"Just like the whole phenomenon of Russian racism and nazism, it can be traced to the Soviet years."
...or to an even older tradition of the "Black Hundreds".
A bit of a side note, but the Russian tactic of pointing to Western racism in response to any criticism of their own discriminatory policies dates back to the tsarist times. The infamous "And you are lynching Negroes" card was first played by Tsar's diplomats when Russia faced worldwide ostracism following the Kishinev pogrom.
Obviously racism in the West is still an issue and was even more so over a century ago, but it doesn't make this form of whataboutism any less dishonest.
"if you call him, you should use vocativus: “o skinheadye!”."
No, you shouldn't. Unlike Polish, Russian doesn't have a real vocative case. There is something called the "old vocative", but it's limited to a few fixed expressions, e.g. "Bozhe!" or "Gospodi!" ("[oh my] God!"). There is also the "new vocative", but again it is limited to certain types of words, such as people's names (e.g. if you are colloquially addressing a girl called Lena, you can say "Len!").
Sorry, Monday morning and I'm looking for common sense on the internet, so I come here...
Formally speaking, Russia did not have slavery, as formally slavery is distinguished by the possibility of an individual human purchase/sale transaction. In the Russian case, it was possible to buy people living in an area (assigned to the property being bought), but not an individual slave.
Well, I don't know how reliable this source is, but it is quite famous (or should I say, notorious?) in Poland. "The Memoirs of Jacques Casanova de Seingalt, 1725-1798. Volume 25: Russia and Poland" (English translation by Arthur Machen) (via Gutenberg Library):
The conversation over, Zinowieff went out, and I followed him after giving the master of the house a rouble. Zinowieff told me what had passed, saying that he had asked the father if he would let him have the daughter as a maid-servant, and the father had replied that it should be so with all his heart, but that he must have a hundred roubles for her, as she was still a virgin. "So you see," added Zinowieff, "the matter is quite simple."
"How simple?"
"Why, yes; only a hundred roubles."
"And supposing me to be inclined to give that sum?"
"Then she would be your servant, and you could do anything you liked with her, except kill her."
"And supposing she is not willing?"
"That never happens, but if it did you could have beaten her."
"Well, if she is satisfied and I enjoy her, can I still continue to keep her?"
"You will be her master, I tell you, and can have her arrested if she attempts to escape, unless she can return the hundred roubles you gave for her."
"What must I give her per month?"
"Nothing, except enough to eat and drink. You must also let her go to the baths on Saturday and to the church on Sunday."
I am more convinced by the wkochano argument, because the mere fact that someone carried out the transaction is not sufficient. From media reports, human trafficking, especially of women for sexual purposes, is currently taking place in the EU. So the problem is not the individual transaction, but the acceptance in culture and law. If someone advertises the possibility of sale in the newspaper, it means that a large number of people see nothing wrong with it and accept slavery.
@Eastsplaining is there a way to contact you with a political science research question? (Not for me personally, but for a young researcher who wants to learn more about Russian politics.)
"Just like the whole phenomenon of Russian racism and nazism, it can be traced to the Soviet years."
...or to an even older tradition of the "Black Hundreds".
A bit of a side note, but the Russian tactic of pointing to Western racism in response to any criticism of their own discriminatory policies dates back to the tsarist times. The infamous "And you are lynching Negroes" card was first played by Tsar's diplomats when Russia faced worldwide ostracism following the Kishinev pogrom.
Obviously racism in the West is still an issue and was even more so over a century ago, but it doesn't make this form of whataboutism any less dishonest.
"if you call him, you should use vocativus: “o skinheadye!”."
No, you shouldn't. Unlike Polish, Russian doesn't have a real vocative case. There is something called the "old vocative", but it's limited to a few fixed expressions, e.g. "Bozhe!" or "Gospodi!" ("[oh my] God!"). There is also the "new vocative", but again it is limited to certain types of words, such as people's names (e.g. if you are colloquially addressing a girl called Lena, you can say "Len!").
Point taken! I thik this is also valid for male names, I think I heard vocative "Sash!" (to one Sasha).
The vocative case does exist in Ukrainian though, and you can say "o skinheade!".
Sorry, Monday morning and I'm looking for common sense on the internet, so I come here...
Formally speaking, Russia did not have slavery, as formally slavery is distinguished by the possibility of an individual human purchase/sale transaction. In the Russian case, it was possible to buy people living in an area (assigned to the property being bought), but not an individual slave.
Consider this beautiful advertisement for three girls for sale: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FN6A2oYXwAQkigp?format=jpg&name=900x900
Thanks -- You prove it.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the archaic Russian in the advert, but where does it say that the three girls ara attached to a property?
Well, I don't know how reliable this source is, but it is quite famous (or should I say, notorious?) in Poland. "The Memoirs of Jacques Casanova de Seingalt, 1725-1798. Volume 25: Russia and Poland" (English translation by Arthur Machen) (via Gutenberg Library):
The conversation over, Zinowieff went out, and I followed him after giving the master of the house a rouble. Zinowieff told me what had passed, saying that he had asked the father if he would let him have the daughter as a maid-servant, and the father had replied that it should be so with all his heart, but that he must have a hundred roubles for her, as she was still a virgin. "So you see," added Zinowieff, "the matter is quite simple."
"How simple?"
"Why, yes; only a hundred roubles."
"And supposing me to be inclined to give that sum?"
"Then she would be your servant, and you could do anything you liked with her, except kill her."
"And supposing she is not willing?"
"That never happens, but if it did you could have beaten her."
"Well, if she is satisfied and I enjoy her, can I still continue to keep her?"
"You will be her master, I tell you, and can have her arrested if she attempts to escape, unless she can return the hundred roubles you gave for her."
"What must I give her per month?"
"Nothing, except enough to eat and drink. You must also let her go to the baths on Saturday and to the church on Sunday."
I am more convinced by the wkochano argument, because the mere fact that someone carried out the transaction is not sufficient. From media reports, human trafficking, especially of women for sexual purposes, is currently taking place in the EU. So the problem is not the individual transaction, but the acceptance in culture and law. If someone advertises the possibility of sale in the newspaper, it means that a large number of people see nothing wrong with it and accept slavery.
@Eastsplaining is there a way to contact you with a political science research question? (Not for me personally, but for a young researcher who wants to learn more about Russian politics.)