Crusades ????

[ESay]

prejudice. The enemy of Russia is Vodka and not freedom.

He is right. The Russians can't live without a strong hand. The absolute power of their ruler was the main reason of their social and economic backwardness. Even the reforms on European manner didn't help them, because they didn't change the main obstacle - absolute power of the czar.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Some blame the Muslims
Some blame the Christians

it was both their faults

I must disagree.

Muslims blocked the road and gave 3 options...Pay a tax...convert to islam...or die.

If I was given that choice right now today I would choose war!

Unacceptable! I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees!

Muslims also did that in the form of the barbary pirates and we kicked their fucking teeth down their throats!

That's why U.S. Marines came to be!

 

[Thunk]

That's why U.S. Marines came to be!

And also how they got the nickname "leatherneck".

Muslims have this "thing" for cutting off heads...the Marines had a high leather collar to protect them from such barbary.

 

[Litwin]

And your theory the Mongols had founded Russia is wrong. The

Basically yes and no. The rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow was thanks to the Mongols who gave the called 'yarlyk' (the right on power) and devastated the rival duchies.

View attachment 358604

View attachment 358605

View attachment 358607

When I saw this then I had prefered to live in Moscow from 996-1088. It's more easy to plant trees than to build walls.

you talk about Ugro - Finnish (Moksha) frog fishers ,

View attachment 358616
we talk here about northern bank for Mongol taxes , Mongol imperial city buy a book



"Charles Halperin - 1987 - ‎History
"... that the language of the Muscovite bureaucracy was a kind of meta-Turkic, "

Russia and the Golden Horde

This revelatory study of Russian medieval history and the age of Mongolian conquest “infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations” (History). In the 13th century, a Mongolian confederation known as The Golden Horde dominated a vast region including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan...

books.google.se

As far as I can see the "Golden Horde" had an empire far from Russia and the Ukraine. And in general are Tatars and Mongols totally different people so it makes not a big sense to say the Mongols spoke Turkish and this has to do with Russia. Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde?

But let me correct a little mistake, which I made here. The German and Polish knights I spoke about - together with the Hungarians, which I forgot - fought not against Ghengis Khan but against the army of Ögedei Khan. We were devastatingly beaten. And suddenly died Ögedei Khan and so his highest army commanders Jochi (German: Dschötschi) and Batu Khan returned to Mongolia. Western Europe was saved. Thanks god.

...

And what has this all to do with the crusades ?

...

" Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde? "

it was not any name just nothern part of juchi ulus , and it had 0 connection to Kyiv rus with died in 11c.

"tributary " is 17c Polish myth, you ( moksha) paid just taxis to the real czars (Golden kin) like 1000 other nations . thats why you are so much against NATO /EU /USA today . like your Blacks, Persians, Hans, Pushtu brothers

 

[zaangalewa]

And your theory the Mongols had founded Russia is wrong. The

Basically yes and no. The rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow was thanks to the Mongols who gave the called 'yarlyk' (the right on power) and devastated the rival duchies.

View attachment 358604

View attachment 358605

View attachment 358607

When I saw this then I had prefered to live in Moscow from 996-1088. It's more easy to plant trees than to build walls.

you talk about Ugro - Finnish (Moksha) frog fishers ,

View attachment 358616
we talk here about northern bank for Mongol taxes , Mongol imperial city buy a book



"Charles Halperin - 1987 - ‎History
"... that the language of the Muscovite bureaucracy was a kind of meta-Turkic, "

Russia and the Golden Horde

This revelatory study of Russian medieval history and the age of Mongolian conquest “infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations” (History). In the 13th century, a Mongolian confederation known as The Golden Horde dominated a vast region including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan...

books.google.se

As far as I can see the "Golden Horde" had an empire far from Russia and the Ukraine. And in general are Tatars and Mongols totally different people so it makes not a big sense to say the Mongols spoke Turkish and this has to do with Russia. Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde?

But let me correct a little mistake, which I made here. The German and Polish knights I spoke about - together with the Hungarians, which I forgot - fought not against Ghengis Khan but against the army of Ögedei Khan. We were devastatingly beaten. And suddenly died Ögedei Khan and so his highest army commanders Jochi (German: Dschötschi) and Batu Khan returned to Mongolia. Western Europe was saved. Thanks god.

...

And what has this all to do with the crusades ?

...

ps start with something simple

My own historical line are the stone ages, Göbekli Tepe, the fertile crescent, Israel, Egypt, Greece, the Roman empires (including Constantinople), the history of Europe (including former colonies of Europe), the history of countries far east specially China, India and Japan - and the history of my own central Europe is not unimportant for me too.

Here someone tries to speak about problems, which were caused from the Seljuks = a turkish tribe, Muslims - who had conquered Jerusalem and Mekka and the Normans - who came from the Frankonian empire, Christians - who had conquered England. The "Frankonians" (Normans, Anglo-Saxons, Brits ...) had started a war to conquer the so called "holy land" - where three of the most important world religions were born. The "holy land" was the center of the world for this people. The very special aspect of this crusades are the warrior monks of the western world. An analogy for such warrior monks exists only in the shaolin in China as far as I know.

And now you tell me something about what and what has this to do with this? What in your 8½ hours long video in Russian language has to do with this?

 

[zaangalewa]

And your theory the Mongols had founded Russia is wrong. The

Basically yes and no. The rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow was thanks to the Mongols who gave the called 'yarlyk' (the right on power) and devastated the rival duchies.

View attachment 358604

View attachment 358605

View attachment 358607

When I saw this then I had prefered to live in Moscow from 996-1088. It's more easy to plant trees than to build walls.

you talk about Ugro - Finnish (Moksha) frog fishers ,

View attachment 358616
we talk here about northern bank for Mongol taxes , Mongol imperial city buy a book



"Charles Halperin - 1987 - ‎History
"... that the language of the Muscovite bureaucracy was a kind of meta-Turkic, "

Russia and the Golden Horde

This revelatory study of Russian medieval history and the age of Mongolian conquest “infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations” (History). In the 13th century, a Mongolian confederation known as The Golden Horde dominated a vast region including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan...

books.google.se

As far as I can see the "Golden Horde" had an empire far from Russia and the Ukraine. And in general are Tatars and Mongols totally different people so it makes not a big sense to say the Mongols spoke Turkish and this has to do with Russia. Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde?

But let me correct a little mistake, which I made here. The German and Polish knights I spoke about - together with the Hungarians, which I forgot - fought not against Ghengis Khan but against the army of Ögedei Khan. We were devastatingly beaten. And suddenly died Ögedei Khan and so his highest army commanders Jochi (German: Dschötschi) and Batu Khan returned to Mongolia. Western Europe was saved. Thanks god.

...

And what has this all to do with the crusades ?

...

" Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde? "

it was not any name just nothern part of juchi ulus ...

Do you really think the people in the region of Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." - whatever this could be? In which language did they think this?

By the way: What's your own nationality? Where do you live? Where did you go in school?

 

[Litwin]

And your theory the Mongols had founded Russia is wrong. The

Basically yes and no. The rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow was thanks to the Mongols who gave the called 'yarlyk' (the right on power) and devastated the rival duchies.

View attachment 358604

View attachment 358605

View attachment 358607

When I saw this then I had prefered to live in Moscow from 996-1088. It's more easy to plant trees than to build walls.

you talk about Ugro - Finnish (Moksha) frog fishers ,

View attachment 358616
we talk here about northern bank for Mongol taxes , Mongol imperial city buy a book



"Charles Halperin - 1987 - ‎History
"... that the language of the Muscovite bureaucracy was a kind of meta-Turkic, "

Russia and the Golden Horde

This revelatory study of Russian medieval history and the age of Mongolian conquest “infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations” (History). In the 13th century, a Mongolian confederation known as The Golden Horde dominated a vast region including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan...

books.google.se

As far as I can see the "Golden Horde" had an empire far from Russia and the Ukraine. And in general are Tatars and Mongols totally different people so it makes not a big sense to say the Mongols spoke Turkish and this has to do with Russia. Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde?

But let me correct a little mistake, which I made here. The German and Polish knights I spoke about - together with the Hungarians, which I forgot - fought not against Ghengis Khan but against the army of Ögedei Khan. We were devastatingly beaten. And suddenly died Ögedei Khan and so his highest army commanders Jochi (German: Dschötschi) and Batu Khan returned to Mongolia. Western Europe was saved. Thanks god.

...

And what has this all to do with the crusades ?

...

" Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde? "

it was not any name just nothern part of juchi ulus ...

Do you really think the people in the region of Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." - whatever this could be? In which language did they think this?

By the way: What's your own nationality? Where do you live? Where did you go in school?

"Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." Kiew (westren side Ukraine) was liberated by Litwins (GDL was rusin state) in 14c and became part of western civilization . buy a book

 

[zaangalewa]

And your theory the Mongols had founded Russia is wrong. The

Basically yes and no. The rise of the Grand Duchy of Moscow was thanks to the Mongols who gave the called 'yarlyk' (the right on power) and devastated the rival duchies.

View attachment 358604

View attachment 358605

View attachment 358607

When I saw this then I had prefered to live in Moscow from 996-1088. It's more easy to plant trees than to build walls.

you talk about Ugro - Finnish (Moksha) frog fishers ,

View attachment 358616
we talk here about northern bank for Mongol taxes , Mongol imperial city buy a book



"Charles Halperin - 1987 - ‎History
"... that the language of the Muscovite bureaucracy was a kind of meta-Turkic, "

Russia and the Golden Horde

This revelatory study of Russian medieval history and the age of Mongolian conquest “infuses the subject with fresh insights and interpretations” (History). In the 13th century, a Mongolian confederation known as The Golden Horde dominated a vast region including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan...

books.google.se

As far as I can see the "Golden Horde" had an empire far from Russia and the Ukraine. And in general are Tatars and Mongols totally different people so it makes not a big sense to say the Mongols spoke Turkish and this has to do with Russia. Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde?

But let me correct a little mistake, which I made here. The German and Polish knights I spoke about - together with the Hungarians, which I forgot - fought not against Ghengis Khan but against the army of Ögedei Khan. We were devastatingly beaten. And suddenly died Ögedei Khan and so his highest army commanders Jochi (German: Dschötschi) and Batu Khan returned to Mongolia. Western Europe was saved. Thanks god.

...

And what has this all to do with the crusades ?

...

" Can it be "Russia" - whatever the name was at this time of history - was tributary to the Golden Horde? "

it was not any name just nothern part of juchi ulus ...

Do you really think the people in the region of Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." - whatever this could be? In which language did they think this?

By the way: What's your own nationality? Where do you live? Where did you go in school?

"Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." Kiew (westren side Ukraine) was liberated by Litwins (GDL was rusin state) in 14c and became part of western civilization . buy a book

In which language they thought this, if so? Why exist still Slaws? And what has this to do with the crusades?

 

[Silver Cat]

"Kiew and/or Moscow thought about themselves about 1000 or 800 years ago "We are the northern part of the juchi ulus." Kiew (westren side Ukraine) was liberated by Litwins (GDL was rusin state) in 14c and became part of western civilization . buy a book

In the matter of fact, "The Great Duchy of Lithuania, Jemaya and Russia" was a same sort of sh-t as its sister-state and competitor "The Great Duchy of Moscow". And only reunion with Poland made it (if made) a part of the "Western Civilization".

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

why does any of this really matter?

 

[Silver Cat]

why does any of this really matter?

Technically, Russia is the only state in the world, that can destroy the USA. So, understanding their point of view on the Northern crusades can be more useful, than understanding the Muslim's point of view on the Southern ones.

 

[Silver Cat]

As far as I heard Charlesmagne eliminated the influence of the Awars.

He conquered them, but he didn't eliminate or genocide them.

And Bohemia (meanwhile it had been an own important kingdom and was made to a part of Czechoslovakia after world war 1) was executed from the allies after world war 2 by displacing all Germans from this area, where their ancestors often had lived for decades of thousands of years. The Czechs and Slovaks had to do nothing and were great winners of world war 2 - thanks Stalin. The side effect: They learned to hate Stalin and their Slawic brother nation "Russia".

Czechs (as a political nation) we created by Russian Empire to fight Austro-Hungarian Empire as well as "Ukrainians" were created by Austro-Hungarian Empire to fight Russian Empire.
Such artificial constructs can be useful, but they hardly can live in love and peace.

No one knows anything about the language the Awars spoke.

Their elites were multicultural, they spoke Mongolian, Iranian and, later, Turkish languages.
Common people in the lands of modern Austria were Slavic. There is a number of Slavic toponims even in Vienna, for example Währing, Döbling, Liesing.

Baltic laguages? ... Interesting languages ... all are very different and on the other side very near to Sanskrit. Astonishing. And I see the Prussians were also a baltic population once. When and why did the Prussians start to speak German?

Most of them didn't "start" to speak German. Most of them were genocided by Teutonic Order in XIII century.

I don't see a big sense to call the own people "glorious". Normally everyone calls the own people something like "old idiots". On the other side think lots of people often the own criminals are saints and the saints of foreign nations are criminals. In case of the word "Slaw" I guess "word" is the root. Perhaps something like "people, who got the word"

Who knows? There was a period, when they called themselves as "Soviets" (from "soviet" - "advice", "council"). May be, it was a self-identification based on the linguistic sign: "We can speak the language, we are not speechless barbarians", may be, it was based on lifestyle: "We are reputable men, we are not unknown strangers", may be, it was based on their political system "We are following glorious leaders, we are not subjects of hereditary monarches".

 

[ESay]

as a political nation) we created by Russian Empire to fight Austro-Hungarian Empire as well as "Ukrainians" were created by Austro-Hungarian Empire to fight Russian Empire.
Such artificial constructs can be useful, but they hardly can live in love and peace.

Yes, this point of view is popular among Russians. If 'Ukrainians' were created by the AHE then why people in Galicia used the term 'Ruthyns' longer than any of other Ukrainians.? And why so called Poltava dialect became the basis for Ukrainian language?

 

[zaangalewa]

why does any of this really matter?

Technically, Russia is the only state in the world, that can destroy the USA.

Idiotic and funny the same time to say so.

So, understanding their point of view on the Northern crusades

The Christianisation of Europe is a very complex theme. To call this "Northern crusades" for the North of Europe is a wrong expression. The only crusaders in this context are the knights from the Deutsche Orden (=German Order). This knights did not fight for Germans against Polish people - this knights created and protected often ew markets and trade routes - and this knights were also often under command of the Polish kings. They are perhaps a main reason why the Polish people are today Catholics. Before the Polish became Catholics they were pagans.

can be more useful, than understanding the Muslim's point of view on the Southern ones.

"The crusades" started with the first crusade in 1095 and ended in 1291. For 88 years was Jerusalem under control of the crusaders before Saladin - one of the most interesting men of the crusades - reconquered Jerusalem for the Muslims and gave a guarantee that Christain pilgrims will be able to visit Jerusalem. The Muslims forgot Saladin, while he was in the European literature very active as a noble knight and great hero.

In general is the idea to do a crusade not an element of the Christian religion - wars are not allowed in the Christian religion except on reason of defence. Crusades per se are an element of the Islam. The expression there is "little jhad". The idea behind the crusades was perhaps to fight the Islam with the methods of the Islam.

 

[daveman]

The Crusades were a response to 400 years of Muslim aggression.

This is not up for debate.

 

[zaangalewa]

As far as I heard Charlesmagne eliminated the influence of the Awars.

He conquered them, but he didn't eliminate or genocide them.

Where did I say he killed them?

And Bohemia (meanwhile it had been an own important kingdom and was made to a part of Czechoslovakia after world war 1) was executed from the allies after world war 2 by displacing all Germans from this area, where their ancestors often had lived for decades of thousands of years. The Czechs and Slovaks had to do nothing and were great winners of world war 2 - thanks Stalin. The side effect: They learned to hate Stalin and their Slawic brother nation "Russia".

Czechs (as a political nation) we created by Russian Empire to fight Austro-Hungarian Empire as well as "Ukrainians" were created by Austro-Hungarian Empire to fight Russian Empire.
Such artificial constructs can be useful, but they hardly can live in love and peace.

Whatever. The Ukraine and Czechia and others exist. Silesia and Bohemia and others are dead. One of my grandmothers was from Silesia. She died before Hitler was able to hurt her by murdering some of her children.

No one knows anything about the language the Awars spoke.

Their elites were multicultural, they spoke Mongolian, Iranian and, later, Turkish languages.

No one knows anything about the language the Awars spoke.

Common people in the lands of modern Austria were Slavic. There is a number of Slavic toponims even in Vienna, for example Währing, Döbling, Liesing.

Typical celtic or germanic names. That's totally normal everywhere in Germany. The ancestors of the Germanics were Celts. And Austria today was latest since the year 550 A.D. a part of a Bavaria, which was much greater than the Bavaria of today.

I took short look and indeed say some the expression "Döbling" fro exmple came from a Slawic word for swamp - on the other side lived people there since a minimum of 5000 years, when no one spoke a Slawic or German language.

Baltic laguages? ... Interesting languages ... all are very different and on the other side very near to Sanskrit. Astonishing. And I see the Prussians were also a baltic population once. When and why did the Prussians start to speak German?

Most of them didn't "start" to speak German. Most of them were genocided by Teutonic Order in XIII century.

I don't see a big sense to call the own people "glorious". Normally everyone calls the own people something like "old idiots". On the other side think lots of people often the own criminals are saints and the saints of foreign nations are criminals. In case of the word "Slaw" I guess "word" is the root. Perhaps something like "people, who got the word"

Who knows? There was a period, when they called themselves as "Soviets" (from "soviet" - "advice", "council"). May be, it was a self-identification based on the linguistic sign: "We can speak the language, we are not speechless barbarians", may be, it was based on lifestyle: "We are reputable men, we are not unknown strangers", may be, it was based on their political system "We are following glorious leaders, we are not subjects of hereditary monarches".

"Soviets" is a clear political word from the Commies. The Soviets eliminate critics and oppositionists instead of real contradictions and systemic weaknesses.

And again: What has this all to do with the crusades?

 

[Litwin]

In which language they thought this, if so? Why exist still Slaws?

various Uralic languages,


Mokshas - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Mokshas



Russia: Mordovia. 4,767. Languages. Moksha, Russian. Religion. Russian Orthodoxy, ...
‎Name · ‎History · ‎Culture
You've visited this page 4 times. Last visit: 6/1/20


Moksha language - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Moksha_language


Jump to Common expressions (Moksha–Russian–English) - The medium in universities of Mordovia is Russian, but the philological faculties of


read this


The cradle of Russians, an obvious Finno-Volgaic genetic ...
indo-european.eu › 2019/04 › the-cradle-of-russian-ex...



Apr 17, 2019 - The ancestors of ethnic Russians were among the Slavic tribes that ... During that interval, the Russians encountered the Finns, Ugrians, and ... I have it listed in my spreadsheet as male but without Y-DNA hg., would need to ..

 

[zaangalewa]

In which language they thought this, if so? Why exist still Slaws?

various Uralic languages,


Mokshas - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Mokshas



Russia: Mordovia. 4,767. Languages. Moksha, Russian. Religion. Russian Orthodoxy, ...
‎Name · ‎History · ‎Culture
You've visited this page 4 times. Last visit: 6/1/20

Moksha language - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Moksha_language


Jump to Common expressions (Moksha–Russian–English) - The medium in universities of Mordovia is Russian, but the philological faculties of


read this


The cradle of Russians, an obvious Finno-Volgaic genetic ...
indo-european.eu › 2019/04 › the-cradle-of-russian-ex...



Apr 17, 2019 - The ancestors of ethnic Russians were among the Slavic tribes that ... During that interval, the Russians encountered the Finns, Ugrians, and ... I have it listed in my spreadsheet as male but without Y-DNA hg., would need to ..

What about a clear answer?

 

[zaangalewa]

prejudice. The enemy of Russia is Vodka and not freedom.

He is right. The Russians can't live without a strong hand.

What a nonsense.

The absolute power of their ruler was the main reason of their social and economic backwardness. Even the reforms on European manner didn't help them, because they didn't change the main obstacle - absolute power of the czar.

In the Russian City Kaliningrad (German: Königsberg) lived a man, who said this:

Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.

Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet, and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind--among them the entire fair sex--should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts.

Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the nonage which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas, these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting nonage. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from nonage by cultivating their own minds.

It is more nearly possible, however, for the public to enlighten itself; indeed, if it is only given freedom, enlightenment is almost inevitable. There will always be a few independent thinkers, even among the self-appointed guardians of the multitude. Once such men have thrown off the yoke of nonage, they will spread about them the spirit of a reasonable appreciation of man's value and of his duty to think for himself. It is especially to be noted that the public which was earlier brought under the yoke by these men afterwards forces these very guardians to remain in submission, if it is so incited by some of its guardians who are themselves incapable of any enlightenment. That shows how pernicious it is to implant prejudices: they will eventually revenge themselves upon their authors or their authors' descendants. Therefore, a public can achieve enlightenment only slowly. A revolution may bring about the end of a personal despotism or of avaricious tyrannical oppression, but never a true reform of modes of thought. New prejudices will serve, in place of the old, as guide lines for the unthinking multitude.

This enlightenment requires nothing but freedom--and the most innocent of all that may be called "freedom": freedom to make public use of one's reason in all matters. Now I hear the cry from all sides: "Do not argue!" The officer says: "Do not argue--drill!" The tax collector: "Do not argue--pay!" The pastor: "Do not argue--believe!" Only one ruler in the world says: "Argue as much as you please, but obey!" We find restrictions on freedom everywhere. But which restriction is harmful to enlightenment? Which restriction is innocent, and which advances enlightenment? I reply: the public use of one's reason must be free at all times, and this alone can bring enlightenment to mankind. ...

Immanuel Kant: What is enlightenment? source: Kant. What is Enlightenment

 

[ESay]

prejudice. The enemy of Russia is Vodka and not freedom.

He is right. The Russians can't live without a strong hand.

What a nonsense.

The absolute power of their ruler was the main reason of their social and economic backwardness. Even the reforms on European manner didn't help them, because they didn't change the main obstacle - absolute power of the czar.

In the Russian City Kaliningrad (German: Königsberg) lived a man, who said this:

Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.

Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet, and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind--among them the entire fair sex--should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts.

Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the nonage which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas, these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting nonage. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from nonage by cultivating their own minds.

It is more nearly possible, however, for the public to enlighten itself; indeed, if it is only given freedom, enlightenment is almost inevitable. There will always be a few independent thinkers, even among the self-appointed guardians of the multitude. Once such men have thrown off the yoke of nonage, they will spread about them the spirit of a reasonable appreciation of man's value and of his duty to think for himself. It is especially to be noted that the public which was earlier brought under the yoke by these men afterwards forces these very guardians to remain in submission, if it is so incited by some of its guardians who are themselves incapable of any enlightenment. That shows how pernicious it is to implant prejudices: they will eventually revenge themselves upon their authors or their authors' descendants. Therefore, a public can achieve enlightenment only slowly. A revolution may bring about the end of a personal despotism or of avaricious tyrannical oppression, but never a true reform of modes of thought. New prejudices will serve, in place of the old, as guide lines for the unthinking multitude.

This enlightenment requires nothing but freedom--and the most innocent of all that may be called "freedom": freedom to make public use of one's reason in all matters. Now I hear the cry from all sides: "Do not argue!" The officer says: "Do not argue--drill!" The tax collector: "Do not argue--pay!" The pastor: "Do not argue--believe!" Only one ruler in the world says: "Argue as much as you please, but obey!" We find restrictions on freedom everywhere. But which restriction is harmful to enlightenment? Which restriction is innocent, and which advances enlightenment? I reply: the public use of one's reason must be free at all times, and this alone can bring enlightenment to mankind. ...

Immanuel Kant: What is enlightenment? source: Kant. What is Enlightenment

Take a look at the history of the Russian empire. The first Russian constitution emerged in the 20th century.

Look what is going on in Russia now.