Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Charles Bausman's avatar

This article, parts 1 and 2 have been republished on unz.com as one long piece. If you found this interesting, it's worth looking there at the comments section because they have a very well informed audience, and sometimes they drop important additional information. Here is one I just noticed there:

Odyssey says: Next New Comment

November 1, 2024 at 4:58 am GMT • 4.9 hours ago • 400 Words ↑

A good and refreshing text for Western readers who usually don’t have the opportunity to read something that is not under the strict control of the Western mainstream media and their masters. When it comes to Ukraine, a few things should be added.

In 1750, Serbian settlers (soldiers and civilians of the former Military Krajina) founded two settlements in Imperial Russia – Slaveno-Serbia and New Serbia, with their capital in Bakhmut. New Serbia was a purely Serbian colony, while in Slaveno-Serbia, in addition to the vast majority of Serbs, other nationalities also came (including the Greeks mentioned in the text). Part of the text talks about Donetsk, but now few people know that the original name of Donetsk, which was founded by Serbs, was Slavyanoserbsk. At that time, there were no Ukrainians and no Ukrainian language and no name ‘Ukraina’.

The very name ‘Ukraine’ (=borderland, in Serbian) was given after Military Krajina (=borderland) from where these settlers came. The Military Krajina was a Christian belt stretched from the Carpathians to the Adriatic Sea and was formed to defend Europe against Ottoman penetration and Islam. The Serbian Military Krajina defended Europe from Islam.

By the way, this settlement gave few Serbian generals who distinguished themselves in the war against Napoleon. In the beginning, Serbs had their own churches and autonomy, but because of their similarities with the Russians, they quickly assimilated.

Later, the communists (Lenin, Khrushchev) added some Russian provinces and Crimea to create an artificial republic of Ukraine within the USSR. It would be fair now, when Ukraine is freed from Ukronazies, to return the original name to that area – New Serbia.

Ukrainians are not a nation, they never existed, they had no state, no history, no language, no literature, no religion. What does Crimea have to do with Ukraine except that a drunken Khrushchev said one morning that it would belong to Soviet Ukraine or that Lenin also decided that Donbass would be Ukraine.

Ukrainians are an artificial category created by the Vatican and the US with the aim of being cannon fodder in the campaign against the Russians and the creation of new Khazaria. Ukrainians don’t even have a name because the current means Borderland. Whose borderland? Russian borderland!

Expand full comment
Charles Bausman's avatar

Odyssey says:Next New Comment

November 1, 2024 at 10:14 am GMT • 22.0 hours ago • 100 Words ↑

@Dumbo

You are right. The frontier was very harsh. There are many descriptions of how the Serbs came to the territory where there was nothing, no settlements, they had no building materials and they lived in dugouts, no tools, no seeds for agriculture, no wells, nor could they get anything from the outside, the distances were huge.

They slowly managed to build settlements, churches, schools and other infrastructure. In the beginning, they had territorial, church and school autonomy, hundreds of toponyms identical to the toponyms from their previous homeland, Serbia, special military units, whose generals distinguished themselves in the war against Napoleon, but were too similar to the Russians, the Empire also had its own imperial logic so that were soon assimilated. Descendants of those Serbian pioneers are probably now fighting on both sides against each other.

Expand full comment
17 more comments...

No posts