and the black government makes it nigh impossible to leave with assets in any sort of a hurry
i know quite a few here and they left with almost nothing
and the older ones simply refuse to go
it's black getback and eventual decline back to savagery
this is the way of the world...everywhere
the brown and black populations are on the move and ascendancy politically and will dominate the majority white nations in time
oddly enough the only survivors will likely be the old east bloc with Mother Russia as the remaining white motherland
sounds far fetched?
imagine how a free white Russia would prosper given her huge resources?
had she transformed from feudal to freedom instead of being hijacked by the usual suspects it might have been a different story there
folks here will laugh and call me racist
just wait...we are on the road to becoming Brasil
Agree 100% - the ‘old east bloc’ is the whitest place on earth! Not a whole lot of diversity.
If you want real "Caucasians" then Western Ukraine (right-bank Ukraine) is the place
had she transformed from feudal to freedom instead of being hijacked by the usual suspects it might have been a different story there -- not a chance.
There was no feudalism per se in Muscowy -- it was autocratic right from mongol times
the ancient Slavs (who only starting splitting in the 6th century into West (Poles/Slovaks/Czechs/Kashubians/Sorbians), South (Croats/Slovenes/Serbs/Bosnians/Bulgarians) and East (Russians, Ukrainians, Belarussians) were a primitive set of pre-tribes with a very primitive indo-european religion.
The East Slavs were the ones who moved first and were heavily influenced by Rome and Byzantine and civilised by them
The West Slavs were converted through Germany, right from Samo's empire through to Great Moravia and then to the Piast kingdom (of the Poles and Wistulans) and the Czech Przysl kingdom.
The Poles, czech-bohemians and Rus had a pretty laissez-fair governance structure because their population levels were so low and the lands were so vast.
The Poles were the ones who kept the concept of freedoms etc. -- this was due to the disintegration and then re-integration of the Piast kingdom and strangely enough due to the French Angevin King of hungary who was also made king of Poland and whose daughter Jadwiga was the one who cemented the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth by marrying the pagan Jagiełło and his conversion to Catholicism
The Polish Kingdom and the Lithuanian kingdom were run together under one king, but separately. And the Poles had the freedom to disaggree, even argue with their kings, while the Lithuanians ruled as utter autocrats. With the last Jagiellon king, this changed to being an elected monarch -- yes, you heard me, the nobility (who comprised 10 to 15% of the population) would choose the next king -- they chose Hungarians (Stefan Bathory), their own (Poniatowski, Jan Sobieski) and Saxons and Swedes (Vasa dynasty) and the P-L had the first consitution in Europe in 1792 (the problem is after this the Russians, Prussians and Austrians decided that this was dangerous and wiped Poland-Lithuania off the map)
The East Slavs were initially under the various Kievan Rus principalities which were a crazy mix of states with no one central ruler -- think the Holy Roman Empire without the Emperor. When the Mongols came, this was smashed and the Kievan Rus principalities had to pay taxes to the Mongols. The GrandDuke of Moscow (which was initially just a cration of the older city of Vladimir-Suzdal) became the tax-collector for the Great Khan and that's how Moscow's prominence came to be -- the Muscowites, arguably, learnt from the Mongol ways and the Grand-Dukes acted like eastern potentates, even after taking the title of Caesar (Tsar) for themselves.
in the meanwhile , the Lithuanians (before Jagiełłó) had taken advantage of the chaos post the Mongols and carved a huge Dukedom which comprised of modern day lithuania, latvia, belarus, western Ukraine and parts of Russia right up to Smolensk -- though the Lithuanians were pagans and "Lords" -- the rule was through Ruthenian bureaucrats (remember the term Ruthenian -- this is good to differentiate between Muscovites and other "Russians" -- so from now on when I say "Russian" that's synonymous with Muscowite and the other Rus people I will refer to as Ruthenian) with old Belarussian being the language of bureaucracy
The Russian Tsars after 1453 claimed the glories of Byzantine as well, but what this meant in practise was that they combined the bad points of the Byzantines with the Mongol (good and bad) ways and left out the Rus "freedoms"
Poland in the meanwhile combined with Lithuania and the Ruthenian people either got Polonized (racially they were the same and ethnically similar) and Catholicized (one and the same) -- and this increased after the Union of Lublin when the Byzantine Catholic Church was formed. This was a political move because the Tsar by claiming Moscow as the third Rome also elevated the Metropolitan of Moscow to being a Patriarch and claimed that the Russians were not only reuniting all the Rus lands but also reuniting all of Orthodoxy.
This was dangerous for P-L, but also dangerous for the Ruthenians who did not want to submit so utterly to Moscow, yet wanted to retain their Orthodoxy.
The compromise was the Uniate or Byzantine Catholic or Greco-Catholic Church which retained Orthodox rituals while aligning themselves to Rome (and thereby keeping out of the temporal and spiritual clutches of Muscowy).
Russia with it's Tsar (who called himself the Tsar of ALL the Russias) got more autocratic through it's Romanov years. It tore apart the P-L commonwealth with the help of Prussia and Austria and took the lions share, but this didn't work - the political cultural differences between Poles/Ruthenians and Russians was too large
As an aside the poor Ruthenians (Belarussians and Ukrainians) got the worst -- they were the original homelands of the Slavs and hence had the most diversity in peoples, languages and culture in the Slav "area" and they never got the chance to coalesce as nations but remained a patchwork where people when asked "Are you Russian or Polish?" would say "I am from here only" and if asked if they were Ruthenian or Lithuanian would say "I am both" -- they never had a chance to create one strong central culture. Under the Lithuanians they had the startings of this, but when joined to Poland, Polish culture was much stronger and slowly took over. There was no forced polonization until the late 1600s, but Khmelnitsky's Cossack rebellion caused the Ruthenians to move towards Moscow in the mistaken assumption that this would help them -- like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire
Moscow crushed the Ruthenian "nationalism" under heavy Russification in the mid 1800s onwards
Russia continued being an autocracy right until the 1904 loss to Japan and the 1905 revolution.
The Tsar gave some ground, but not enough. Instead the March 1917 revolution where Bosheviks and non-communists came together to overthrow the Tsar, caused chaos, and the October 1917 revolution in which the Bolsheviks killed everyone else and then plunged the nation into 6 years of bloody civil war was replacing one tyranny with a worse one.
The Russians had only one chance recently -- the US in the 90s could have helped it in its transition during the Yeltsin years, but Clinton flubbed that and instead insulted the Russians and ergo, we have Putin....
also the brown and black populations are on the move and ascendancy politically and will dominate the majority white nations in time is incorrect in the sense that there is no "brown" race neither is there a "white" race -- the Aryanic peoples are a wide range of shades of white to dark brown, from Marathas to Irish. And the wider Caucasian peoples include brown Semites (Arabs, Jews) and Berbers and brown to nearly black Dravidians.