From where did the ">slavs are subhuman" meme come from?

Basically, all those that've successfully resisted Western hegemony at one point in modern history are "subhumans" ?Interesting analogy, I take it Westerners and Colonials can't be subhuman by default, even though they tend to exhibit some subhuman traits without peer- inspired repercussion?

It is not putting it in opposition with "rationalism", but with rampant hypocrisy which promotes the draconian philosophy of "doing as they say, but not doing what they do ".

Gopnik videos and memes are not a representation of peoples and people groups, just like rednecks and hillbillies are not.
So historical circumstances decide race to you?

>implying the South isn't filled with subhuman white trash
>implying the United States would have as much trouble as it does now if we had simply shot every male of fighting age in the South in 1865

And they you turn around and call southerners racist.

observations of russia and serbia

I'll give you a serious reply OP. The main reason why Slavs were considered subhuman is because it's the impression they gave. The risen points by the previous posters are all somewhat correct.

I might spout some ahistorical things, but that's because my perspective is Russian, a Czech or Pole or Croat might give a different view, and I base my understanding on Nikolai Berdyaev's work.

First, you need to remember there are 3 Slavic groups: Western, Eastern and Southern. Western Slavs are Catholic for the most part, Eastern are Orthodox, and Southern are a mix. This is important as religion played a crucial role in shaping these nations distinctly despite a common core.

The Eastern Slavs (read: Russians) were viewed as backwards simply because they were. While the Mongol yoke did hinder progress by hindering the autonomy of the nation, what held back the Russian people was themselves, a sort of a vicious cycle of tyrannical government producing a dependent and fearful population, having it all justified through divine right. Top this sort of slave-to-a-strongmam-government mentality with serfdom and you could easily understand why a Westerner would view Russians as backwards, and given Russians were representatives of Slavs on the world stage, thus Slavs in general as subhuman.

Other than that, the Russian church played a role in that it didn't allow much philosophizing or supported scientific progress, which is the stark difference with Catholicism. Although, how much it *oppossed* progress is unknown to me, although social progress for sure. In short, Russia was one step behind in all realms of life; technologically, socially, scientifically, intellectually and militaristically.

Lamanosov was an anomaly. There were no intellectuals,defined as broadly as possible, as a class or even a social group prior to the late 18th century. The inteligencia rose from the petty bourgeoisie, army officers and members of the royal court. 1/2 cont

Observing members of a dying post-Soviet subculture is the same as observing Russians and Serbs?

Cry harder, traitor. You wouldn't be held responsible for the Confederacy's crimes if you didn't constantly pledge allegiance to it.

>serbia
In what way?

>implying it's not true
>implying white trash rednecks aren't subhuman

YEEEEE HAAWWW IMMA GONNA LISTEN TO SHIT MUSIC AND INTENTIONALLY POLLUTE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE CUZ FUCK DA LIBRULS WHILE I DRIVE OVER TO FUCK MAH SISTER WIFE

"Culture".

That's the point. Gopniks from Slav memes are not representative of Slavs just how Rednecks aren't representative of Americans.
There's a reason why they're considered the bottom of their societies.

Because Russians are the dominant demographic.

What most anons in this thread mentioned is not a result of race, rather of a lack of education, education is not just schools, it starts at home.

Not true, my cousing Klause 5km across the border wears suspenders and green shorts, while I only wear Adidas like Nikolay 5000km away.

I tried to wear the suspenders that one time, but as soon as I uttered a word of a slavic languages, I just couldn't help but don some Adidas.

>producing a dependent and fearful population, having it all justified through divine right

If they were fearful, then they would've never dismembered the Mongol Hordes and assimilated it's inhabitants.Either way, Russia is an excellent example of how geography determines destiny. There is a reason why Russia constantly degenerates into autocracy and the USSR was no exception.
The reason why Russia's geopolitical strategy ever since Ivan the Terrible has primarily remained the same - for the Russian people to survive they needed large tracts of land to fall back on. This was their defense in the event of invasion as Russia's two most vulnerable areas are easily accessible via the European Plain. Examples of course include Napoleon and Hitler who both invaded Russia's most vulnerable areas - others are of course the Polish and Swedes.
So in order to maintain survival Russia has to fall back and if you look at their colonisation process they stopped every time they met a major geographical barrier and then constructed cities. Now these cities were so far apart and so isolated that they lacked the ability to be self-sufficient and all are reliant upon Moscow.
Moscow is Russia. Without Moscow there is no Russia. I know it seems silly, but think about it. The Government has to control these ethnically diverse regions, the distances of which between them increases exponentially (Nizhny Novgorod, Kazan, Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk but each supplies the other in a chain), - the logistics are mind boggling to comprehend. So Russia has to be autocratic, it has to follow a 'realist ideology' in regards to the international system in order to maintain its very survival.”

The rest is somewhat true.

All those golden and silver age writers? descendants of gentry. The average Russian was an expandable, superstitious and uneducated peasant throughout the 19th century. The illiteracy rate in Russia was embarrassing.

Besides the already fearing general population the intelligencia, to a degree, also rejected Western ideas. The so called Slavophiles, who were pretty much LARPers and mused about how great it was in the old days. A side note: most of Russian philosophical thought in the 19th century was based off of Hegel's teaching.

Then came along Communism and Nazism. Communism gave an incentive for the West to vilify Slavs during the cold war. I know it wasn't targeting Slavs, not even Russians, but it's evident that is the impression it left judging by Russians' portrayal in cold war era Hollywood. I'm not implying Russophobia or crap like that, just that if you portray a group as backwards, and that group also happens to include a dominant ethnicity, bias against the ethnicity will be created. Now Nazism just ran on the old belief and conception of Slavs, except this time it was reinforced because of Communism. I remember seeing an old German political cartoon in the form of a national trait chart from the 17th(?) century, it portrayed Eastern europeans very negatively, treating Russians the worst out of them.

Basically, Slavs are considered sub-human because of history, backwards legacy and political agenda. Interestingly enough, Berdyaev's analysis of the Russian national mindset can be reflected even today.

Look at the average Slav and the average Slavic country.

People often need a scapegoat to feel better about the state of their existence, especially those of lesser intelligence.

Yes, because Balkanniggers were so successful in not getting conquered by Westerners that they became a cumsocket for Turks

Written by someone who hails from a country which developed a cult of hardcore subservience .

...

It took the Turks 227 years to conquer the Balkans and besides, I spoke of recent events.

>The so called Slavophiles

A response to 19th century Germanic romanticism.

>Slavs are considered sub-human because of history

Define "history"- They always came on top in most of the conflicts in which they've fought.

>g-go to /pol/
prove me wrong, faggot

can you source these "cumsockets?"

I just did and as I've said, I spoke o modern history, not the late Middle Ages, you illiterate ape.

>If they were fearful, then they would've never dismembered the Mongol Hordes and assimilated it's inhabitants
Strawman, he wasn't talking about their external fear.

>Russia is an excellent example of how geography determines destiny. There is a reason why Russia constantly degenerates into autocracy and the USSR was no exception.
This is nonsense and has nothing to do with the actual argument

By history I meant what actually happened, those practices as serfdom and general, for a lack of a better word, retardation in all spheres of life. And just to clarify by cultural legacy I meant what we have now in actuality and how Slavic countries are progressing.

As for coming on top, well, hardiness isn't the same as finesse.

Every time I see you, it's an endless amazement of how fucking retarded nationalists like yourself can get.

It is not nonsense at all, if you've taken your time to read my entire post.Their "fascination" with authoritarian rule stems from the time of Ivan IV and it's by far their most effective method of governance.

So you've meant cultural and social developments, then yes, I'm inclined to agree.

> hardiness isn't the same as finesse
True, one is innate, the other has to earned.

>lack of a better word, retardation in all spheres of life
>As for coming on top, well, hardiness isn't the same as finesse.

What the fuck are you even talking about, other than pure ideological jingoist rambling?

Itt: Slavs get BTFO

>In the history of Europe, the Middle Ages or medieval period lasted from the 5th to the 15th century.

>Ottoman Hungary was the territory of Medieval Hungary which was ruled by the Ottoman Empire from 1541 to 1699

>middle ages

As you could see, I did not tag you in that response, you illiterate ape.

>it took them 227 years
Yeah, maybe because the Ottoman Empire started as pretty much a city-state, surrounded by bigger Emirates and the remnants of the Latin and Byzantine Empires around them, which they all subjugated. Really makes you think, huh?

>What is the Ottoman conquest of the Balkan
I thought you Slavs kept whining about how the Ottomans raped you and destroyed every bit of human decency you have.

You're deeming people subhuman on the basis of memes and I'm the retard, and while we're at it, what makes me a nationalist?The fact that I don't agree with illiterate assessments made by people who have absolutely no idea of what they're talking about, especially when it comes to Slavic history?

the ideal rocket equation was derived by an anglo first, tsiolkovsky was unnecessary

Nigga that was my first post.

>I thought you Slavs kept whining about how the Ottomans raped you and destroyed every bit of human decency you have.

What? "You"? Who "You?" I haven't been raped by anyone, especially not someone from the Osmanoğlu family.

are you even reading the thread

When I've spoke of the History of the late Middle Ages, I've implied the period which encompassed the Ottoman conquests of the Balkan peninsula, you illiterate subhuman maggot and besides, there was no mention of Hungary, that country isn't on the Balkans, in case you've missed that.

>I thought you Slavs kept whining about how the Ottomans raped you and destroyed every bit of human decency you have

The Ottomans have done irreparable damage to their European provinces, but they're rarely raped anything, considering that the punishments for rape were severe to say the least.

But for real, do you like no understanding of history, let alone jest?

Do you know that the Kingdom of Hungary encompassed more than just modern Hungary, you fucking retarded Slav

Most of the kingdom was situated in Central Europe and before you mention Croatia, she was a part of a personal Union with Hungary.

That bit of"Nigger" inside you has severely hampered your capability to reason and comprehend.

You realize they don't mean literal rape right?

...

The last Balkan regions Slavs inhabited where conquered with the Ottoman conquest of Hungary you moron, most of the Balkan was already conquered long before that.

That remains to be seen, types like them/ him are usually lack the tact for allegory.

He said multiple times he is not a Serb.
>out of arguments
>shtitpost

>being this retarded

No you subhuman, the last territory which the Ottomans have conquered on the Balkans were the Banate of Jajce and Banate of Srebrenik.

I don't go to Reddit, I don't like it's outlook.

He's a Bosnian and he's more educated on the topics he discusses than all the shitposters combined.

Nice argument you fucking retard, it was still not the middle ages.
>Le if I strawman long enough maybe he'll forget what we're arguing about
Jesus Christ just end your life already

Slavs=Russians

Why would a Bosniak argue in favor of Christian Russians and Serbs?

There was/is an West-East gap in development and some people attributed it to racial factors.

>Look at the average Slav

Bosnian Bosniak

Subhuman and treacherous "neighbours" + idiotic policy ("democracy" in times of kingdoms and empires) + imbecile rulers + being cucked by Vatican, which resulted in:
- 123 years of non-existence
- 50 years of communism
- countless wars and uprisings
- total destruction and theft of Polish culture, genocides of our elites, intelligentsia etc
And somehow we are still here.

Poland and the PLC were great reservoirs of culture and development throughout the entire 15th and 16th centuries. It was rich and (relatively) stable, and was probably one of if not the nicest place to live during those centuries in the middle of the last millennium.

Swedeshitters ruined it though, they looted and burnt almost every palace, library, archive and gallery in the PLC, they massacred, in some places, up to 3/4 of the population, and are the reason Poland in the last few centuries has gone from France-Tier to what it is now.

It was quite unique and showed that Poland was the most free country in Europe. And oh, it wasn't really szlachta that mostly fucked up the Commonwealth, they were actually the soul of the nation and cultural and knowledge propagators, but some magnate families like the Radziwiłł's.
Actually the protestants and calvinists like the Radziwiłł's wanted the Cossacks (a warrior class of refugees to the borderland (U+kraina) of mostly Ruthenian but also Polish, Lithuanian, Scottish, Dutch ethnicity as well) to rise up against the Catholic majority so the protestants from the north could overtake the country, then later the Radziwiłł's literally begged Sweden to invade and are partly responsible for causing the Deluge - all in the name of destroying Catholicism.

They were supported by other protestants, mostly Britain through proxies like Sweden and Prussia. The protestants wanted to destroy Catholic Poland because it was the largest and most powerful country loyal to the Vatican. The Brits were the 4th partitioner of Poland through funding Prussia.

Friedrich and Bismarck were the biggest enemies of Poland, mainly because Prussia was nothing but a backwater without rich Polish provinces.

Germany was unified on Polish and French corpse by ex Polish vassal.

>Keeps building shaky straw-men, fails at keeping them up, blames it on someone else.The course of the discussion has so far changed to providing evidence that might refute the belief that the last Slavic holdings were in Hungary while in fact, they weren't.

Can't wait till you get gunned down by some officer who couldn't get himself off before his shift began.

Another factor was Communism and Russkie occupation.

>Poland suffered catastrophic damage to its infrastructure during the war, which caused it to lag even further behind the West in its industrial output.[11] The losses in national resources and infrastructure amounted to over 30% of the pre-war potential.[11] Poland's capital of Warsaw was among the most devastated cities – over 80 percent destroyed in the aftermath of the Warsaw Uprising of 1944.[12] Nonetheless, resulting from forced migration, there was a rapid increase in population to 23.9 million shown in the first post-war census of 14 February 1946.[13] The Polish state acquired more highly developed western territories and lost the more economically backward eastern regions. Already in 1948 the prewar level of industrial production was exceeded in global and per capita terms during the first Three-Year Plan (Plan Trzyletni) fueled by the collective desire to rebuild shattered lives.[14]

>After the Soviet annexation of the Kresy territories east of the Curzon line, about 2 million Poles were "repatriated" (moved or were transferred or expelled) from these areas into the new western and northern territories east of the Oder-Neisse line,[20][21]

> In 1947 Soviet pressure caused the Polish government to reject the American-sponsored Marshall Plan,[16] and to join the Soviet Union-dominated Comecon in 1949.[17] The Soviet forces present engaged in plunder of the former eastern territories of Germany which were being transferred to Poland, stripping it of valuable industrial equipment, infrastructure and factories and sending them to the Soviet Union.[18][19]

>importing polish coal from mines in silesia for free for 40 years
>importing meat from poland for free while the polish starved
>"""""rebuilding"""""""

>Keeps building shaky straw-men, fails at keeping them up, blames it on someone else

Literally you every fucking thread your in.

No, serfdom lasted a long time, because there were no railroads and very little connection with the west in many parts of Russia. It took a while for most of Russia to find out that the west had actually become civilized in last few hundred years

Your entire argument was that they were conquered in the middle ages, not the modern age. The Ottoman Empire is a state that thrived in the early modern age. Your point is just wrong, you are wrong. Kill yourself

In other words, that means that I shouldn't strive towards truthfulness ?

>Prussia was nothing but a backwater without rich Polish provinces

Prussia was in good shape, Poland was devastated before the partitions. Prussian policies made the newly acquired Polish land somewhat useful again.

You didn't get my post.

Prussia didn't matter before they gained Polish lands and connected Prussia.

It was good farming land of Greater Poland that boosted Prussia.

I have a hard time choosing who is worse, the imperialist retardos that are Russians and Serbs, or the ever butthurt and self-loathing Poles.

>facts
>butthurt
Kill yourself.

I would lay pipe in the belorussian broad

You keep mentioning Serbs. Why? Wouldn't Bulgarians fit the description better?

No, my argument was that the conquest lasted, key word lasted throughout the Late Middle Ages, it only ended at the very beginning of the Modern age.

According to whom ?A horde of malcontent individuals who judge history from the lenses of the modern era or according to those who assume that their version is closer to the truth because it suits their predefined opinions more?

You didn't get the post, Prussia didn't matter before she acquired all the Polish territories.

Since when are facts "butthurt" ?

Nazi propaganda and a Western European belief that prosperity is achieved solely through being inherently superior and not through just luck.

>A horde of malcontent individuals who judge history from the lenses of the modern era
Strawman fallacy.

>or according to those who assume that their version is closer to the truth because it suits their predefined opinions more?

considering you ignore arguments, ignore and throw out facts that are "uncomfortable" to your preconstructed belief that the west is evil and that slavs are perfect and that you source or give examples to your claims once a year at best, you would probably fit that description more. trying to mask it with the pretentious language of a 17 yearold redditer to fool retarded slavs who don't wanna feel irrelevant like does not change that.

>It was good farming land of Greater Poland that boosted Prussia.

yes

>Prussia didn't matter before they gained Polish lands

No. Prussia was already established as a major player in Europe after the War of the Austrian Succession and Seven Years War.

It still wasn't enough to compete with Russia and France.

Austria wasn't some kind of powerhouse.

Yet they held their ground against Russia and Austria combined

Not at all, considering that most people on this thread tend to do that on an average level.

>considering you ignore arguments, ignore and throw out facts that are "uncomfortable" to your constructed belief

I'd like to see you point out all the arguments where I've allegedly done all of that.

So you're turning it from racism to relevancy?
Because no one gives a shit about relevancy, there is only one country relevant at the moment, and it's the USA.

During Seven Years War, Frederick acquired Polish money print from Saxony, which doubled Prussian economy.

So? They clearly were strong enough to compete with Russians on a military basis at the least

I like to imagine that this happened.

They were just lucky.

>muh Swedes
>muh Roskies
>muh Friedrich
>muh Bismarck
>muh Banderites
>muh Nazis
>muh Commies
>muh Putin
The only good Pole is a dead Pole, for only then he cannot whine.

you're on the wrong board.

Mostly from ethnic Russians' behavior. Serbs deserve an honorable mention too.

Last I checked this board was about History & Humanities, not Polish Butthurt and Whining.

Where do you see butthurt and whining, you absolute fucking retard?

It's all facts.

>It was just luck that made them survive so long
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rossbach
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leuthen
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Krefeld
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Zorndorf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Liegnitz_(1760)

They clearly were able to hold their ground against the great powers of Europe, completely on their own aside of british subsidies