Let us discuss Ukrainian elections

Mar 2013
2,674
the Nile to the Euphrates
As for the elections, the Ukrainians will have to make a difficult choice between Poroshenko, who showed himself well in 2014, when it was necessary to quickly organize the defense against the Russian intervention, and the army was almost destroyed under Yanukovych. And Poroshenko completely failed the fight against corruption, although some effective measures against it in public procurement were made, and the Ukrainian Soviet-style Militia were completely modernized (it also was renamed to the Police), the Ukrainians received a visa-free regime with the EU, and the Ukrainian church has got its independence from the Moscow church - it was lost in late 17th century.

However, Poroshenko’s popularity has fallen sharply from 2014-2015 - and he is unlikely to win the second round. Zelensky is some kind of a dark horse and an open forecast. He is not a politician. He only successfully played of ordinary Ukrainians, who became president of the country in the TV serial. This choice may turn out to be interesting for Ukrainians, or it may end in failure. Now one knows by the moment. That is, in the elections of the second round the Ukrainians take a considerable risk. I hope that the choice will be successful.

I had big doubts in Zelensky, but now I have learned some positive things about him, and I will vote for him. Although in the first round I voted for Gritsenko, and if he went to the second round - I would vote for him with both hands
The most important thing that you have an intrigue during your elections. In Russia, we don't have real elections, that's why we sublimate watching yours.
 
Mar 2013
2,674
the Nile to the Euphrates
Is Putin a Russian patriot? I really doubt. Otherwise, he would not have put Russia under a tough retaliatory strike when he gave the order to his troops to occupy the Crimea. To explain you the real purpose of the Krymnash (CrymeaIsOurs in Russian)? The main goal was to raise Putin's rating in the eyes of the Russians. This rating began to decline rapidly before 2014. And Putin decided that the annexation of the Crimea will be the solution to this problem. And he did not mistake.

And what Putin did during this time? He turned a prosperous Russia of 2013 with large Western investments, a good credit rating and a rapidly growing level of welfare of the Russians, the Russia which did not know where to put the money - to post-Krymnash Russia. With economic stagnation, deprived of foreign loans, with a ruble collapsed to 50% and the decline in real incomes of the population. With Russian GDP falling by 40% in 2015 against 2013, with a series of gross failures in foreign policy, with big financial problems and with the crisis that occurred after the annexation of Crimea. Even two sole ally of Russia - Belarus and Kazakhstan - did not recognize the annexation of the Crimea. With them Putin did not agree this operation in advance.
The interesting phenomen is that Putin's rating among Russians is inversely proportional to their well-being.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2013
2,674
the Nile to the Euphrates
Thanks sparky. I was asking about Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church and Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Kiev Patriarchate, but i see they are both defunct now united /merged together into Orthodox Church of Ukraine. OCU is autocephalous since the beginning of this year. So they had split/schism, but solved it successfully quite recently. EDIT: This caused a spilt between ROC and the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Religion and politics / dangerous mix.
Isn't the ecclesiastical situation on the Balkans somehow similar to Russo-Ukrainian? As far as I understand, the the Montenegrin and Macedonian churches got their Tomos of autocephaly that granted independence from Serbian and Bulgarian churches, respectively.
 
Sep 2012
3,676
Bulgaria
Isn't the ecclesiastical situation on the Balkans somehow similar to Russo-Ukrainian? As far as I understand, the the Montenegrin and Macedonian churches got their Tomos of autocephaly that granted independence from Serbian and Bulgarian churches, respectively.
No, it isnt. Please check lexell's post #86. Regarding Macedonian Orthodox Church under the name of Archbishopric of Ohrid last year Bulgarian Orthodox Church became a Mother Church to MOC and agreed to advocate before all the Orthodox Churches for the establishment and recognition of MOC canonical status. You should ask Serbian historomites for the current situation of Montenegrin Orthodox Church/ it's not autocephalous for sure. EDIT: UOC has tomos of autocephaly signed this year by the Ecumencial Patriarch himself, these two churches above are still in the process of negotiation.
 
Last edited:
Likes: Decembrist
Sep 2012
3,676
Bulgaria
The point is recognition of autocephaly is recognition of independence of the church that unites all believers on country's territory. Even for non-believers this is huge deal because for orthodox countries the church is an ancient symbol of the nation. This is quite recent event for Ukraine / the clergy managed to unite the three orthodox denominations in the country into an autocefalous / independent national church.
 
Nov 2015
1,674
Kyiv
The interesting phenomen is that Putin's rating among Russians is inversely proportional to their well-being.
I think this is an example of traditional Russian masochism in relation to its authorities. If you select the earlier Russian rulers who are most popular in Russia today, this is:

- Ivan the Terrible, who almost went insane from his own sadism. He exterminated or starved a huge number of his ordinary citizens, and in Novgorod he staged a real genocide. And he exterminated with pleasure the elite of Muscovy

- Peter the Great, whom the inhabitants of the Moscow Tzardom often called the Antichrist. He exhausted Russia with exorbitant military spending, enslaved the peasants and actively pursued a policy of guns instead of butter

- Joseph Stalin, who showed himself in relation to the Russians as a real cannibal. And he dragged Russia in September 1939 into the Second World War, in which a great number of Russians perished

At the same time, no one in Russia is glorifying Alexander II now, the “Tsar-Liberator” who saved tens of millions of Russian peasants from centuries of slavery in 1861. Moreover, no one remembers Mikhail Gorbachev’s with kind word there, at which democracy and freedom came to Russia.

Unfortunately it did not come there for long
 
Dec 2017
600
-------
I would like to see primary sources about the claim above that contemporary subjects of Peter I idd called him Antichrist.
If Peter was named Antichrist, then probably for the introduction of church reform in historiography known as Church reform of Peter the Great
Church reform of Peter the Great - Wikipedia

Peter also forced all Orthodox men to shave their beards. Prior to Peter reform all Orthodox men wore beard. To these days Old Believers , those who split from Orthodox church during reforms r of Patriarch Nikon of Moscow continue wearing beards.
Old Believers - Wikipedia
One could pay tax to wear beard during Peter‘s rule.

During the battle against Swedes Peter lost many cannons. Then he used metal of church bells to make new cannon.

Muscovites may also disliked Peter because he transferred capital to St Petersburg.

The coin reads: 'money are taken'. That was the evidence that tax on beard was paid




 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions