A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- russia russian federation
Imperador Pedro III
Banned
Union of Slavic Republics (USR). This would mean that the name for our people would be Slavics. It would serve to gather some sympathy and double loyalties in Slavic NATO members.
Imperador Pedro III
Banned
Venezuela and Ethiopia shouldn't be accepted into BRICS that earlier.
We need to make sure both aren't going to become failed states like OTL, otherwise this will undermine BRICS credibility. Venezuela'a membership is MERCOSUR greatly tarnished the reputation of the organization.
Seconding any name that is Eurasia based if it ever comes about that we change our country name.
I think naming ourselves something slavic would be a bad move considering the existence of non slav minority groups.
Plus slavic already exists as a identity that people identify with. Naming ourselves after Eurasia, our geographic location that does not exclude any minorities and does not have any existent social characteristics or culture identity associated with it would allow us to create our own supernational identity.
Still allowing for identifying with cultures like Russian and Ukraine and allowing them to exist as equals while giving both an identity that exists a level higher that is a unifying force.
I.E. what Yugoslavia and the Soviets wanted to do at various points but never quite managed.
I think naming ourselves something slavic would be a bad move considering the existence of non slav minority groups.
Plus slavic already exists as a identity that people identify with. Naming ourselves after Eurasia, our geographic location that does not exclude any minorities and does not have any existent social characteristics or culture identity associated with it would allow us to create our own supernational identity.
Still allowing for identifying with cultures like Russian and Ukraine and allowing them to exist as equals while giving both an identity that exists a level higher that is a unifying force.
I.E. what Yugoslavia and the Soviets wanted to do at various points but never quite managed.
Yeah, pretty much. We basically center our new national idea not on a single ethnicity or culture but on the shared land our people live on: the Eurasian supercontinent.
Even better, it provides a neat geographic opposition to America.
Even better, it provides a neat geographic opposition to America.
Countries that should be included in 1st wave of BRICS expansion are Vietnam , Indonesia, UAE , Argentina.
I would dispute this, basing our national identity on Euroasian landmass with different cultural and civilizational identities is quite vauge. Soviets tried to create a vague identity based on ideology and it didn't hold. Yugoslavia is different as many accept that they are South Slavic, but problem is that Yugoslavia didn't enforce it's own identity enough, plus its problem lies more in state building. Generally problem with Euroasian identity is that besides some upper class circles it doesn't really resonate with the population. Most Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, basically main nationalities forming Union State won't feel any connection to this identity and will feel more connected to European identity, especially Ukraine.
Also in regards to "national minorities ", it's important to note that those minorities make absolute minority even in Russian Federation where they are mostly located and they are already quite well integrated there,there's no need for further appeasment at the price of alienation of our main nationalities which are predominantly Slavic.
Honestly in my opinion our identity should be based on Salvic, or more correctly East Slavic identity, or historical identity of Rus. Both identities that are already well established and resonate with our Slavic population.
Basically my point is that national minorities are already well integrated in Russian Federation which already has predominant Slavic/Russian identity, so i don't really feel the need for further appeasment, especially since Ukraine joining the state will make our Union even more Slavic.
So for me the best identity for us would be to adopt Rus identity becoming Confederation of Rus,or Union State of Eastslavia/East Slavic Union. This name reflects the truth on the Ground and is the one most likely to be accepted by Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians, or better said they already identify with as East Slavs.
Last edited:
I would gently push back against some of this, saying that people prefer to identity with other national identities instead of Eurasian is obvious, seeing as a Eurasian identity does not exist and has never been policy of any state. It has only ever existed both OTL and presumably TTL as a niche ideological idea.
So saying it wouldn't work because Russians and Ukrainians would not identify with it is a opinion based assertion, because it has never been given to them as a genuine option.
I would also dispute the premise that 1. All the ethnic minorities in the Russian federation are well represented and content "being Russian" many are, but many are also not and just don't have a alternative. Just because they are semi integrated into the russian lable, does not mean we should ignore them. And 2. That a supernational identity that includes minority groups would inherently alienate the majority group. Super national identities can work, even Yugoslavia, where the yugoslav identity was lukewarmly supported, the youngest generation that was aging into adulthood before the yugoslav war, was beginning to more and more identify as yugoslav first. And of course the most successful supernational identity of all, the United States of America.
Eurasian is indeed vague, it as an identity has no characteristics, that's kinda the point. It allows us to build a unifying identity almost from scratch and focus it on the nation state.
from a more gamey perspective. I think euasian is much more future proofed than a slavic based name change. Other then Ukraine we are unlikely to pick up any more slavic identity groups. Being Eurasian gives us alot of wiggle room.
Last edited:
Imperador Pedro III
Banned
I support this view. No Eurasian frige ideas. Let's just stay with the Pan-Slavic identity. Eurasian gives us more leeway over Central Asia, which is already under our area of influence, but Pan-Slavic gives us more room in Eastern Europe, which is a crucial territory that we need to control.
Last edited:
Renaming ourselves the Slavic something state would hint to Pan-slavism, which tbh is pretty discredited and might lead to western Slavs like the Poles and Czechs to be even more anti-Russian due to past history. Remember that we also have substantial minority populations that have consistently been more loyal to Russia, like the Kalmyks and Tatars than fellow East Slavs like the Ukrainians.
Also bear in mind that calling ourselves the Russian or Eurasian Pact/Union/League gives us far more wiggle room in terms of future expansion and whatnot.
Also bear in mind that calling ourselves the Russian or Eurasian Pact/Union/League gives us far more wiggle room in terms of future expansion and whatnot.
Maybe something like the Eastern European Federation as something more generic and less Russian? Really though I doubt we will ever get Poland or the Czech ever become willing allies to us. If something like that does appear to happen the Poles are going to make their own thing before taking Russian as a partner.