Why many Balts are loyal to Hitler's regime?

most likely it was during the Avar conquests.
It was from them that it came
 
'Poland', like 'Germany', is a modern 19th Century political invention, and so are many of the Baltic states. It's not rocket science to realize they were never cohesive tribes; neither was 'France' or 'Italy' for that matter. They are all conglomerates of different tribes, with invented 'nationalities'. See Bismarck and Garibaldi and others for examples of the rise in 19th Century European 'Nation-State' political organizations. Sicilians are not Milanese, Bavarians are not Prussians, Austrians aren't Rhinelanders, Neopolitians are not Venetians.
 
'Poland', like 'Germany', is a modern 19th Century political invention, and so are many of the Baltic states. It's not rocket science to realize they were never cohesive tribes; neither was 'France' or 'Italy' for that matter. They are all conglomerates of different tribes, with invented 'nationalities'. See Bismarck and Garibaldi and others for examples of the rise in 19th Century European 'Nation-State' political organizations. Sicilians are not Milanese, Bavarians are not Prussians, Austrians aren't Rhinelanders, Neopolitians are not Venetians.
yes, these are all imperial nations, not peoples in the sense of kinship of origin
Although Poland is still quite homogeneous. Apart from the northeast, they all descended from the steppe people, from the Sarmatians and the Huns, hence their name
 
haplogroup-r1a-m458.png
 
do not think that the Slavic language was widespread in the ancient Russian state, because at that time only about 300 years had passed since the beginning of its spread among the Balts
And what language did they speak according to your version? In Rus at the times of Vladimir the Great or Yaroslav the Wise?
 
They are all conglomerates of different tribes, with invented 'nationalities
Agree. I don't understand all that obsession about the time or place of formation of some 'nation' or all that DNA stuff.

At the course of all passed centuries people, especially in Europe, have become so intermixed that it hardly really matters.
 
Apart from the northeast, they all descended from the steppe people, from the Sarmatians and the Huns, hence their name
Yeah, that is one of theories. I read somewhere that it doesn't hold water.

What is interesting is that this theory was promoted by the Polish nobility and they claimed that the upper class should have been considered as the descendants of the Sarmats while the peasants were the Slavs.
 
And what language did they speak according to your version? In Rus at the times of Vladimir the Great or Yaroslav the Wise?
At the time of Rus, apparently there was already a mixture of Slavic and Baltic, before the Avar Kaganate Baltic languages.
 
Yeah, that is one of theories. I read somewhere that it doesn't hold water.
This is self-evident. Back in the 18th century, it was an exclusively equestrian knightly culture. Polish hussars put an end to the Ottoman expansion. The ethnonym itself comes from the word "pole"(steppe). Before the Franks, Avars were the main ones there, from them comes the Russian word "barin" (obarin, obrin), by the way it is interesting that nothing of the kind happened from Rus people. It's not known how called rus nobility at all.
There is no such address as "kniaz" or "varag" or "rus" in the peasant language.
 
Last edited:
Agree. I don't understand all that obsession about the time or place of formation of some 'nation' or all that DNA stuff.

At the course of all passed centuries people, especially in Europe, have become so intermixed that it hardly really matters.
Such a position of a mixed people devoid of history and roots is always beneficial to the imperial elites for using such peoples as slaves and cannon fodder
 
Last edited:
In addition, Poles are direct relatives of Western Ukrainians. There was Lesser Poland, and there were Polovtsians, from which the Poles themselves descended
 
Such a position of a mixed people devoid of history and roots is always beneficial to the imperial elites for using such peoples as slaves and cannon fodder
On the contrary, national and religious bias serves the elites to achieve their goals. It was true for Europe for centuries.
 
On the contrary, national and religious bias serves the elites to achieve their goals. It was true for Europe for centuries.
Do not confuse religion and national culture, these are opposite things. Abrahamic religions were the main instruments of empires to enslave peoples. Franks and Arabs did it. These were not folk religions, but international
 
Do not confuse religion and national culture, these are opposite things. Abrahamic religions were the main instruments of empires to enslave peoples. Franks and Arabs did it. These were not folk religions, but international
They were moving hand to hand. The Poles as an example consider a certain religion as part of their identity.
 
They were moving hand to hand. The Poles as an example consider a certain religion as part of their identity.
The tragedy of Poland and many other countries is precisely because of this. In Afghanistan, Muslims kill Muslim Uzbeks and Muslim Uzbeks harbor illusions of Islamic identity
 
Let's take the same Polish identity. In modern western Ukraine there are people who are disoriented by a false history and identity. Western Ukrainians are Poles, but the history of the Moscow hetmanate and the novoserbia was imposed on them, and this leads to the fact that they are killing their own brothers.

At one time in the Russian Empire, a Slavic identity was invented, as a result, because of the "Slavic" terrorist Princip, 2 great empires collapsed.

All this leads to dire consequences.
 
Нou don't have to go far. Christian identity destroyed half of Europe during the Crusades, in the narrow national interests of the Frankish elites, who built this empire on blood and lies.
 

Forum List

Back
Top