Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No it doesn't, being born in, growing up in & living in Russia makes you Russian. Ask yourself - why is it people that call themselves Italian American aren't mad on Lazio or AC Milan like actual Italians?
Growing up and living in their ethnic communities, and being of ethnic parentage, are what give people their ethnic identity. Native Americans whose communities have lost their Native languages are still Native Americans. They're steeped in their culture. values and word view. The US Government recognizes their blood quantum as a factor, or their lineage traced to tribal treaty signatories. Their passports say they're American, if they ever get a passport. Otherwise, in most cases their ID states their tribal affiliation, their ethnic identity.
It's the same for Native peoples and other ethnic minorities in Russia; they're often referred to as "non-Russian", and their passports state their ethnicity. They're not Russian just because they grew up in and live in Russia. That doesn't make them Russians. Similarly, growing up in and living in China didn't make the Manchurian and Shanghai Russians Chinese, even the younger generation that learned Chinese as a second language.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 09-06-2022 at 01:23 PM..
Rubbish! There is no such thing as French 'ethnicity' being French is a nationality not an ethnicity.
Spoken like an American,who views "ethnicity" in racial terms only, by the color of someone's skin or shape of their eyes. Of course French is an ethnicity. Basque and Breton are ethnicities. The Sorbs of Germany are an ethnicity. The Roma are a multi-national ethnicity.
Spoken like an American,who views "ethnicity" in racial terms only, by the color of someone's skin or shape of their eyes. Of course French is an ethnicity. Basque and Breton are ethnicities. The Sorbs of Germany are an ethnicity. The Roma are a multi-national ethnicity.
What!? Surely you can see I'm saying the EXACT OPPOSITE?? I am saying there is no such thing as French 'ethnicity'! You are probably the sort of person that (mistakenly) believes English people are all Anglo-Saxons!
Fact is even if they were (which they're not) it wouldn't make them any more 'English' than anybody else born and raised in England!
French is a nationality its not a 'race' or 'ethnicity'. You don't have to be white and blonde to be Scandinavian or black skinned and brown eyed to be African.
If 'one' is born and raised in the US one is American, not Russian, Italian, Irish or African.
This will be my last post regarding this specific issue , since I highly suspect I've already wasted more than enough bandwidth expounding on it ( ) , but IMO this present dialogue very much highlights the vast differences which exist between different conceptions of nationality/ethnicity along with the very fluidity of these concepts as such .
New World Colonial countries and ( at least arguably ) Old World European ones with a strong history of colonialism like the UK seem to have a much more civic conception of nationality that de-emphasizes the importance of ethnicity , whereas their Old World European counterparts with no real history of colonialism often tend to have a much more ethnic conception of nationality , which is underscored by the fact that many of these aforementioned countries have rather controversially drawn political boundaries to this very day producing the result of many of their " own " people living in the near abroad , without actually being immigrants in the proper sense of the term .
Neither conception of nationality is inherently right or wrong IMHO , since it's only natural that different societies will assign different meanings to this particular term/concept , however it does behoove one to understand why their own specific understanding of nationality may not be applicable elsewhere .
Setting all this verbiage aside though and back on track to the general theme of Q&A about the contemporary Russian Federation in general , I'd like to humbly pose the following question :
Which is that does anyone here have any knowledge regarding the subject of historical artifacts regulation in the Russian Federation or even the general subject of historical artifacts in the RF ?
I'm asking because it's always struck me as curious that while one can find a plethora of articles relating to how the state of historical artifacts in certain Balkan countries is imperiled by factors ranging from looting to poor maintenance , the same doesn't seem to be true of the Russian Federation .
Is it because greater care is taken in Russia to prevent looting/smuggling/inadequate maintenance and what have you of historical artifacts ?
Or is the Russian Federation just as bad off as these certain Balkan countries are in this respect ?
does anyone here have any knowledge regarding the subject of historical artifacts regulation in the Russian Federation or even the general subject of historical artifacts in the RF ?
I'm asking because it's always struck me as curious that while one can find a plethora of articles relating to how the state of historical artifacts in certain Balkan countries is imperiled by factors ranging from looting to poor maintenance , the same doesn't seem to be true of the Russian Federation .
Is it because greater care is taken in Russia to prevent looting/smuggling/inadequate maintenance and what have you of historical artifacts ?
Or is the Russian Federation just as bad off as these certain Balkan countries are in this respect ?
Russia has laws protecting antiquities and important items of cultural heritage (that don't fall into the antiquities category). They're not to be taken out of the country, which means that when anyone leaves the country, they have to pass through a customs check, to see if they're taking any "national treasures" out. If they're found to have any such items in their luggage (checked via routine x-ray as well as an open search on a spot-check basis), they have to relinquish them.
People buying art or craftwork of any significant value (vs. tourist trinkets) are required to get everything approved by a representative of the Ministry of Culture, who provides a document saying all items are approved for export. This document is then shown to authorities at the baggage inspection stage before proceeding to the international flight waiting hall.
Does that address your question, or is there something else you had in mind? Were you asking what measures Russia has in place to prevent archaeological sites from being robbed, and that sort of thing? There aren't many people inside the country who would have the means to buy such items. The demand would be outside the country, so the aforementioned inspections make it hard to take anything out. I don't know how it is for people driving out.
Ukraine was helpless to stop the looting of their museums by the Russian invading forces. It was so unexpected, they couldn't organize themselves in time to react effectively, it seems.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 09-06-2022 at 09:28 PM..
Russia has laws protecting antiquities and important items of cultural heritage (that don't fall into the antiquities category). They're not to be taken out of the country, which means that when anyone leaves the country, they have to pass through a customs check, to see if they're taking any "national treasures" out. If they're found to have any such items in their luggage (checked via routine x-ray as well as an open search on a spot-check basis), they have to relinquish them.
People buying art or craftwork of any significant value (vs. tourist trinkets) are required to get everything approved by a representative of the Ministry of Culture, who provides a document saying all items are approved for export. This document is then shown to authorities at the baggage inspection stage before proceeding to the international flight waiting hall.
Does that address your question, or is there something else you had in mind? Were you asking what measures Russia has in place to prevent archaeological sites from being robbed, and that sort of thing? There aren't many people inside the country who would have the means to buy such items. The demand would be outside the country, so the aforementioned inspections make it hard to take anything out. I don't know how it is for people driving out.
Ukraine was helpless to stop the looting of their museums by the Russian invading forces. It was so unexpected, they couldn't organize themselves in time to react effectively, it seems.
Yes you've addressed my question pretty well , though I'm also interested in the question of does the fact that there appears to be so little news about looting of historical artifacts/smuggling of said items outside of the Russian Federation ( along with articles about poor maintenance of such objects ) mean that the Russian state is more proactive in stepping up against such things occurring ?
I've actually read reports about illicit antiquities trafficking being/having been one of the main sources of revenue for Bulgarian and Greek organized crime groups , which is why I'm curious as to why I haven't read the same in the case of their Russian counterparts .
There is a difference between the USSR and Russia. I've worked with a lot of Eastern Europeans and am good friends with a Lithuanian, she most certainly does NOT consider herself Russian. That is a bit like calling the Welsh English and I certainly wouldn't recommend anyone to do that! :-D
btw, English language does not take into account that the term "Russian" means several things in Russian language.
1. Russians is the historical name of inhabitants of the ancient Russian state. Derived from the word "Rus", which means "rowers" from the old Swedish. Numerous tribes of the Russian Plain (Slavs, Finno-Ugric, Balts and others) called "Rus" the Vikings that came along the rivers from Scandinavia to create trade routes with Byzantium and Persia. The Vikings had outposts in the north (Old Ladoga, later Veliky Novgorod) and in the south (Kyiv). The Vikings created the first state (princes of Rurikovich), uniting multiple tribes. Kyiv became the capital of this state, the Vikings assimilated and the original meaning of Rus as rowers (the prince and his team) spread first to the Kiev principality (Russians), and then to all inhabitants of the ancient state, where Slavic culture became dominant. Russians at that time were representatives of different tribes, but they were:
- Orthodox;
- speaking the Slavic language;
- living under the rule of the descendants of Rurikovich (the unified state fell apart, but faith and culture formed a single ethnic group).
2. Russians is the nation. The nation was formed mainly in the North-Eastern territory of the ancient state a few centuries later. Also, from the ancient state Belarusian and Ukrainian nations were formed. At the same time, Russian nation has a fairly wide genetic diversity (the original ethnos was a union of tribes) and quite easily assimilates new members. Ukrainian and Belarusian nations are more nationalistic, as they experience assimilation pressure from Russian nation.
3. Russians is citizens of the Russian Federation. This is a legal term, Russian is one who has a passport RF.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 