large part of my social circle is made up of people from Donetsk and elsewhere in the half of the country that foreign media likes to misrepresent as the side who lost.

I'll watch it later but I think I know what it will say.

anthonyMI -

I live in Ukraine, know plenty of people who were directly involved in the protests, and a disproportionately large part of my social circle is made up of people from Donetsk and elsewhere in the half of the country that foreign media likes to misrepresent as the side who lost.

I'll watch it later but I think I know what it will say.

Cool. I was hoping I'd hear from someone close to the issue like this. 

Nothing would surprise me anymore...

.

I said I would respond then never did. Oops.

Both of these documentaries are rank propaganda. I'm not familiar with the maker of the first one, but Roger Stone is an old Leftist who still believes that Moscow is the headquarters of the Revolution.

Maidan was not a huge movement at first. But every time the government cracked down on it, it grew larger. Then people began getting kidnapped and murdered by traffic police and more protesters came. Then groups of low-rent gopniki show up to beat the piss out of journalists and more people show up. By the time the Berkut were murdering people in the street, there was no turning back for the Yanukovych regime.

After Maidan, there was no reckoning. There were a handful of the most plainly guilty oligarch and Yanukovych allies who fled to Russia, but most of his party have either reformed as the Opposition Bloc or even joined the Poroshenko Bloc and are still in the ruling party of government. Barely anyone has even gone to trial, and out of the few who have, some of them got out right away because of their political connections. The judiciary and prosecutors are mostly a bunch of Yanukovych holdovers. I hardly would even call in a "Revolution."

During and after Maidan, there was a flood of disinformation saying that there were Banderist militias wandering the streets assaulting people for speaking Russian and crucifying children. A lot of people were afraid. You think that there is a fake news problem in the US? You haven't seen anything. A few months later though, and most realized it was all bullshit. I know one babushka who watched too much tv and thought that the Ukrainians were coming to lynch her, now she is a patriot and always knew Poroshenko had the right path in mind.

And the casual usage of the word "the Southeast" is just hilariously off, though both Western and Russain media have a monolithic view of it. The Southeast is made up of Crimea, Odesa, Mykolaev, Kherson, Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhia, Kharkiv, Donetsk, and Luhansk Oblasts. There were some anti-Maidan protests in the Southeast, but they were small. The difference is that in Donbas, Russia had Rinat Akhmetov who supported them. Too bad for Akhmetov, most of his businesses in Donetsk have since been nationalized, dismantled, and sold in pieces to Russian firms. The militiants who took control of Donetsk and Luhansk were not asking for "federalization", they declared independent Republics. Republics that were meant to join in with the rest of the Southeast in dismantling Ukraine. Too bad for them, nobody else was interested.

One thing that caught my eye was the batman flag of the group he was with. If that was the Batman battallion in Luhansk, that story does not end happily. They are one of the separatist units who have since been purged by their comrades. Like with the Ukrainian side, there was a wild west situation in those early months. Different units operated fairly independently, like Batman. Others had all kinds of crazy ideologies. The Cossack groups, for example, wanted to create a pre-modern Orthodox Christian military state. Most of them were wiped out. Just recently there was another coup in Luhansk People's Republic and the former leader is now in Russia.

Meanwhile, the Russian army is having all of these mysterious "training accidents" near Rostov.

The MH17 stuff is just plain insulting. MH17 was shot down using a very specific, very advanced Russian rocket that requires a lot of training. And the separatists originally took credit for shooting down a military aircraft, then immediately deleted the message after it became obvious what they did. Russian disinformation then went into a schizophrenic frenzy over what story they were going with. There has been a lot of investigations, though they have been hampered by the material taken by Russia.

I haven't watched Stone's movie.

 

effinggoof - Soros.

Those baby killing Judeo-Pederast-Banderist Nazi militias who launched a coup against Yanukovych also think Soros is behind all the bad things.

They also tend to be kinda dumb.

Fascinatingly contradictory ideology they have.

Good thing they are pretty well sidelined in mainstream Ukrainian politics.

anthoniMI,

Did US finance Ukrainian "revolution" in any way?

Many of the NGOs who took part in Euromaidan receive funding through American sources like the International Republican Institute, yes.

Grant writing is much less exciting than Kremlin propaganda makes it out to be, though.

I know a lot of the people in that world. They did it because they genuinely care about fighting corruption, oligarchy, and all the things that are attached to it. Which is why they aren't big fans of the current government either, though there is still much more hopefulness now than under Yanukovych. The worst you can say about them is that some have a bit of a high opinion of themselves.

So, when Victoria Nuland said that US invested over 5 billion in Ukraine to help them with democracy she misspoke?

fanat - So, when Victoria Nuland said that US invested over 5 billion in Ukraine to help them with democracy she misspoke?

I think investing in democracy is a good idea. I don't know the exact numbers myself. 5 billion since 1991 sounds about right.

Ukraine could use some more money for that, though there also needs to be more strings attached and more willingness to confront Poroshenko over his failings.

I mostly agree with your summary but you left the role of US completely out.

fanat - I mostly agree with your summary but you left the role of US completely out.

 In the time I've been here, I have realized that what the US thinks about anything really doesn't matter. It is practically an abstraction. If the US was really pulling the strings, things would probably work better.

There would be more US funding if everyone would just accept the fact that you need itemized budgets.

The Ukraine is weak. 

There's a Netflix documentary on this issue called "Winter on Fire". It was nominated for an Oscar.

Thanks for sharing your perspective Anthony. I'm not surprised to hear you say most of what you did. The doc was very heavy-handed in rhetoric. I assumed that the truth was somewhere in the middle, though maybe you wouldn't even agree with that?

Would you consider Ukraine an ideologically divided country? Obviously there's a conflict going on now, but even the past elections seemed to be very polarizing and split geographically. 

Also, what about the nationalistic groups - Right Sector for example. Do they have a strong presence in the new government? The docs made quite a big deal about them and what they said were Maidan's ties to nazism and fascism. 

"I assumed that the truth was somewhere in the middle, though maybe you wouldn't even agree with that?"

I would not, no. Just because someone makes a propaganda video that abuses the truth doesn't mean I have to meet them half way.

"Would you consider Ukraine an ideologically divided country? Obviously there's a conflict going on now, but even the past elections seemed to be very polarizing and split geographically."

No, I would not. The polarization that existed before 2014 is now gone. It is easy to look at elections so I'll start there. For the Presidency, the Poroshenko had a very strong victory. The next few runners-up were all also pro-European. The Party of Regions of guy got 3%. Yulia Tymoshenko is ahead in the polls for the next election, but she seems to have a pretty hard ceiling. In Parliament, half Poroshenko Bloc picked up a lot fo the Southeast in multi-member districts and almost all of the single-member districts.

And with Opposition Bloc, at least publically, they aren't fully pro-Russian. I mentioned how Donetsk was able to turn out the way it did because of support from Akhmetov. The Party of Regions mayor of the eastern, Russian-speaking, city of Kharkiv cracked down on the Euromaidan protests in his city. But, when separatists started seizing regional administrations in Donbas and declaring independent republics and push came to shove, he stood with Ukraine. And he caught a bullet in the spine for it and is now a paraplegic.

If you look at polls, there is very little disagreement that Russia is currently an enemy.

Culturally, nobody has done more to create a united Ukrainian identity than Tovarishch Putin. Before the Revolution, there wasn't a very strong sense of Ukrainianness. Nationalism was very tied into Ukrainian ethnicity. Now even the nationalists are, at least publically, much more civic nationalist. I mentioned that babushka. She would not have called herself Ukrainian before. Now she does.

"Also, what about the nationalistic groups - Right Sector for example. Do they have a strong presence in the new government? The docs made quite a big deal about them and what they said were Maidan's ties to nazism and fascism."

No, even if you add up all of the far-right, since they have a habit of breaking up and forming some new group, they have very little representation in the parliament and are not a part of the government. As for Right Sector itself, they have no seats in parliament after their leader splintered off.  Before that, he won a district in his home oblast with something like a quarter of the vote. And that district is in the Southeast, literally on the border with Donbas.

And because things are weird, he is in a faction controlled by the richest Jew in Ukraine.