Markup /brabant/4109

Comment
>>4096
>If slavs are white then why do we kill other whites (Ukrainians)? 
Because 99% of russoids are commies albeit being White but dysgenic and morally degenerate.
>>4095
>>Whatever vends were, they had been germanized.
>Yup, germanized and then slavised, pretty fair I think.
Nee, local mixed germano-slavic population had been eliminated by ((('ed A'my))). They either left their home and emigrate to Western Germany, or were killed.
>Just like Germans were on these lands???
Ancient Poland (in BC period) was inhabited by Germanic tribes. Slavs are a result of balto-germanic (with unmeasured celtic influence) intermixing near Subsylvania aka Podlachia.
>Which planned to dance on the bones of all Russian nation. Not like I'm a fan of commies but I have no pity for Germans after what they did to us(and you btw)
Number of nazis' victims in our country is ≈900k. 700-750k of them — are the holocausted Jews. The other 100-150k it's killed as a result of the war with the partisans (don't forget about soviet partisans' terror towards belarusian volk, especially peasants, because the Reich returned back private landowning). Resuming, there was no genocide or any impactful slavophobic sentiment in the Reich. The Soviets, together with Jews, invented this myth. 
>Depends from the period and the place actually, there was a time when Kievan Rus was the most cultured and literate state in Europe(after Byzantium).
It is just unrealistic. Orthodox church had no such a tradition of (relatively) common education as the Roman-Catholics had. The most important difference is that western monks were chronically busy with rewriting books and other intellectual activities (unlike the orthodox version of "regular clergy", which we, easterners, know under the name "чёрное духовенство", which also was very poor and often illiterate), so the West couldn't be less educated than the East.
>Meeeeeehhhhh, please use something else, it's always the same. It depends from the period and ruler, there was Alexander I and Pavel I, and there was a Catherine II. Difference is noticeable as well.
Actual slavery (крепостничество) —> actual kolchozy (мирская община). And I have to call it "the evolution of the status of russian peasants"? Geg, both were shit, I'll just remind you that Stolypin reforms were performed due to things Stolypin had seen in Western Belarus (Grodno). And under "things" I mean private landowning.
>Plus even when western peasants became "free" they still had no rights, somewhere their conditions were even worse than in Russia lol.
For example? Your peasants were like chinese ones, i.e. literally slaves, not serfs even.
>Google something about english poor laws for example.
Yeah, this. The Americans are smarter than the British so they were doing this out of private initiative by private persons, not with a help of the state by state officials. Or did you mean something other?
>Private property wasn't sacred and still isn't, unfortunately. 
Maybe in commies' and nons' minds, surely. 
>They literally stole russian assets recently, you know.
Justified.