The Unwomanly Face of War - Vol. 4 Ch. 18 - Cap 18

[MangaDex]

 

[kuma]

considering the original writer now had to take refuge from belarus for objecting russia occupation of crimea, this chapter hit hard.

 

[kazaddum]

considering the original writer now had to take refuge from belarus for objecting russia occupation of crimea, this chapter hit hard.

Considering she considered the end of the USSR and economic shock therapy good(as per this chapter), my sympathies are limited.

 

[SuperOniichan]

Considering she considered the end of the USSR and economic shock therapy good(as per this chapter), my sympathies are limited.

She also supported the Ukrainian far right before this whole war started, saying that the repression of Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians was a "justifiable defense against the Kremlin." We can talk about this for a long time, I will just stop at the fact that Alekseevich has a rather controversial reputation in the former USSR due to the fact that after the collapse of the USSR she became one of those people who justified a very harsh right-wing reaction against any left oppositionists (quite ironic, right?), saying that this is the only way to save us from the "new communist dictatorship." Which is especially funny considering that years later, Odessa's right-wing Ukrainian nationalists disrupted her performance because she was so naive that she was not afraid to mention the participation of the OUN-UPA in the Holocaust in Ukraine. This is a well-known fact, but Alekseevich believed in her own illusions about the democratic nature of the Ukrainian ultra-right.

Another such woman, Liya Akhedzhakova, in the 90s called on the military to shoot people who criticized the new capitalist government in order to "save Russia from the arrival of the communists."

considering the original writer now had to take refuge from belarus for objecting russia occupation of crimea, this chapter hit hard.

It's hard to call it an "occupation" when you're talking about a predominantly Russian-populated region where anti-Ukrainian sentiment has always been strong and where threats of ethnic repression or even purges have always been a favorite item on the Ukrainian nationalist agenda. To such an extent that Crimea could have returned to Russia back in the 90s, when we elected our president and sent ambassadors to Moscow, but Yeltsin simply did not want to worry about unnecessary problems.

If Russia had a completely pro-American government, the US and EU would have supported it long ago, like the annexation of Kosovo or a number of Arab territories in Israel. But since Russia is a rival of Western countries, the West systematically ignores the ethnic history of Crimea. And of course, if the West sincerely believes that Russia has occupied us, then why are 90% of the Crimean sanctions aimed at the ordinary Crimean population, depriving us of our rights and making us second-class citizens? Maybe because the main anger is caused by the fact that Crimeans do not want to live in Ukraine and only then, because Russia annexed us?

 

[kuma]

Considering she considered the end of the USSR and economic shock therapy good(as per this chapter), my sympathies are limited.

the fall of USSR was good, the initial economic shock therapy and organized crime takeover was bad, the early putin economic boom was good, the later autocratic Putin Oil state (which dutch desease it get kill all russian other industry) was bad.

She also supported the Ukrainian far right before this whole war started, saying that the repression of Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainians was a "justifiable defense against the Kremlin." We can talk about this for a long time, I will just stop at the fact that Alekseevich has a rather controversial reputation in the former USSR due to the fact that after the collapse of the USSR she became one of those people who justified a very harsh right-wing reaction against any left oppositionists (quite ironic, right?), saying that this is the only way to save us from the "new communist dictatorship." Which is especially funny considering that years later, Odessa's right-wing Ukrainian nationalists disrupted her performance because she was so naive that she was not afraid to mention the participation of the OUN-UPA in the Holocaust in Ukraine. This is a well-known fact, but Alekseevich believed in her own illusions about the democratic nature of the Ukrainian ultra-right.

Another such woman, Liya Akhedzhakova, in the 90s called on the military to shoot people who criticized the new capitalist government in order to "save Russia from the arrival of the communists."

It's hard to call it an "occupation" when you're talking about a predominantly Russian-populated region where anti-Ukrainian sentiment has always been strong and where threats of ethnic repression or even purges have always been a favorite item on the Ukrainian nationalist agenda. To such an extent that Crimea could have returned to Russia back in the 90s, when we elected our president and sent ambassadors to Moscow, but Yeltsin simply did not want to worry about unnecessary problems.

If Russia had a completely pro-American government, the US and EU would have supported it long ago, like the annexation of Kosovo or a number of Arab territories in Israel. But since Russia is a rival of Western countries, the West systematically ignores the ethnic history of Crimea. And of course, if the West sincerely believes that Russia has occupied us, then why are 90% of the Crimean sanctions aimed at the ordinary Crimean population, depriving us of our rights and making us second-class citizens? Maybe because the main anger is caused by the fact that Crimeans do not want to live in Ukraine and only then, because Russia annexed us?

for starter, she never support of war, of any kind, from both side. hence she also criticize ukraine far right. she was supporting the nation to distance their self from russian influence, which understandable after rusian invasion of georgia.

as for crimea, they themselves got referendum if they want to support ukraine or to support russia in 1991, it was choosing ukraine (tbf, it was the closest in the region, with only 54% in favor while it's 57% in Sevastopol).

if the West sincerely believes that Russia has occupied us, then why are 90% of the Crimean sanctions aimed at the ordinary Crimean population, depriving us of our rights and making us second-class citizens? Maybe because the main anger is caused by the fact that Crimeans do not want to live in Ukraine and only then, because Russia annexed us?

funny you mention sanction crimea while there is NO "the west" sanction againts crimea average citizen or region prior to 2020. it was when EU try to be buddy buddy with russia. only US did for official and businessmen who clearly providing russian assistance which number is less than 12. the one impose full sanction was ukraine did which understandable. if anything it's only show how broken crimea was. incompetence government who clearly controlled by only handful people, over reliance on ukraine supply (which crimea new government chose to antagonize with), and lack of russian government effort to replace ukraine role in crimea. maybe start taking accountability on your own government instead blaming others?

for KOSOVO, the US and EU actually didn't care about kosovo themselves, hence their uninterested in early stages of war, until the refuge starting to flooding their border and massacre live on TV, suddenly they have to act. it's not out of pro alliance or goodwill, it's purely self interest.

for israel, while it is true US was pro israel, some of EU member actually one of most pro palestine country in the world (like ireland and sweden for example). heck, there are more EU nation that recognize Palestine than Arab nation.

 

[SuperOniichan]

the fall of USSR was good, the initial economic shock therapy and organized crime takeover was bad, the early putin economic boom was good, the later autocratic Putin Oil state (which dutch desease it get kill all russian other industry) was bad.

for starter, she never support of war, of any kind, from both side. hence she also criticize ukraine far right. she was supporting the nation to distance their self from russian influence, which understandable after rusian invasion of georgia.

as for crimea, they themselves got referendum if they want to support ukraine or to support russia in 1991, it was choosing ukraine (tbf, it was the closest in the region, with only 54% in favor while it's 57% in Sevastopol).


funny you mention sanction crimea while there is NO "the west" sanction againts crimea average citizen or region prior to 2020. it was when EU try to be buddy buddy with russia. only US did for official and businessmen who clearly providing russian assistance which number is less than 12. the one impose full sanction was ukraine did which understandable. if anything it's only show how broken crimea was. incompetence government who clearly controlled by only handful people, over reliance on ukraine supply (which crimea new government chose to antagonize with), and lack of russian government effort to replace ukraine role in crimea. maybe start taking accountability on your own government instead blaming others?

for KOSOVO, the US and EU actually didn't care about kosovo themselves, hence their uninterested in early stages of war, until the refuge starting to flooding their border and massacre live on TV, suddenly they have to act. it's not out of pro alliance or goodwill, it's purely self interest.

for israel, while it is true US was pro israel, some of EU member actually one of most pro palestine country in the world (like ireland and sweden for example). heck, there are more EU nation that recognize Palestine than Arab nation.

She didn't directly support the war, yes. But she did support the oppression of Russians and Russian speakers in Ukraine, which is simply not possible without the involvement of Ukrainian right-wing radicals. Denying this suggests that Alekseevich is either completely stupid and didn't understand what was going on, or was simply being hypocritical, trying to rationalize something that directly contradicted her stated ideals. Not to mention that these very actions will in the future become the perfect justification for the current war, since any attempts by the Russians to draw attention to this right under our noses were demonstratively ignored. And don't even try to tell me about the invasion of Georgia, when it is no longer a secret that it was Georgia that attacked Abkhazia and even the Georgians themselves admit that Saakashvili planned it as a blitzkrieg. Not to mention that the Russophobic campaigns of the right began in Ukraine long before Georgia, remember the Orange Revolution and the popularization of Russophobia not only by Yushchenko, but even by Kuchma. In general, yet another cynical but formal justification to blame Russians and Russian-speakers for the repressions against them.

We never chose to support Ukraine, man. Yeltsin abandoned us and we still hate that, as well as the thoughtless action of Khrushchev, who made a thoughtless action in the 50s, not even thinking about the possibility of the collapse of the USSR in the future. And don't even try to feed me that crap. While you're getting your data from your media, I'm literally living here.

A bunch of nonsense. What is happening to Russia now happened to Crimea for the first time since 2014. Of course, no anti-Crimean actions and of course, we are to blame for this ourselves anyway, lmao. And it's especially funny to hear about antagonism when it was Ukraine that organized the dam blocking and a series of blackouts on the peninsula, which were disguised as the explosion of pillars by nationalists. Again, you're talking nonsense, while I live here. And you're trying to blame the Crimeans themselves for the attempt to blockade and create humanitarian disasters on the part of Ukraine. Like the Ukrainians, you don't care about the Crimeans, you just want to embrace the idea of evil Russia occupying the "Ukrainian" region.

Oh yeah, sure. And the fact that the Americans and the EU bombed Yugoslavia and actively engaged in demonizing Serbia propaganda or covered up Albanian war crimes is not important. These are democratic bombings and crimes. And I especially like the repetition of the narrative that the Crimeans allegedly have no right to national self-determination, because Ukraine did not carry out real ethnic cleansing there. They only threatened. Sorry, dude, Russia is too strong to prevent this, no matter how much you fantasize about it. But it will very well happen if Crimea returns to Ukraine for some crazy reason.

This does not change the fact that, thanks to the support of the US and the EU, Israel did not receive any punishment for what Russia received a tanker of sanctions for (although the way many people in the West openly indulge Hamas and anti-Semitism is a separate topic for conversation). Moreover, until Netanyahu's actions crossed all boundaries, the West was happy to directly sponsor him with weapons. Which was so outrageous that even I, with my Jewish roots, could not help but notice it, and even many European politicians wondered why, unlike Russia, Israeli athletes do not receive any sanctions from sports officials or are not subject to the same international boycott. Simply because it is not about the war and how you wage it, but about who is on your side.

And yes, the collapse of the USSR was so "good" that in the 90s thousands, if not millions of people died in my country, the economy was destroyed (including in Ukraine and a number of other republics), not to mention the growth of various crimes, including oligarchs and terrorists (I wouldn't even be surprised if you consider Chechen terrorists "freedom fighters" as a bonus). After all, the autocratic regime appeared just like that, not because the Russians were looking for any kind of stability to get rid of the hell that happened after the collapse of the country. And I'm not even talking about Ukraine, where people like you supported any radicals, oligarchs, corrupt officials or dictators, just to turn them against the Russians, which made Ukraine a victim of even worse events, where each president was worse than the other (don't even start telling fairy tales about Zelensky).

Your attempts to almost openly justify direct discrimination against people because of their language or origin as a political response to another country are completely normal. No disturbing implications or cynical substitution of concepts, yes. As I understand it, further conversation is useless, because considering your answers, you are one of those typical Western gaslighters who will cynically justify anything if its against Russians or communists. Which just confirms my words about Alixeyvich and people like her, ironic, isn't it? So you can consider this my last answer to you, I am fed up with Western idiots who try to lecture me about my history or try to put on a mask of democracy and civility, while trying to blame me and my people for our oppression. Even to the point of supporting cringe neo-Nazis who tear down Soviet monuments to World War II, idealize collaborators, or call Victory Day over fascism "Russian propaganda."

 

[kuma]

There is no war, yes. But it directly supported the repressions against Russian speakers and Russians, trying to justify it by protecting them from Russia. That in the case of Ukraine, 100% support for the Ukrainian ultra-right. You cannot support the oppression of Russians and Russian speakers in Ukraine and at the same time deny your support for Ukrainian right-wing radicals. And don't even try to tell me about the invasion of Georgia, when it is no longer a secret that it was Georgia that attacked Abkhazia and even the Georgians themselves admit that Saakashvili planned it as a blitzkrieg. Not to mention that the Russophobic campaigns of the right began in Ukraine long before Georgia, remember the Orange Revolution and the popularization of Russophobia not only by Yushchenko, but even by Kuchma. In general, yet another cynical but formal justification to blame Russians and Russian-speakers for the repressions against them.

We never chose to support Ukraine, man. Yeltsin abandoned us and we still hate that, as well as the thoughtless action of Khrushchev, who made a thoughtless action in the 50s, not even thinking about the possibility of the collapse of the USSR in the future. And don't even try to feed me that crap. While you're getting your data from propaganda, I'm literally living here.

A bunch of nonsense. Already in 2014 we received a bunch of both European and American sanctions that directly prohibited dealing with the Crimeans in any way. And it's especially funny to hear about antagonism when it was Ukraine that organized the dam blocking and a series of blackouts on the peninsula, which were disguised as the explosion of pillars by nationalists. Again, you're talking nonsense, while I live here. And you're trying to blame the Crimeans themselves for the attempt to blockade and create humanitarian disasters on the part of Ukraine. Like the Ukrainians, you don't care about the Crimeans, you just want to embrace the idea of evil Russia occupying the "Ukrainian" region.

Oh yeah, sure. And the fact that the Americans and the EU bombed Yugoslavia and actively engaged in demonizing Serbia propaganda or covered up Albanian war crimes is not important. These are democratic bombings and crimes. And I especially like the repetition of the narrative that the Crimeans allegedly have no right to national self-determination, because Ukraine did not carry out real ethnic cleansing there. They only threatened. Sorry, dude, Russia is too strong to prevent this, no matter how much you fantasize about it. But it will very well happen if Crimea returns to Ukraine for some crazy reason.

This does not change the fact that, thanks to the support of the US and the EU, Israel did not receive any punishment for what Russia received a tanker of sanctions for. Which was so outrageous that even I, with my Jewish roots, could not help but notice it, and even many European politicians wondered why, unlike Russia, Israeli athletes do not receive any sanctions from sports officials or are not subject to the same international boycott. Simply because it is not about the war and how you wage it, but about who is on your side.

And yes, the collapse of the USSR was so "good" that in the 90s thousands, if not millions of people died in my country, the economy was destroyed (including in Ukraine and a number of other republics), not to mention the growth of various crimes, including oligarchs and terrorists (I wouldn't even be surprised if you consider Chechen terrorists "freedom fighters" as a bonus). After all, the autocratic regime appeared just like that, not because the Russians were looking for any kind of stability to get rid of the hell that happened after the collapse of the country. And I'm not even talking about Ukraine, where people like you supported any radicals, oligarchs or dictators, just to turn them against the Russians, which made Ukraine a victim of even worse events, where each president was worse than the other (don't even start telling fairy tales about Zelensky).

As I understand it, further conversation is useless, because considering your answers, you are one of those typical Western gaslighters who will cynically justify any hypocrisy or even lies with the help of formal answers or will openly justify anything, because it is against Russians or communists. Which just confirms my words about Alixeyvich and people like her, ironic, isn't it? So you can consider this my last answer to you, I am fed up with Western idiots who try to lecture me about my history or try to put on a mask of democracy and civility, while trying to blame me and my people for our oppression.

i am not westerner, but go on. actually i used to live in one of those communist regime (my family literally run from pol pot).

USSR (as in communist soviet) collapse was good and inevitable. it was originally planned to be federation with multy party system (which most country agreed first and approved by Gorbachev) however the 1991 august coup, and subsequently lithuania re-occupation, all trust are gone. it was communist elite own fault putting the nail in the coffin. the federation could've been saved, even if it's not communist.

also you completely ignore every point i made. i literally saying organized crime was not good. and i literally never portray EU or US in good light, but i don't know.

 

[SuperOniichan]

i am not westerner, but go on. actually i used to live in one of those communist regime (my family literally run from pol pot).

USSR (as in communist soviet) collapse was good and inevitable. it was originally planned to be federation with multy party system (which most country agreed first and approved by Gorbachev) however the 1991 august coup, and subsequently lithuania re-occupation, all trust are gone. it was communist elite own fault putting the nail in the coffin. the federation could've been saved, even if it's not communist.

also you completely ignore every point i made. i literally saying organized crime was not good. and i literally never portray EU or US in good light, but i don't know.

But you present their typical arguments, even to the point of almost direct quotation of Western narratives. I sympathize if you and your family had to suffer under red dictators, but with the same logic I can start justifying oppression and repression against the inhabitants of Western countries, because my family and I suffered under the ultra-right and capitalist regimes. This is complete nonsense. The collapse of the USSR was one of the most powerful tragedies in the history of my people, both conceptually and considering the consequences. And if for you all this is just good only because it is "against the communists", you only confirm my words above. I have never been a communist and never will be, because I do not like radical ideologies. But to justify the suffering, tragedy and death of people only because you did not like the political views of their country (and many of the victims of the 90s were themselves anti-communists) is simply inhumane. I am extremely skeptical about capitalism, but this will never stop me from considering September 11th one of the most terrible and inhumane terrorist attacks in history.

And I think it's a rhetorical question to ask how you would react if I suddenly started lecturing you about the Khmer Rouge, telling you how cool they were, even though I'm not Asian? Now imagine how I feel when, as a Crimean, I'm told that Crimeans are to blame for 14 years of ethnic oppression and they try to reproach us for trying to take our fate into our own hands in the face of the victory of the Russophobic ultra-right in Kyiv. This is why I can't stand these kinds of conversations. It's as if people can't tell the difference between politics and the feelings of ordinary people.

You said. But you completely defended and justified those who either did it or justified it. Including openly implying that it is okay to oppress Russians and Russian-speaking people if you have some kind of dispute with Russia.

 

[kuma]

But you present their typical arguments, even to the point of almost direct quotation of Western narratives. I sympathize if you and your family had to suffer under red dictators, but with the same logic I can start justifying oppression and repression against the inhabitants of Western countries, because my family and I suffered under the ultra-right and capitalist regimes. This is complete nonsense. The collapse of the USSR was one of the most powerful tragedies in the history of my people, both conceptually and considering the consequences. And if for you all this is just good only because it is "against the communists", you only confirm my words above. I have never been a communist and never will be, because I do not like radical ideologies. But to justify the suffering, tragedy and death of people only because you did not like the political views of their country (and many of the victims of the 90s were themselves anti-communists) is simply inhumane. I am extremely skeptical about capitalism, but this will never stop me from considering September 11th one of the most terrible and inhumane terrorist attacks in history.

And I think it's a rhetorical question to ask how you would react if I suddenly started lecturing you about the Khmer Rouge, telling you how cool they were, even though I'm not Asian? Now imagine how I feel when, as a Crimean, I'm told that Crimeans are to blame for 14 years of ethnic oppression and they try to reproach us for trying to take our fate into our own hands in the face of the victory of the Russophobic ultra-right in Kyiv. This is why I can't stand these kinds of conversations. It's as if people can't tell the difference between politics and the feelings of ordinary people.

You said. But you completely defended and justified those who either did it or justified it. Including openly implying that it is okay to oppress Russians and Russian-speaking people if you have some kind of dispute with Russia.

again, you are always use this US vs THEM narrative. which was never my point or my interest. if other did wrong, doesn't mean you can excuse another wrongdoing. never once i try to portray "the west" are the truth and the russian are evil. if you fail to see this you are part of the problem.

 

[SuperOniichan]

again, you are always use this US vs THEM narrative. which was never my point or my interest. if other did wrong, doesn't mean you can excuse another wrongdoing. never once i try to portray "the west" are the truth and the russian are evil. if you fail to see this you are part of the problem.

It was not me who tried to justify Alekseyevich's support for Russophobic initiatives by saying that it is normal to distance oneself from Russia, as if oppressing Russians and Russian-speakers is normal if you don't like Russia.

 

[kuma]

It was not me who tried to justify Alekseyevich's support for Russophobic initiatives by saying that it is normal to distance oneself from Russia, as if oppressing Russians and Russian-speakers is normal if you don't like Russia.

what she support was less economic reliance on russia AND UKRAINE STATE funding russian education which often RUSSIAN STATE used to justify separation and civil war in certain region, namely georgia and moldova. she was never supporting militant violence action or attempt to ban public use of russian language. heck she was writting book in russian to this day.

 

[SuperOniichan]

what she support was less economic reliance on russia AND UKRAINE STATE funding russian education which often RUSSIAN STATE used to justify separation and civil war in certain region, namely georgia and moldova. she was never supporting militant violence action or attempt to ban public use of russian language. heck she was writting book in russian to this day.

She has directly supported this several times both in interviews and in phone conversations with pranksters when she thought she was talking to Ukrainians. And she even belatedly tried to retract the first one when she understand what she had said, but the journalists refused and published it without cuts. Which only further confirms the truth of the interview and her as a not entirely smart and consistent person. To such an extent that she admitted that she understood the killers of Oles Buzina, a well-known pro-Russian Ukrainian activist. And when the pranksters called her back some time later on behalf of the Russian Minister of Culture, she began to act as the most pro-Russian person possible. Here's your fucking Alekseevich, don't choke.

And don't even try to tell me about the Russian language. Most Belarusians are Russian-speaking and many Ukrainians, even among the Russophobic right-wing radicals. For example, a couple of years ago there was a scandal because even neo-Nazis from Azov speak Russian, lmao. You would know this very well if you lived here. Because this is one of the main ironies of Russophobia in Eastern Europe. But instead you choose to ignore how people like Alekseevich are genuinely inciting ethnic hatred while trying to portray them as fighters against allegedly creates civil conflicts Russia. As if this never happened in Georgia and Moldova without us. A typical delusional conspiracy theory, like those where people believe that without the communists there were no problems in Tsarist country. Still trying to deny that you think Russia is evil, huh. I've just had enough of this crap from people who know absolutely nothing about life here, but at the same time try to lecture and idealize opportunistic hypocrites.

 

[SuperOniichan]

And if I didn't feel sorry for such a good manga (well, until it concerns Alekseevich's own inserts) and all the work of both the mangaka and the women who gave her interviews, I could tell you a lot more about Alekseevich, if you are so persistent in creating an idol out of her. No need to be shy, I know very well how people like you adore all the Eastern European writers who demonize Russians and the USSR, even if they themselves once built a career as Soviet propagandists. But unlike her, I have some moral boundaries. That's it, I'm done here.

 

[Kobitohime]

Damn kuma, you might not be a westerner but you might as well be one with how you really believe western propaganda like that.

 

[Equilibrium]

All tankies should be hanged.

 

[SuperOniichan]

Damn kuma, you might not be a westerner but you might as well be one with how you really believe western propaganda like that.

Yeah. They get offended when you call them Americans or see them as people with a Cold War mentality, but they literally write 1 to 1 what an American jingoist might write. Which is only further confirmed by what kind of people give them the main positive reaction. But I am especially concerned when you see many German users who support revanchist anti-Soviet or in any way reducing the responsibility of the Nazis comments.