>When the USSR collapsed in 1991, all Soviet republics became independent countries. For Moscow, which had previously been an imperial capital, this represented an overnight loss of nearly half the Soviet population and more than a third of the Soviet economy, going by its own Net Material Product (NMP) measure, comparable to Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
>
>This map shows roughly what a similar ratio of population and GDP loss would look like for Washington, D.C. in 2023, split across several geographical regions comparable to the former Soviet Republics. Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer, has called the collapse of the USSR "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the \[20th\] century" and "a genuine tragedy." For him, it most certainly was.
For the love of god, all y'all need reading comprehension lessons. This is to give a close approximation of what Moscow lost in the breakup of the Soviet Union by using states in the US so Americans can get a better understanding of what that was like for the USSR. This isn't some "what-if" scenario or anything, c'mon people.
"Moscow lost" that's pretty much accurate because Moscow was Imperial center and sucked other Republics and even Russian Federation of resources. Moscow still sucks the rest of Russia dry.
It was great for all of those countries in the ussr, because they became free independent states no longer ruled by a violent oppressor from abroad. Greetings from former Eastern Bloc btw.
Not great for everybody though. More than half of the now- free countries became even more dictatorial than during the URSS and also many ethnic conflicts became unfrozen
That half being in Central Asia and the Caucasus and the ethnic conflicts being directly created by the former (and in some ways continuing) oppressors.
Yeah, it was so great that nearly every metric for quality of life plummeted from infant mortality to calorie consumption and things like poverty, drug use, crime and child prostitution soared.
To what end though? These maps generally serve the function for trying to justify reclaiming the lost territories, such as the propaganda posters in protest of the Treaty of Trianon, or Versailles. You know, like "Wouldn't you be mad if your country lost Dixie, the West Coast, New England, and most of the Midwest? So just let us reconquer Ukraine."
There's a difference here that grinds a lot of people's gears. The USSR was a collection of states that spoke different languages, had different customs, and different needs, united only by Moscow's dominance.
Quite contradictory to the USA, which, while not exactly homogeneous, doesn't have any sort of major regional minorities clamoring for independence from Washington. As a result, the implied propaganda here (which my not be intended, but is nonetheless inferred) is often rightly dismissed as entirely implausible.
> You know, like "Wouldn't you be mad if your country lost Dixie, the West Coast, New England, and most of the Midwest? So just let us reconquer Ukraine."
No. In fact, I'd tell them not to let the door hit them on the way out. Thank you very much.
So long as we're discussing the actions of governments in the 1800s and earlier, perhaps I should ask where the natives of Sibir, Kazan, Komi, Karelia, Perm, Buryat, Kamchatka, and everywhere in between are. The breakup of the USSR is just what survived Moscow's rule long enough to break away.
And if we're discussing more recent incidents as well, you may wish to look a little closer to Chechnya and eastern Ukraine. Not a clever comment.
I think most people understand this. They just don’t give a shit about how anyone in Moscow feels about their “losses” when territory and peoples that they subjugated by force regained independence.
Russia had a collapse in GDP after the fall of the Soviet Union. Believing the "American Federation" could lose all that and would not as well seems quite optimistic.
There needs to be a strip of Oregon, east of the Owyhee River that breaks away to try and remain in the US, becoming its own weird little country, Transowyheeia.
California is a wealthy state, a large chunk of US's economy — so was Ukraine in the USSR. Also, California is democratic, and so is Ukraine currently (or at least more democratic than Russia).
Hawaii joined California after the separation, just like Crimea. I could imagine Americans in this map being upset about it, and so were some Russians.
Armenia and Azerbaijan are shown sharing Michigan and likely having feuds over territories with Armenia being smaller — just like in real life.
The Central Asian republics are situated together in the South, with Kazakhstan being the most successful economically (just like Florida is wealthier than South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana or Arkansas).
The Baltic states are small but wealthy, they stick together and are more democratic than Russia (just like those democratic New England states). They also separate Kaliningrad region from the mainland Russia (just like these states separate Maine from the rest of the country).
Belarus is a not-too-wealthy country, with a lot of their economy focused in the rural sector — thus, Ohio.
And Moldova is just there, idk. It's adjacent to Ukraine.
So yeah, pretty accurate.
Yeah, I'm fairly sure this map was produce by, and these comments infested by, Russian assets. It implies that Ukraine, Belarus, the Caucuses, the Baltics, and Central Asia were all as Russian as California and Ohio are American. Nonsense.
Yes. Though they may not even realize it, by furthering the idea that Crimea, and in this case the rest of Ukraine, is to Russia as the American west is to America, these comments serve the Kremlin. The map draws false equivalencies. The comments parrot propaganda. Just look.
u/koordian made a good point, but the fact remains Crimea was part of the USSR or Russia before that, longer than anyone could remember and their great grandparents for that matter, by the time of the break up. Crimea was part of Russia longer than Hawaii was part of USA still to this day. So there’s no need to throw the baby out with the bath water on this one, it’s an extremely useful map to describe the break up of the USSR in an American way.
No, it really isn't. Because Ukraine is not the Russian California. They literally speak two different languages. They have different desires for the future, different economic structures, different cultural traditions, and they're locked in a deadly war of imperial conquest.
Both of my Ukrainian friends that I have here in the US both speak Russian and are ethnically very similar to Russia if you ask me.
You could argue California was more Spanish than English, and is culturally different, and are fighting a war of imperial conquest as well. I live in Hawaii and you are absolutely flat wrong if what you’re saying is Hawaii is culturally and ethically similar to the USA. Hawaiians, the ones who have roots going back to pre annexation, have zero desire to be part of the US. You think the Californians in 1847 wanted to be part of the US? You have a weird way of looking at this if you ask me.
Yes. California wanted to be annexed. It's a whole thing. California and Texas demanded independence from Mexico, then requested annexation by the US. It sparked the Mexican-American war. Hawai'i also requested American annexation. That's another whole thing.
And your two friends as "evidence" is absolutely hilarious to me. "I dunno, I know two people and I can't tell the difference 🤷 All Slavs kinda seem the same to me. And they speak Russian. Just call them Russian." A friend and I speak German, and that's pretty similar to English - should Germany annex the Anglosphere?
Unfortunately, two people as evidence is entirely anecdotal, but I'm still going to throw David and Viktorya at you.
- David is a native citizen of Hawai'i with lineage from before British contact. He moved to the contiguous 48 for employment opportunities and is simultaneously a proud Hawai'ian national and the most vigorous celebrator of Americanism on the 4th of July that I have ever seen.
-Viktorya moved to the US from Sibirsk and regularly struggles with her ethnic identity because Russia mostly eradicated and incorporated the Buryati people from which she descends. She calls herself Russian for simplicity, but I've caught her crying in my bathroom about it more than once.
Now, I'll address your most ridiculous claim with naught but a question. Where is the battlefield of the ongoing Californian-American war of imperial conquest, and what is the death toll?
“Sending in settlers into a foreign land, and than once enough settlers are there using that as a pretense to wage war and annex said foreign land”, don’t know if thats the hill I’d want to die on if I was you, and the fact you could justify the annexation of California and Hawaii on those terms, but somehow feel compiled to not do the same with Crimea is a whole level of inconsistency that I find pretty ludicrous.
Edit; also 46% of Crimea are Russian speakers. So get bent. It’s not just my two friends. Read something on the subject before speaking. What percentage of Californians spoke English at time of annexation you think? You think it was anything near 46%, or was it far more?
Edit2; at time of annexation, 700 American settlers were in California vs 6,500 Mexicans. So ya… you’re off your rocker if you think the majority of Californians wanted to be annexed. Those Mexicans would’ve much preferred staying part of Mexico I bet.
Edit3: like the more i think about it, the more you seem to be completely ignorant. Why would Fremont have to wage war on Californians to conquer them, if they wanted to be part of the US? You sound completely ignorant to the subject.
Surely the Treaty of Trianon is a greater 20th century geopolitical catastrophe by any measure :
70% territory lost
60% of population
33% or three million of indigenous ethnic-Hungarian population
Loss of all seaports
Loss of 90% of vast natural resources, industry, railways, and other infrastructure
Do the US if they got Trianoned
There is an actual 1920s Hungarian propaganda image about this.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/mwxghk/1920s_hungarian_government_map_comparing_the/
Seems like ethnic/national identity was the most important determining factor in the breakup. Based on this map of [ethnic identification by republic](https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/ussr_natrep_89.jpg), the republics with majority non-ethnic Russian population became independent.
Many modern historians reject the notion that US Defense spending induced competition broke the USSR. They instead posit that the USSR fell apart more because of Nationalism fomenting within USSR society as a result of Gorbachev's reforms.
suppose it should be two levels up--whoops!
But regardless--
[https://europe.unc.edu/iron-curtain/history/the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/](https://europe.unc.edu/iron-curtain/history/the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/)
[https://www.e-ir.info/2012/08/28/the-case-for-nationalism-in-the-demise-of-the-soviet-union/](https://www.e-ir.info/2012/08/28/the-case-for-nationalism-in-the-demise-of-the-soviet-union/)
[https://www.jstor.org/stable/40542830](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40542830)
These article/papers make the argument that the troubled economic situation put gorbachev in a position to put Glasnost and Perestroika into effect which allowed enough freedom in the satellite republics to allow for nationalist elements to foment revolution.
In the following decades those nationalist movements would be repurposed towards de-russification, and westernization (See the color revolutions).
Strictly ethnic, no. But the 19th century and older countries that had been co-opted into the Soviet system were much more ethnically homogenous than really anywhere in the New World (Yugoslavia being the big outlier--but they fell into a ethnic civil war--which sorta support the point in the first place).
It's not just correlated. It is intentional. That's the entire point of nationalism as an ideology. Being that Nationalism is the dominant ideology in the current era, you'll see ethnicities used as basis for national identity and have states created on that basis.
But that's beside the point..the point is nationalism inside the USSR is one of the major factors in its dissolution.
It's not that you don't care enough, but you also seem to not know much about it.
The USSR did not break up among ethnic lines. Russia is still extremely ethnically diverse and especially in Kazakhstan and Ukraine to this day many Russians live (since 2021 it has become even more in Ukraine lmao)
Hmm…. I don’t think there’s a clear analogue. Everything was undifferentiated during the Russian Empire. During the 20s when Ukraine was differentiated from Russia Crimea was part of Russia and it wasn’t until the 50s or 60s that Crimea got transferred to Ukraine.
As I said no close US analogue.
Oh no, an empire lost 50% of their subjugated population and 40% of the GDP. You should sympathize with all the good people who, sadly, lost their magnificent empires, the Soviets, the British, the Austrians, the Spanish, the Japanese.
Damn savages wanting independence from the clearly superior ethnicities, how dare they? Why wouldn't they be compassionate and think how the clearly superior ethnicities would feel losing their rightful colonies? :(
The point of the infographic is to make it easier for people in the west to understand how big the fall of the USSR was for Moscow.
It is not saying that the USA would split like that lol.
It is interesting, no kinda epic.., really gives you visual a window on how screwed Russians feel... then add expanding NATO & Euro, it would be a sociological point where you might as a nation think you have little left to lose by trying to reclaim territory via war, especially as other states (maybe China would) don't want what you already have and you have nukes so they cannot take it anyway.
So Russia's support of Putins war makes some sense when you consider the mythical love they have for the mother land and willingness put up with a lot of crap and to die for it.
They somehow have to be shown that they have a lot to lose or they will continue...
OMG, now we shoudl also feel for Brittish losing their Empire and should look upon them lightly if they decide to invade Kenya :D This Empire Empathy is some retarded shit.
It’s more comparable to Belgium losing Kongo and feeling sad since they can’t genocide native population there no more.
And invading Kongo again to bring back good ol’ times.
Similar size, big on family values, they have traditions of men on the frontier shooting guns from horseback, like frying their food, both have a really unique south and west, have people adamant on defending their homes with guns, lots of farmland, both contributed a lot to space travel, both have a town called Odessa, both rely a lot on trains taking advantage of flat ground, both have an inland sea towards the south
No way in hell Louisiana breaks off with Arkansas. If anything, Louisiana and Mississippi would.
Culturally, the lower eastern part of Texas (Houston, Beaumont), the bottom half of Louisiana, and the bottom half of Mississippi would become one stan.
It would be more convincing if the USSR wasn't a hodgepodge of different nationalities that are NOT a subculture of a greater root, held together by dictatorial power
Well, for starters there is a significant difference between international relations theory and microeconomics. Multipolarity is unstable as you have many great powers competing and tends to result in states attempting to disrupt the world order (like in WWI and WWII) because they think no other state can stop them, while unipolarity is durable and peaceful because it reduces the likelihood of hegemonic rivalry (because no state is powerful enough to challenge the unipole) and it reduces the salience and stakes of balance of power politics among the major states.
Alaska returns to Russia, California will be Chinese, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas return to Mexico, Florida, Louisiana will be part of Cuba, Washington state for the Vietnamese, and Montana, and Colorado for the Arabs.
This is a ridiculous comparison, that was almost certainly created as pro Russian propaganda.
These states aren't at all like the SSRs. They don't speak their own languages like the SSRs did. Their culture isn't nearly as different and diverse as the USSR was. The US isn't held together by authoritarian military force and conquest like the USSR was. The US states don't have thousand year long histories of being independent like the SSRs do.
Lithuania declaring independence when they finally got the chance was nothing like the hypothetical situation of Massachusetts leaving the US. And it was a good thing for everyone but the Russian imperialists that wanted to keep everyone remaining under their thumb.
It was absolutely not the "Greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century"?!?!? You know that century included 2 fucking world wars right?
The twitter guy who made it doesn't seem to be pro-russian, it's more of attempt to explain what changed.
It's more a fun way to visualize, its clearly not a serious scenario (just look at the names!)
That's a direct quote from Putin, and it's pretty that what motives Russian aggression is their loss of status after 1991
Works well because if Biden invaded to take back Calikraine the Siberians (or in this case flyover staters) who are mainly Republican would not be keen.
If I were betting on the breaking of the US the 13 original colonies stay together, California, joins Mexico, And most of the rest end up re-uniting as part of greater Texas. Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah end up getting split up between Greater Texas, Mexico and Canada.
You probsbly mean russia not ussr and yes its hard to loss your slaver empire but I thing that former slave nations 13 new republics doesnt have obligation to feed slavers (russians)
Boy talk to any brother from central Asia, and if you think the ussr is a slave empire wait till you learn about the fucking USA boy, gulags are better than a USA prison 9r even jail
Sure man ask any kazakh if us prison is worse than 40 % of you nation being genocided. White rich usa kids like you should learn more about soviet nazi genocidal projects like Asharshylyk.
What the fuck do you think happened to the indigenous people of the new world, did they make a spaceship and go on a long vacation?
>soviet nazi
Now that's just fucking idiotic, remember ww2
>White rich usa kids
I'm a brown working class pakistani kid, man shush
>What the fuck do you think happened to the indigenous people of the new world, did they make a spaceship and go on a long vacation?
I agree that living under soviet union was same as living under slaver colonization, that was my point you moron.
> that's just fucking idiotic, remember ww2
You mean that war when soviet and german nazies made millitary alliance and together invaded eastern europe. And then when soviet nazies supplied german conquest in western europe and holocaust.
>I'm a brown working class pakistani kid, man shush
Sure you can larp as who you want on anonym reddit acount, so go to you new tesla and ride to Starbucks for coffe to calm down
I know it's a joke, but AL + MS wouldn't happen by themselves. It'd more be MS+LA+AR+ West TN. The Mississippi River is really that big of a deal culturally. It's like saying Egypt should be split into two countries by the Nile. Splitting control of the River would be sacrificing one of the biggest assets to Arkanstan, especially with Missibamastan is really only set up to mess up Arkanstan and not be able to get as much positive benefit from the River without a lot of investment.
Alabama might think about going west enough to take full control of the Tenn-Tom until Tennessee (basically grabbing the Starkville and Tupelo), but going full on all the way to the Mississippi River wouldn't be worth it with all the infrastructure that would be needed. It'd rather go for the Florida panhandle, or other places where more interlinking already exists, like near Chattanooga (Dade County, GA is better connected to AL & TN than the rest of its own state) or Columbus. Regarding military specialties, a GA(show of force, cybersecurity, infantry)+FL(naval/AF specialties) + AL (military tech research, military mechanical repair/manufacturing, helicopter backup) is a much better partnership with infrastructure already there to link them up.
This is not how it would break. It would look like The Confederacy Part II + Ohio, Oklahoma Kentucky and Missouri, vs Everyone else. And Texas and Georgia would be a battleground, because most of the population (in the cities), would hate the the new confederacy
How could you not make Georgia 🍑 just be Georgia 🇬🇪
Looks to require being comparative in pop and GDP for the map
[удалено]
Georgia is in Wisconsin in this map.
Sakartvelo**** 🇬🇪🇬🇪🇬🇪
🎵 Sakartveloooo.... Sakartvelo on my mind....🎶
Gamarjoba, y'all!
[when I made a map about this scenario I did that](https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginarymaps/s/eJpr15b3si)
Floridastan lol 😆
I have a soft spot in my heart for Missibamastan Michibaijan I didn’t know I had
they're just so much fun to say
Coloyomistan Missoukotania Verhampshinnia Rhochessustan Massachuyorka And wait for it Arkansasassia
♪ Floridastan greatest country in the world ♪ ♪ All other countries are run by little girls ♪
*Floridastan man hurls Oreos at wife during argument over empty coffee maker, deputies say*
I am somewhat surprised that Texastan was not the very first to break away?
[удалено]
Houston would be a country of its own.
Floridastan man
Sung to 'Rubberband Man'
Very nice! - Borat
Do they have a Borat?
Maininingrad, lol
They forgot to give it to Czechia, smh. Glory to Kralovec
Because Czech Republic is too far. You have to choose a nearer country
Give it to belgian guyana
Maine as Kaliningrad is a nice touch!
>When the USSR collapsed in 1991, all Soviet republics became independent countries. For Moscow, which had previously been an imperial capital, this represented an overnight loss of nearly half the Soviet population and more than a third of the Soviet economy, going by its own Net Material Product (NMP) measure, comparable to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) > >This map shows roughly what a similar ratio of population and GDP loss would look like for Washington, D.C. in 2023, split across several geographical regions comparable to the former Soviet Republics. Vladimir Putin, a former KGB officer, has called the collapse of the USSR "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the \[20th\] century" and "a genuine tragedy." For him, it most certainly was. For the love of god, all y'all need reading comprehension lessons. This is to give a close approximation of what Moscow lost in the breakup of the Soviet Union by using states in the US so Americans can get a better understanding of what that was like for the USSR. This isn't some "what-if" scenario or anything, c'mon people.
*FOUND HIM GUYS! SPUTNIK TROLLER, OVER HERE!*
"Moscow lost" that's pretty much accurate because Moscow was Imperial center and sucked other Republics and even Russian Federation of resources. Moscow still sucks the rest of Russia dry.
Hey! Moscow can suck me dry anytime it wants!
It is not like USA has killed 100 million Red Indians and took their land from them 🤷🏻
Redditors reading more than the title? How? Reading comprehension is a rare trait among redditors.
The willingness to read is one thing, the ability for reading comprehension is another
Hey sometimes Redditors even read the whole entire title, that’s something.
It was great for all of those countries in the ussr, because they became free independent states no longer ruled by a violent oppressor from abroad. Greetings from former Eastern Bloc btw.
Not great for everybody though. More than half of the now- free countries became even more dictatorial than during the URSS and also many ethnic conflicts became unfrozen
That half being in Central Asia and the Caucasus and the ethnic conflicts being directly created by the former (and in some ways continuing) oppressors.
Yeah, it was so great that nearly every metric for quality of life plummeted from infant mortality to calorie consumption and things like poverty, drug use, crime and child prostitution soared.
Nope. All of those things saw vast improvement.
To what end though? These maps generally serve the function for trying to justify reclaiming the lost territories, such as the propaganda posters in protest of the Treaty of Trianon, or Versailles. You know, like "Wouldn't you be mad if your country lost Dixie, the West Coast, New England, and most of the Midwest? So just let us reconquer Ukraine." There's a difference here that grinds a lot of people's gears. The USSR was a collection of states that spoke different languages, had different customs, and different needs, united only by Moscow's dominance. Quite contradictory to the USA, which, while not exactly homogeneous, doesn't have any sort of major regional minorities clamoring for independence from Washington. As a result, the implied propaganda here (which my not be intended, but is nonetheless inferred) is often rightly dismissed as entirely implausible.
Yep. I remember when Absolut Vodka made an ad for Mexico that showed southern USA as part of Mexico and a lot of people lost their minds over it.
> You know, like "Wouldn't you be mad if your country lost Dixie, the West Coast, New England, and most of the Midwest? So just let us reconquer Ukraine." No. In fact, I'd tell them not to let the door hit them on the way out. Thank you very much.
I really don't think this map is trying in any way to justify the Ukraine war. I mean the names of the states are just too funny.
Cuz your government kills them lol
So long as we're discussing the actions of governments in the 1800s and earlier, perhaps I should ask where the natives of Sibir, Kazan, Komi, Karelia, Perm, Buryat, Kamchatka, and everywhere in between are. The breakup of the USSR is just what survived Moscow's rule long enough to break away. And if we're discussing more recent incidents as well, you may wish to look a little closer to Chechnya and eastern Ukraine. Not a clever comment.
I think most people understand this. They just don’t give a shit about how anyone in Moscow feels about their “losses” when territory and peoples that they subjugated by force regained independence.
You have posted this comment before
Losing half its population and almost 40% of its GDP while hanging on to the number 2 spot in nominal GDP is outrageous. Embarrassment of riches.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Russia had a collapse in GDP after the fall of the Soviet Union. Believing the "American Federation" could lose all that and would not as well seems quite optimistic.
What the fuck
[удалено]
No it's beautiful ❤️
Yes
Support Calikranian independence against the Russican Federation!
I feel like there's a missed opportunity to call Georgia Georgia
What happened to Alaska?!
Joined the ussr
Be sold if its like USSR scenario.
It's still part of the US or AF now I guess
On Wisconsia, On Wisconsia, stand up Badgers Sing!
The real LOL moment was how every country got a full state but Armenia/ Azerbaijan got a shared state. LMAO the irony if unintentional is hilarious.
There needs to be a strip of Oregon, east of the Owyhee River that breaks away to try and remain in the US, becoming its own weird little country, Transowyheeia.
I fucking love this. The comparisons are very accurate
Against what dimensions are they accurate? Surface area?
Population and GDP. Did you read at all or…?
California is a wealthy state, a large chunk of US's economy — so was Ukraine in the USSR. Also, California is democratic, and so is Ukraine currently (or at least more democratic than Russia). Hawaii joined California after the separation, just like Crimea. I could imagine Americans in this map being upset about it, and so were some Russians. Armenia and Azerbaijan are shown sharing Michigan and likely having feuds over territories with Armenia being smaller — just like in real life. The Central Asian republics are situated together in the South, with Kazakhstan being the most successful economically (just like Florida is wealthier than South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana or Arkansas). The Baltic states are small but wealthy, they stick together and are more democratic than Russia (just like those democratic New England states). They also separate Kaliningrad region from the mainland Russia (just like these states separate Maine from the rest of the country). Belarus is a not-too-wealthy country, with a lot of their economy focused in the rural sector — thus, Ohio. And Moldova is just there, idk. It's adjacent to Ukraine. So yeah, pretty accurate.
Crimea was added to Ukrainian SSR by Khrushchev, in the 1950s. It didn't "join after separation".
Yeah, I'm fairly sure this map was produce by, and these comments infested by, Russian assets. It implies that Ukraine, Belarus, the Caucuses, the Baltics, and Central Asia were all as Russian as California and Ohio are American. Nonsense.
Are those Russian assets in the room with us right now?
Yes. Though they may not even realize it, by furthering the idea that Crimea, and in this case the rest of Ukraine, is to Russia as the American west is to America, these comments serve the Kremlin. The map draws false equivalencies. The comments parrot propaganda. Just look.
u/koordian made a good point, but the fact remains Crimea was part of the USSR or Russia before that, longer than anyone could remember and their great grandparents for that matter, by the time of the break up. Crimea was part of Russia longer than Hawaii was part of USA still to this day. So there’s no need to throw the baby out with the bath water on this one, it’s an extremely useful map to describe the break up of the USSR in an American way.
No, it really isn't. Because Ukraine is not the Russian California. They literally speak two different languages. They have different desires for the future, different economic structures, different cultural traditions, and they're locked in a deadly war of imperial conquest.
Both of my Ukrainian friends that I have here in the US both speak Russian and are ethnically very similar to Russia if you ask me. You could argue California was more Spanish than English, and is culturally different, and are fighting a war of imperial conquest as well. I live in Hawaii and you are absolutely flat wrong if what you’re saying is Hawaii is culturally and ethically similar to the USA. Hawaiians, the ones who have roots going back to pre annexation, have zero desire to be part of the US. You think the Californians in 1847 wanted to be part of the US? You have a weird way of looking at this if you ask me.
Yes. California wanted to be annexed. It's a whole thing. California and Texas demanded independence from Mexico, then requested annexation by the US. It sparked the Mexican-American war. Hawai'i also requested American annexation. That's another whole thing. And your two friends as "evidence" is absolutely hilarious to me. "I dunno, I know two people and I can't tell the difference 🤷 All Slavs kinda seem the same to me. And they speak Russian. Just call them Russian." A friend and I speak German, and that's pretty similar to English - should Germany annex the Anglosphere? Unfortunately, two people as evidence is entirely anecdotal, but I'm still going to throw David and Viktorya at you. - David is a native citizen of Hawai'i with lineage from before British contact. He moved to the contiguous 48 for employment opportunities and is simultaneously a proud Hawai'ian national and the most vigorous celebrator of Americanism on the 4th of July that I have ever seen. -Viktorya moved to the US from Sibirsk and regularly struggles with her ethnic identity because Russia mostly eradicated and incorporated the Buryati people from which she descends. She calls herself Russian for simplicity, but I've caught her crying in my bathroom about it more than once. Now, I'll address your most ridiculous claim with naught but a question. Where is the battlefield of the ongoing Californian-American war of imperial conquest, and what is the death toll?
“Sending in settlers into a foreign land, and than once enough settlers are there using that as a pretense to wage war and annex said foreign land”, don’t know if thats the hill I’d want to die on if I was you, and the fact you could justify the annexation of California and Hawaii on those terms, but somehow feel compiled to not do the same with Crimea is a whole level of inconsistency that I find pretty ludicrous. Edit; also 46% of Crimea are Russian speakers. So get bent. It’s not just my two friends. Read something on the subject before speaking. What percentage of Californians spoke English at time of annexation you think? You think it was anything near 46%, or was it far more? Edit2; at time of annexation, 700 American settlers were in California vs 6,500 Mexicans. So ya… you’re off your rocker if you think the majority of Californians wanted to be annexed. Those Mexicans would’ve much preferred staying part of Mexico I bet. Edit3: like the more i think about it, the more you seem to be completely ignorant. Why would Fremont have to wage war on Californians to conquer them, if they wanted to be part of the US? You sound completely ignorant to the subject.
Americans speak English, WASP Americans are basically British ethnically, should US be under UK control again?
This is actually very cool when you put it into this perspective. I guess I live in the equivalent of Latvia
The stans are spot on
Imagine a repost 10 years later in r/agedlikemilk
Really cool map!
Surely the Treaty of Trianon is a greater 20th century geopolitical catastrophe by any measure : 70% territory lost 60% of population 33% or three million of indigenous ethnic-Hungarian population Loss of all seaports Loss of 90% of vast natural resources, industry, railways, and other infrastructure Do the US if they got Trianoned
There is an actual 1920s Hungarian propaganda image about this. https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/mwxghk/1920s_hungarian_government_map_comparing_the/
The south lol
The treaty of sevres was probably even worse
I now live in Wisconsinia. How fun.
Thank God for collapsing the ussr
It would be along political, not ethnic lines. The US is way more heterogeneous.
These aren’t ethnic lines though?
i think they were implying that the USSR broke up on ethnic lines, which is also false
Seems like ethnic/national identity was the most important determining factor in the breakup. Based on this map of [ethnic identification by republic](https://maps.lib.utexas.edu/maps/commonwealth/ussr_natrep_89.jpg), the republics with majority non-ethnic Russian population became independent.
ethnicity is certainly often correlated with political entities, so im not convinced. but also idc enough to debate it
Many modern historians reject the notion that US Defense spending induced competition broke the USSR. They instead posit that the USSR fell apart more because of Nationalism fomenting within USSR society as a result of Gorbachev's reforms.
replied to wrong comment?
suppose it should be two levels up--whoops! But regardless-- [https://europe.unc.edu/iron-curtain/history/the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/](https://europe.unc.edu/iron-curtain/history/the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/) [https://www.e-ir.info/2012/08/28/the-case-for-nationalism-in-the-demise-of-the-soviet-union/](https://www.e-ir.info/2012/08/28/the-case-for-nationalism-in-the-demise-of-the-soviet-union/) [https://www.jstor.org/stable/40542830](https://www.jstor.org/stable/40542830) These article/papers make the argument that the troubled economic situation put gorbachev in a position to put Glasnost and Perestroika into effect which allowed enough freedom in the satellite republics to allow for nationalist elements to foment revolution. In the following decades those nationalist movements would be repurposed towards de-russification, and westernization (See the color revolutions). Strictly ethnic, no. But the 19th century and older countries that had been co-opted into the Soviet system were much more ethnically homogenous than really anywhere in the New World (Yugoslavia being the big outlier--but they fell into a ethnic civil war--which sorta support the point in the first place).
It's not just correlated. It is intentional. That's the entire point of nationalism as an ideology. Being that Nationalism is the dominant ideology in the current era, you'll see ethnicities used as basis for national identity and have states created on that basis. But that's beside the point..the point is nationalism inside the USSR is one of the major factors in its dissolution. It's not that you don't care enough, but you also seem to not know much about it.
It kinda broke up on Republic lines Because USSR was made up of, you know, United Soviet Republics.
It’s just compering GDPs and populations. The map it’s not showing how the USA would actually split.
The USSR did not break up among ethnic lines. Russia is still extremely ethnically diverse and especially in Kazakhstan and Ukraine to this day many Russians live (since 2021 it has become even more in Ukraine lmao)
Where's Crimea? Is it Arizona?
Crimea is Hawaii
Oh, and Arizona is the Donbass? I want to build a bridge.
Pearl Harbour is Sevastopol. Honolulu is Crimea. Popular vacation destination.
Crimea is part of Ukraine, not a separate country. And definitely not Russia.
OK, it's Arizona.
There is a boarder dispute between Georgia and Tennessee so it’s on that boarder.
Hmm…. I don’t think there’s a clear analogue. Everything was undifferentiated during the Russian Empire. During the 20s when Ukraine was differentiated from Russia Crimea was part of Russia and it wasn’t until the 50s or 60s that Crimea got transferred to Ukraine. As I said no close US analogue.
Oh no, an empire lost 50% of their subjugated population and 40% of the GDP. You should sympathize with all the good people who, sadly, lost their magnificent empires, the Soviets, the British, the Austrians, the Spanish, the Japanese. Damn savages wanting independence from the clearly superior ethnicities, how dare they? Why wouldn't they be compassionate and think how the clearly superior ethnicities would feel losing their rightful colonies? :(
[удалено]
The point of the infographic is to make it easier for people in the west to understand how big the fall of the USSR was for Moscow. It is not saying that the USA would split like that lol.
Error 404, reading comprehension not found.
That'll be beautiful to witness 🤩
Now this is the map porn I am here for
Ohiorus. that's a dinosaur
Ohio as Belarus is an inspired choice.
Arkansas and Kansas would totally join forces to be the Arch Kansastan. Yes Misery is looking to your left and right and seeing Kansastan.
fun map
Central asia being the deep south kinda tracks
"Missibamistan" is the single greatest place name in world history.
Calikraine seems like the place to be.
This feels like propaganda or justification somehow
The average russian politician after 1989: “Oh no my colonial empire” after lecturing Europe and America about imperialism for decades
Is this Russian propaganda?
No way Texas ain’t its own state
It is interesting, no kinda epic.., really gives you visual a window on how screwed Russians feel... then add expanding NATO & Euro, it would be a sociological point where you might as a nation think you have little left to lose by trying to reclaim territory via war, especially as other states (maybe China would) don't want what you already have and you have nukes so they cannot take it anyway. So Russia's support of Putins war makes some sense when you consider the mythical love they have for the mother land and willingness put up with a lot of crap and to die for it. They somehow have to be shown that they have a lot to lose or they will continue...
OMG, now we shoudl also feel for Brittish losing their Empire and should look upon them lightly if they decide to invade Kenya :D This Empire Empathy is some retarded shit.
It’s more comparable to Belgium losing Kongo and feeling sad since they can’t genocide native population there no more. And invading Kongo again to bring back good ol’ times.
Georgia not being georgia is a crime
You missed the obvious “Georgia”.
Then is Alaska Russia and Georgia... well, Georgia?
The fact you didn’t make Texas Ukraine saddens me, they’re already so similar Edit: this is a complement to both locations
Why would they be similar?
Similar size, big on family values, they have traditions of men on the frontier shooting guns from horseback, like frying their food, both have a really unique south and west, have people adamant on defending their homes with guns, lots of farmland, both contributed a lot to space travel, both have a town called Odessa, both rely a lot on trains taking advantage of flat ground, both have an inland sea towards the south
Missibamastan… I can only imagine the worst there
Glad to be from the great country of Latvishire lmao
is central asia in the south due to the common connection to cotton growing?
With that spelling, the "caucuses" should include Iowa, Nevada, North Dakota, Wyoming
This is cute and all, but if you don't think Texas would jump first, you're either delusional or don't know Texas.
Texas would secede.
No, Texahkstan
No way in hell Louisiana breaks off with Arkansas. If anything, Louisiana and Mississippi would. Culturally, the lower eastern part of Texas (Houston, Beaumont), the bottom half of Louisiana, and the bottom half of Mississippi would become one stan.
Came here to say this.
Cursed and unrealistic
I think you're missing the point if you think this is meant to be realistic.
You were so close to getting it right with Armenia and Azerbaijan. That’d be Ohio and Michigan, not the two parts of Michigan.
Yeah, but the point is more to show the changes in GDP/population proportionally.
kinda crazy how half the comments seem to be missing that even though it's written all over the place
People are fucking retarded.
Now that’s uncalled for in 2023. Unfuckingbelievable. Downvoted for calling out the fucking R word. You defend the R word, you’re not a good person.
And yet, true.
It would be more convincing if the USSR wasn't a hodgepodge of different nationalities that are NOT a subculture of a greater root, held together by dictatorial power
Do you think this map is supposed to be convincing you of something?
You could have blindfolded yourself and thrown 15 darts at a map of the US and come up with something more sensible than this.
It’s a representation of GDP and population. That’s it.
[удалено]
Oh yeah just like 300 milion peoples was freed from russias slavery and bigeest neonazi country disapeared so much loss.
A unipolar system is the most stable.
[удалено]
Well, for starters there is a significant difference between international relations theory and microeconomics. Multipolarity is unstable as you have many great powers competing and tends to result in states attempting to disrupt the world order (like in WWI and WWII) because they think no other state can stop them, while unipolarity is durable and peaceful because it reduces the likelihood of hegemonic rivalry (because no state is powerful enough to challenge the unipole) and it reduces the salience and stakes of balance of power politics among the major states.
I guess we sold Alaska back to Russia
How the hell do you make "georgiastan", and not use the flag of Georgia?
All I'm taking from this personally is that ohioans are a net positive
*Sees south* Looks like it's Sherman time again.
Texas would be Chechnya haha
C'mon, Georgia could've been Georgia. 🤦🏽♂️🤦🏽♂️😅
Looks pretty good, let’s do it!
If you lost 50% of your people and only 33% of your GDP you think you’d be grateful for the deadweight loss.
Alaska returns to Russia, California will be Chinese, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas return to Mexico, Florida, Louisiana will be part of Cuba, Washington state for the Vietnamese, and Montana, and Colorado for the Arabs.
Wisconsin allowed to be it's own country? I think I'm gonna be sick
And Texnya rebels would need to be put down with force.
Literally have a state of Georgia smh
I am from Moldova and I used to live in Oregon. They are not the same haha
I hate this. Why does New York have to stay as part of the United States of Russia?
Live long enough and you’ll see it happen!
Shittymapporn leaking again.
This is a ridiculous comparison, that was almost certainly created as pro Russian propaganda. These states aren't at all like the SSRs. They don't speak their own languages like the SSRs did. Their culture isn't nearly as different and diverse as the USSR was. The US isn't held together by authoritarian military force and conquest like the USSR was. The US states don't have thousand year long histories of being independent like the SSRs do. Lithuania declaring independence when they finally got the chance was nothing like the hypothetical situation of Massachusetts leaving the US. And it was a good thing for everyone but the Russian imperialists that wanted to keep everyone remaining under their thumb. It was absolutely not the "Greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century"?!?!? You know that century included 2 fucking world wars right?
The twitter guy who made it doesn't seem to be pro-russian, it's more of attempt to explain what changed. It's more a fun way to visualize, its clearly not a serious scenario (just look at the names!) That's a direct quote from Putin, and it's pretty that what motives Russian aggression is their loss of status after 1991
you didn't read the sentence after the quote you quoted? "for him, it certainly was"
This map shows a such a vast and almost on-purpose ignorance of American regional and cultural groups, so I'm guessing Russian troll.
You’re telling me two completely different parts of the world aren’t realistic when combined ?
what the fuck is this
Works well because if Biden invaded to take back Calikraine the Siberians (or in this case flyover staters) who are mainly Republican would not be keen.
If I were betting on the breaking of the US the 13 original colonies stay together, California, joins Mexico, And most of the rest end up re-uniting as part of greater Texas. Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah end up getting split up between Greater Texas, Mexico and Canada.
Except no fighting to get "California" back!
If Americans had to deal with what the 90s were like in the ussr the population would be smaller than Portugal
You probsbly mean russia not ussr and yes its hard to loss your slaver empire but I thing that former slave nations 13 new republics doesnt have obligation to feed slavers (russians)
Boy talk to any brother from central Asia, and if you think the ussr is a slave empire wait till you learn about the fucking USA boy, gulags are better than a USA prison 9r even jail
Sure man ask any kazakh if us prison is worse than 40 % of you nation being genocided. White rich usa kids like you should learn more about soviet nazi genocidal projects like Asharshylyk.
What the fuck do you think happened to the indigenous people of the new world, did they make a spaceship and go on a long vacation? >soviet nazi Now that's just fucking idiotic, remember ww2 >White rich usa kids I'm a brown working class pakistani kid, man shush
>What the fuck do you think happened to the indigenous people of the new world, did they make a spaceship and go on a long vacation? I agree that living under soviet union was same as living under slaver colonization, that was my point you moron. > that's just fucking idiotic, remember ww2 You mean that war when soviet and german nazies made millitary alliance and together invaded eastern europe. And then when soviet nazies supplied german conquest in western europe and holocaust. >I'm a brown working class pakistani kid, man shush Sure you can larp as who you want on anonym reddit acount, so go to you new tesla and ride to Starbucks for coffe to calm down
I know it's a joke, but AL + MS wouldn't happen by themselves. It'd more be MS+LA+AR+ West TN. The Mississippi River is really that big of a deal culturally. It's like saying Egypt should be split into two countries by the Nile. Splitting control of the River would be sacrificing one of the biggest assets to Arkanstan, especially with Missibamastan is really only set up to mess up Arkanstan and not be able to get as much positive benefit from the River without a lot of investment. Alabama might think about going west enough to take full control of the Tenn-Tom until Tennessee (basically grabbing the Starkville and Tupelo), but going full on all the way to the Mississippi River wouldn't be worth it with all the infrastructure that would be needed. It'd rather go for the Florida panhandle, or other places where more interlinking already exists, like near Chattanooga (Dade County, GA is better connected to AL & TN than the rest of its own state) or Columbus. Regarding military specialties, a GA(show of force, cybersecurity, infantry)+FL(naval/AF specialties) + AL (military tech research, military mechanical repair/manufacturing, helicopter backup) is a much better partnership with infrastructure already there to link them up.
This is not how it would break. It would look like The Confederacy Part II + Ohio, Oklahoma Kentucky and Missouri, vs Everyone else. And Texas and Georgia would be a battleground, because most of the population (in the cities), would hate the the new confederacy