I feel sorry for Belarus. For a country with such an interesting

File: 1404319076149.jpg (238KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1000x1000px

>>284024
Belarussian history is simply Russian history with added occupation by Lithuanians.

Putin tier triumvirate-Russian masturbating aside Belarus actually is a made up country. Ukraine actually has some real interesting and unique history that justifies its existence, but the world just needs to accept that Belarus just somehow found itself on the wrong side of the Russian border.

>>284090
>Belarussian history is simply Russian history with added occupation by Lithuanians.
It's more like simply Lithuanian history with added occupation by Russians if you want to put it that way.

>>284090
From my understanding, the ancient "Lithuania" is actually modern Belarus.

That said, those people willingly abandoned their own language and got russified. I'm not shitting you, Belarusian is actually a minority language in Belarus. They deserve nothing but mockery and scorn.

File: 1447432287764.jpg (115KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 500x500px

>>284105
2bf Kievan Rus existed and owned the entirety of Belarus before Lithuania existed. So it's safe to say Lithos are the occupying force.

>>284132
>Kievan Rus is the same as Russia

Apex kek

File: rus.jpg (723KB, 1280x1728px) Image search: [Google]

723KB, 1280x1728px

>>284090

Ukraine is the same as Belarus except with Polish occupation+lawlesness+Tatar raids instead of Lithuanian occupation, both Ukraine and Belarus are Russian peoples.

File: 1448203431433.jpg (60KB, 465x700px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 465x700px

>>284120
Belarussian was already a total meme language anyway, it's hugely intelligible with Russian.

I at least respect that Belarus recognized the irrelevance of their dialect and started speaking Russian properly.

>>284159
>pronouncing "kokogo" as "kakova"

Is there a more subhuman language than Russian?

>>284132
Russia is not Rus or Ruthenia.

Also as far as Lithuanian conquest of Ruthenia goes, it had actually been more of incorporation kinda thing. Pagan Lithuanian nobility happily accepted more advanced Ruthenian culture and assimilated fairly quickly. Hell, Svitrigaila even reestablished Ruthenia for a brief period of time.

However, Lithuanians also brought a much-needed centralization system to the principalities so it was not a full assimilation, more like a symbiosis.

File: Alf looking right in Australia.jpg (2KB, 156x128px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 156x128px

>>284159
>84% common vocabulary with Ukrainian, its closest language

>Hugely intelligible with Russian which closest language is Bulgarian, of all things

>>284143
>>284166
>the medieval Russia is not Russia meme
rus=ruthenia=russia are synonymous.

File: PLT_flag_EU4.png (4KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 128x128px

>>284024
Isn't the Principality of Polotsk, technically the equivalent of modern day Belarus?

>>284143
>>284166
I know, but Rus is the undisputed ancestor state of all East Slavs - which Belarussians definitely are.

My point however, was that the kind of East Slavs Belarussians really are is simply Russians.

>>284176
Bet you also believe that Carolingian empire is the same as Roman empire.

>>284174
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_intelligibility#List_of_mutually_intelligible_languages

All East Slavic languages are very intelligible.

>>284185
Russian propaganda desu.

>All East Slavs are Russians
>wait actually, all Slavs are Russians
>let's go further, ALL EUROPEANS are Russians
>and the entire world for that matter, even God himself is a Russian

>>284176
No they're not, Ivan.

>Rus
Originally a name for varangians, later an umbrella term for various Eastern Slavic principalities, sometimes used for Kiev principality only.

>Ruthenia
Rus translated to Latin. A name used for lands of modern Ukraine and Belarus, corresponding with self-name of the peoples living there - rusyny.
Later on it became substituted for Ukraine in Ukraine and Belarus in Belarus, used for the longest time in Galicia and Zakarpattia regions of Ukraine. Hence why some guys living there still call themselves Ruthenians.

>Russia
Rus translated to Greek. Referred to the North-Eastern borders of Kievan Rus, lands generally called Muscovy by Lithuanians and Ruthenians.

>>284188
I bet you believe the French republic is in no way related to the French kingdom.

>>284191
Same as all Slavic languages in general. Doesn't mean they're the same. Sure, most Ukrainians and Belarusians understand Russian very well but that's because they fucking studied it. Ask a Russian or Ukrainian-Canadian (for example) to read the opposite language, hilarity will ensue.

>>284188
If Charlemagne had the same language, same religion, all the old Roman territory, and was of the same dynasty as the last Roman emperor the yes - they probably would be the same.

File: url.jpg (634KB, 770x1028px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 770x1028px

>>284192
>>and the entire world for that matter, even God himself is a Russian
No, just east slavs.

>>284201
>No they're not, Ivan.
But you literally just explained how they are synonyms, different translations of the same name, referring to the same thing, the lands of old rus.

>>284206
Not even comparable.

>a loose federation of principalities
>they get fucked by Mongols, get even more loose
>one splinter group lays a claim on the whole thing and conquers everything
>everyone who refuses to be conquered is considered illigetimate

>>284183
Kind of. One can say the same of Kingdom of Halych-Volhynia and Ukraine but they existed fucking long ago.

>>284224
No, I explained how, despite being a variation of an old name, they came to describe completely different lands.

Ruthenia is one thing, Russia is other.

>>284209
>Because they fucking studied it.

This isn't the opinion of random East Slavic bydlo. This is the opinion of linguists in their professional analysis of the languages.

And all Slavic languages aren't as intelligible as the East Slavic languages with each other.

>>284214
"Same language" is not the same as a"pretty similar language".

I'm not a native Russian speaker but I understand some Russian since I learned it in highschool. I however can't understand spoken Ukrainian to save my life.

I mean this is on the level of Spain claiming Portugal or something.

>>284229
They aren't, they're direct translations of each other.

You may as well say Hibernia and Ireland are different.

>>284244
They're direct translations evolving to mean completely different things, like, say Rome and Romania.

>muh arbitrary ancient/medieval monarchy is a nation maymay

>>284229
>No, I explained how, despite being a variation of an old name, they came to describe completely different lands.
Ok, you're right, but still, those are just english terms, in russian/ukrainian/belorussian, there are no such terms, there is only rus and russia, the latter which simply means the land of the rus, implying united pan rus state.

>>284225
Weird logic, so then sparta is not greek because it was never part of the pan greek macedonian empire?

>>284253
Sparta might be Greek, but it's not an argument for why the entire Greece should belong under Sparta.

>>284250
Drawing borders of a country based on ethnicity might legitimately be the dumbest concept ever invented. Thanks 19th century.

>>284238
No because those are wildly divergent languages, such a scenario would be more like Russia claiming Poland.

East Slavic languages are similar to the point where linguists are still debating whether or not they're just one language. Their very existence is simply nationalist pretending, kind of like Serbo-Croatian and all its nationalist flavours.

>>284256
Now you're backpedaling. The argument is whether they are the same people or not, you just admitted that they are by what you said.

That said i believe they should be united because they are the same people.

>>284253
>in russian/ukrainian/belorussian, there are no such terms, there is only rus and russia, the latter which simply means the land of the rus, implying united pan rus state
This is where you're wrong. In Ukrainian, Belarusian and i think even Polish there's a strict difference between "Russian" and "Referring to Rus".

File: b9cb6b64c7f6ced39c2335bee2ee2b95[1].jpg (8KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x250px

>>284266
>East Slavic languages are similar to the point where linguists are still debating whether or not they're just one language

>>284267
I'm not backpedalling at all.

>That said i believe they should be united because they are the same people.

see >>284263

>>284249
What does Ruthenia mean then?

Because it's a word that literally no one uses outside of referring to Russia or former Rus territories.

>>284272
>I'm not backpedalling at all.
whatever you say

>see >>284263
I disagree with you and agree with>>284250

People of the same culture, nation and language should be under the same nation, division is pointless and multiculturalism is causes conflict.

>>284283
should be under the same country, division is pointless and multiculturalism causes conflict*

>>284275
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenia

In the narrow sense of the term it was used to describe what's now West-Central Ukraine (up to Zhytomyr or something like that), in the narrowest one just Lviv and its surroundings.

Today it's also seldom used for Zakarpattia region of Ukraine.

>>284275
It actually refers to Western Ukraine/Romania

>>284271
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belarusian_language#Classification_and_relationship_to_other_languages

>>284275
It's just a latinisation of the name russia that modern historiography applies to the russian lands that were under polish/lithuanian occupation.

Belarusian story starts after WW1.
The concept of a Belarusian nation is a meme invented by anticommunist scholars in 1919, and is not really based on any cultural or ethnic differences.

t. dating a belarusian girl

>>284287
>>284283
>People of the same culture, nation and language should be under the same nation

Says who?

>multiculturalism causes conflict
So when is Russia granting independence to Chechnia, Tatarstan, Bashkorostan etc?

>>284263
Okay, Belgium.

>>284238
Actually, if we follow the medieval and not-so-medieval definition of Spain, Portugal is Spain. España was just the castilian form of Hispania, aka all the peninsula.

Now, in the second half of the 17th and first half of the 18th modern portuguese and spanish identities were forged, with Portugal independent again and Spain with a new dynasty that wanted to change his possesions from an united kingdom into a modern absolute monarchy. Hence why no spaniard or portuguese would call Portugal spanish in 2015 (or 1900, or whatever) but wouldn't be strange to hear it in 1300.

But I suppose that actually confirms your point: terms and it's meanings evolve and can mean different things in different years.

>>284307
You know, let's go further. Spanish is a Latin-based language, so it can be traced back to Rome. So if for example modern Italy claims to be the heir of ancient Rome (like Muscovy declared to be the successor of Kievan Rus), they'd be perfectly justified in annexing Spain according to that Russian guy.

>>284301
>Says who?
Me and i explained why you needlessly passive aggressive little shit.

>So when is Russia granting independence to Chechnia, Tatarstan, Bashkorostan etc?
When the world turns into a utopia and everyone gets to have what they want.

>>284319
That's more like Panslavism

>>284319
>>284319
I'm not Russian, I'm a Britbong. I just recognize that East Slavic division is totally pointless and a very recent thing.

More importantly Italy doesn't have half the connections to Rome as Russia does to Rus. And Italians and Spaniards aren't half as close as Russians and Belarussians. The situation you're describing is like if Russia claimed Slovenia.

>>284319
No that would be more like Russia/Poland/whatever trying to create a pan slavic state. Or germany/denmark/whatever trying to create a pan-germanic state. The logic is not flawed you're just pathetically nitpicking, trying to insult, not really trying to understand or prove a point.

>>284327
>Me and i explained why
And you're relying on a false premise that multiculturalism causes conflict. Virtually no countries prior to 19th century followed ethnic borders yet most conflicts stemmed from either religious or class differences, not ethnic ones.

>When the world turns into a utopia and everyone gets to have what they want.
Well Russia is a multicultural country, so if they followed your theory they should let non-Russian elements secede. You can't have it both ways, it sounds to me like it's just an excuse for continuous landgrab.

>>284337
You are an autist who gets confused when something doesnt conform to your categories, you probably blob a lot of countries when you draw autistic maps

>>284337
>More importantly Italy doesn't have half the connections to Rome as Russia does to Rus.
And where's the cutoff point between close ties and distant ties?

>>284359
And you probably think Scotland and Ireland are real nations :)

>>284359
This to be honest family.

>>284368
You probably think Scandinavia is a nation :')

File: Orangutan.jpg (63KB, 600x423px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x423px

I just wanted to discuss Belarus

:(

>>284351
>And you're relying on a false premise that multiculturalism causes conflict. Virtually no countries prior to 19th century followed ethnic borders yet most conflicts stemmed from either religious or class differences, not ethnic ones.
People had better things to worry about in feudal times. This is the modern age, people all across the world want their own state, where they can freely learn and speak their own language, celebrate their own culture, follow their own leaders and all that. No one wants to be ruled by foreigners. It's funny coming from you when you keep mentioning all the rebels against Russia.

>Well Russia is a multicultural country, so if they followed your theory they should let non-Russian elements secede. You can't have it both ways, it sounds to me like it's just an excuse for continuous landgrab.
Why do you falsely assume i disagree? Because also you falsely assume I'm Russian and you're angry at me for it. Maybe you should start using your brain more objectively and stop being so passive aggressive?

>>284395
Did you know that the Government of Belarus set up by the Germans during World War One is still functioning?

File: Habsburg_Empire.jpg (76KB, 658x517px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 658x517px

>>284263
Finally someone who gets it.
>we could have been relevant
>we could have been part of a powerful nation
>but nooooooo, we have to have an ethnic nation

>>284402
>This is the modern age
John Oliver pls leave.

>>284404
Now that is actually interesting.

>>284361
A combination of historical origins, linguistic relation and ethnicity.

For instance Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians are the pinnacle of made up nations. Whereas say the Dutch and Germans are decidedly different.

>>284420
>2015
>not being a anationalist
COME ON PEOPLE!

>>284415
The supposed ethnic conflict in the Habsburg empire wasn't even a real thing, apart from the Hungarians who were just given greater power within the empire and got satisfied.

The entire EVERYONE WANTED TO BE INDEPEDENT, LET'S ATOMIZE THE EMPIRE INTO 500 IRRELEVANT NON-COUNTRIES is a bullshit Wilsonian Entente narrative. USA, France and Britain simply didn't want a strong competitor in central Europe.

They do have some regional uniqueness, but they're pretty much snowflake Russians, just like MOST of Ukrainians.
I mean, anyone who knows history knows this, it's just a question of political agenda whether you will support exaggerated claims of Ukrainian or Belorussian nationalists or not.
Discussion can realistically only go in terms of whether these two nations diverged enough to be considered separate, and whether that divergence was artificial.
Historically, they began as same group. And in my opinion, overwhelming majority of Belorussians and most of Ukrainians are pretty much same as Russians.

>>284429
>IT'S THE CURRENT YEAR
>People 120 years ago had way different values, I mean come on, it's the CURRENT YEAR

Nationalism is yet another "we're a historical inevitability" horseshit ideology spawned by the French revolution, just like Marxism and SJW identity politics. Read Leddihn.

>>284430
Romanians and Serbs wanted independence, Croats wanted greater anatomy. I'm not sure about the others(poles would certainly want to revive their great commonwealth). Also i don't think serbs vs croats liked eachother very much, or hungarians vs everyone for that matter.

File: snipsnip.jpg (562KB, 939x1190px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 939x1190px

>>284438
>Reactionaries

Go away.

>>284427
>For instance Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians are the pinnacle of made up nations.
Serbs and Croats might have a shared root, but they had like 1000 years of separate development. Exactly like the Germans and the Dutch.

>>284430
Even Western Ukrainians, generally very loyal to Habsburgs, were striving for independence.

>>284436
Instrumentalists >>>/out/

>>284444
Don't lose your head over it chap.

>>284430
>The supposed ethnic conflict in the Habsburg empire wasn't even a real thing
Bullshit. Groups were often not just against Austrians/Hungarians, but against each other as well.
Go check what was happening in Croatia, Bosnia, Vojvodina and Transylvania.

>>284450
I smiled slightly and audibly exhaled from my nose.

>>284426
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rada_of_the_Belarusian_Democratic_Republic
It's the oldest functioning government in exile in the world today.

File: 1443952583127.png (391KB, 1024x887px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 1024x887px

>>284438
Sure thing, buddy.

>>284447
Not particularly, the main different between them is Christian sectarianism punctuated with brief periods of independence for both of them.

>>284467
>Reactionaries are SJWs in denial
>tfw you're actually retarded enough to believe that

>>284468
>the main different between them is Christian sectarianism punctuated with brief periods of independence for both of them.
Or the fact that prior to yugoslavia they were absolutely never part of the same nation and always had different national identities. Assuming you're talking about serbs vs croats.

>>284474
>Nationalism
>Reactionary
Where do you think you are?

>>284463
Does that even count if the republic has never been internationally recognized unlike, say. Ukrainian People's Republic which transferred its power to Ukraine in 92?

>>284482
True reactionaries recognize nationalism as pleb shit in the same ballpark as marxism.

>let's elevate peasants into a collective aristocracy because they happen to belong to a certain ethnicity

>>284474
Oh well you're just as bad then.

>please don't hate me sjw massas, I h-hate nationalism too, im a good boy

>>284484
It was recognized. It just outlived the states recognizing it.

>>284495
UPR was actually officially recognized by several of its neighbors, namely Poland, Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary and had diplomatic representatives at several countries. Hell, it even had its envoys sent to Paris Conference.

However, Belarusian People's Republic failed to achieve any kind of proper recognition.

>>284449
Am I wrong in any way?
I'm not denying Ukrainians exist, cause they do. I'm just denying they were separate from Russians, or that there were no external factors influencing Ukrainian identity.
Their historians also often misinterpret events to serve their own theory.
In reality, genesis of Ukrainian nation didn't occur from Cossack society, but in Western Ukraine, under Polish and later Austrian rule.
Cossacks themselves didn't have Ukrainian identity outside of regional sense. They considered themselves to be same people as rest of East Slavs, only embraced different ideals and lived in different society.
>>284468
Not really. Croats and Serbs are different groups, despite common origin and many similarities.
It's true main difference is different denominations of Christianity, but that's not the root of it. Croats and Serbs were different Slavic tribes/proto-nations.

>>284492
>radicals
Socialism
Social darwinism
Nationalism
Marxism / Communism
National Socialism
Fascism
Egalitarianism
Neo-Marxism / SJW / Identity Politics
Atheism

>reactionaries
Traditional monarchism / hierarchism

>>284492
You and the SJWs are the same rabble to me.

>>284510
I agree with you mi familia. The thing is, it bugs people when you label all of them russians, but it's the only proper term for them, the medieval state that they all draw their roots from is medieval Rus, and Russia=land of the Rus.

>>284527
Exactly.
It's just easier to say ''Russians'', because Belorussians literally means White Russians and Ukraine means ''borderlands''.

>>284481
Except the Ottoman Empire, and Hungary, and Austria-Hungary.

There were very few occasions where they were independent at all, and I think there was only a ~100 year window in their entire history when they were simultaneously independent prior to the 90s.

This is what I'm saying, the division between them chiefly comes from sectarianism and the failure of Yugoslavia to effectively unite a nation that was historically always a minority.

File: 1446980477036.jpg (160KB, 600x709px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 600x709px

>>284521
>>284525
Sorry but a constitutional monarchy with a fascist government is the only acceptable form of rule, everything else belongs in the shitter.

>>284537
>constitutional
>>>/trash/

File: 1447998417681.jpg (190KB, 512x600px) Image search: [Google]

190KB, 512x600px

>>284537
>monarchy
>fascism

>>284534
It's not just sectarian, Bulgarians and Serbs are orthodox yet they have distinct identities. It's the same with Serbs and Croats except for the fact that leading Serb and Croat intellectuals in the 19th century decided to standardize their languages on the same dialect in Bosnia, so today they speak the exact same language, but always had a separate identity. But yeah today it's mostly their religion that defines their nation since they all speak the same language.

>>284551
Baby's first satire

Make sure to add a fedora

>>284562
I know, but Bulgarians have a much longer history of independence as well as a certain national identity that's unique among the South Slavs. Even compared to their near identical Macedonian neighbours.

>>284534
Actually it's the other way around, the only thing they have in common is being Slavic and having the same language. They didn't even have the same language until like 150 years ago, so the "they're the same nation" concept is much more recent and artifical than the one about them being separate.

>>284263
Sykes and Picot got it right I presume?

>>284583
Yeah if you think radical islam is a good idea, because the Saudis and related shitmonglers got into power precisely thanks to the destruction of Ottoman empire.

File: robeliver.jpg (556KB, 758x960px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 758x960px

>>284444

Damn it, I wanna learn about actual Belarussian history, not semantic discussions about whether Belarus should join Russia.

Someone give me an overview of Belarussian history from the beginning of the Iron Age to today.

>>285678
Long story short:
Slavs-->the rus conquer the what is now east slavs-->united rus principalities ruled by grand prince(first from novgorod, later from kiev), kievan rus falls apart from mongol invasions, what is now belarus is conquered by lithuanians--->grand dutchy of lithuania, old russian/belorusian becomes state language, lithuanian and belorusian nobles rule the land toghetter, belarusians develope a lithuanian identity----> polish throne is inherited by lithuanian grand prince, now lithuania becomes the lesser partner in a dynastic union--->polish-lithuanian commonwealth---->plc has their shit fucked up and belarus is conquered by russia, they develop a new identity, belorussian(no longer lithuanians)--->communists take over russia, belarus gets independence, but quickly is retaken by soviet russia--->ussr falls apart--->modern independent belarus

I think today they claim medieval rus and later the grand dutchy of lithuania as their historical predecessors.

>>284120
>That said, those people willingly abandoned their own language and got russified
>400 years of polonization then russification then polonization again then russification again.
>willingly

no shit

>>284090
what the fuck, that picture is not even Belarus, it's Poland

>>284163
>pronouncing "laugh" as "laf"

Is there a more subhuman language than English?

>>284192
>even God himself is a Russian
sorry, won't work
Bog je Srbin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-EQJA8Ahac

Who /WhiteGovernmentInExile/ here?

Why do they even bother anymore? It's clear that nobody is going to be willing to support them, especially since Belarus is squarely in Putin's sphere.

>>284442
>Croats wanted greater anatomy
Well, the males did.

>>284481
>they were absolutely never part of the same nation and always had different national identities. Assuming you're talking about serbs vs croats.
Never picked up a history book on the subject? Both Serbs and Croats came as a second wave of Slavic migrations after a first wave of Slavs had already settled there. The common people among both groups freely intermixed with the Slavs that came before them and with each other. Through the end of the medieval period they called themselves simply Slavs and their language simply Slavic a vast majority of the time. The only people that maintained a separate Croat or Serb national identity were the nobles.

>x has distinct culture and history
>but look, x is also similar to y in many ways
>wow I guess x was just y all along

>>287903
Holy shit you're so wrong on that many levels.


>grand dutchy of lithuania, old russian/belorusian becomes state language,

First of all there was no such thing as state language, in correspondence with various people used different languages for Eastern Slavic principalities hint in official GDL documents it was literally called Russian or Old Church Slavonic, not Ruthenian, Belarusian or whatever. With Germans they used German/Latin, with Poles Polish..

Lithuanian wasn't a written language until about 1547 or something like that, nevertheless it was still used as oral language and was used in court and was spoken by the Grand Dukes the last one to speak Lithuanian was Alexander Jagiellon.


>lithuanian and belorusian nobles rule the land toghetter,


Belorusian nobles didn't have that much influence outside of Ruthenian principalities though there were few exceptions. Not to mention that ethnic Roman Catholic Lithuanians from Vilnius, Trakai and Samogitia voivodeships were the majority in Lithuanian Council of Lords and Ruthenians were generally only started being accepted into it only at about the time of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

>>284307
I get what you mean but Hispania was only one of the two Roman provonces in the Iberian peninsula, the other one being Lusitania which comprised about half of today's Portuguese territory plus a part of Andalusia in Spain.

File: 1376719742836.jpg (36KB, 317x265px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 317x265px

>>288054
I'm afraid you've been BELARUSED, comrade

Belarus in German is "Weissrussland" - White Russia. Seems most other languages in Europe call it something along those lines too. What is so white about it?

File: 1447771381087.png (21KB, 777x710px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 777x710px

>thread about Belarus

>literally no discussion of Belarus

>>288634
The term itself is relatively recent, I believe. It got spread around the time Ruthenians (i.e. rusyny) started calling themselves Ukrainians to avoid confusion with Russians but unlike Ukraine, it has never had any deep historical roots.

In fact, Belarusian national identity is so weak that a lot of peasants simply called themselves "locals" in the beginning of 20th fucking century.

As far as origins go, I think it's something along the lines of White Serbian and White Croatian tribes.

>>284510
>Cossacks themselves didn't have Ukrainian identity outside of regional sense. They considered themselves to be same people as rest of East Slavs, only embraced different ideals and lived in different society.

>Ukrainian cossacks weren't Ukrainian

I hate this meme.

>>284430
I agree in part. It is true that Austria-Hungary got separated because geopolitics. "oppressed ethnicities" was just an excuse to split it. However, the nation was seriously weakened by nationalist movements which constantly fought centralization and the Austrian throne. There is a reason Maria Therese and Joseph II did everything they could to fight local autonomy, it made ruling difficult and seriously weakened the nation. And fucking nationalists just kept demanding more autonomy (with the exception of Hungarians, who forced the throne into giving them significant concessions, and tried to make other ethnicities like Croats into their subjects)

File: 1435599639852.jpg (49KB, 483x600px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 483x600px

>>284024
hihihihihi

>>284237
>And all Slavic languages aren't as intelligible as the East Slavic languages with each other.
I am pretty sure that South Slavic languages have similar case or even stronger one than East Slavic.
That being said, Polish and Czech won't be able to get each other as fast.

>>284268
>I think even Polish there's a strict difference between "Russian" and "Referring to Rus".
Polish here to aid.
>Russia = Rosja
>Russians = Rosjanie
>Ruthenia = Ruś
>Ruthenians = Rusini
Ivan is full of shit, fucking Moskal.

>>288634

Belo = White
Rus = Russia

Belorusiya in Macedonian.

>>287903
>united rus principalities ruled by grand prince(first from novgorod, later from kiev), kievan rus falls apart from mongol invasions
You forgot separation of Kievan Rus into separate Dukedoms, that happened in between and lasted for a while before the Mongols arrived.

>>288610
I don't see how what i said conflicts what you just said.

>>289554
Oh well i didn't know they fell apart into separate principalities before the mongols, i thought it happened because of them.

>>288658
Everything in the thread is completely about Belarus, your reading comprehension is poor.

>>289463
I call modern poland poopland, therefore it is unrelated to historical poland.

File: a good world.png (10KB, 330x153px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 330x153px

>>288093
this tbqh

>>289466
Did they invent the cocktail?