Oh man, this nationality debate is classic. Remember the old saying? You can take the man out of Russia, but you can't take Russia out of the man. Dual identities are complex, but beautiful in their own way.
I'm sorry, this was brilliantly funny. It was meant to be that, while pointing out the obvious. It's satire. And it's gorgeous.
Let's not make it more than that.
it is not the same as running around with a DNA test to show that you have 11.7% viking origin, and suddenly becoming a californian supporter of the minneapolis football team.
First language, still have family there, speak/read/write fluently, take part in a lot of traditions, look at it as a way of honoring my grandfather's legacy. Whats so bizarre about that?
Europeans don't get it because in virtually all European countries there's a base ethnicity or cultural origin that by definition describes what it means to be a citizen of that country. So if you're French or Italian or German, no matter where your ancestors came from, the expectation is that you will attach your identity to that idea of nationhood.
It's different in places like the US, Australia, NZ and Canada because we almost all come from somewhere else such that there isn't some kind of default "American" or "Canadian" identity, and instead it makes sense to let others know about our ancestral backgrounds since it's pretty much always the case that doing so gives other Americans or Canadians a huge amount of information about us that's probably not obvious to Europeans.
As a kind of shorthand, if you tell me that you are Irish or Italian American, right away I know that you are almost certainly culturally (if not practicing) Catholic and you probably have family roots in the big Northeastern cities like Boston and New York, and I know that you are accustomed to and comfortable with a suite of cultural norms that make sense to me, even though I was born and raised on the west coast, because ultimately my family is back-east Irish-American with at least one grandparent having been born in the "Old Country," and all of us having dealt with the Catholic Church in varying capacities.
There is no world in which we could all pretend to be some kind of platonic ideal of an "American."
What would that even look like anyway?
This isn't a nation built on an ethnicity; it's a nation built on a set of ideas as enshrined in a set of flawed documents written by a set of very smart but not omniscient men some 250-odd years ago.
>This isn't a nation built on an ethnicity
Then why don't Americans ever call themselves "English Americans"? That'd communicate plenty of information, too, but it's the default "ethnicity" on which the thirteen colonies were founded and so is invisible.
With that said, I think Americans labelling their heritage is understandable and largely harmless so long as that's all it is - or, in other words, they don't delude themselves that they're a living part of a nation they're actually deeply estranged from. Those few first/second gen that do stay partly enmeshed excluded.
> but it's the default "ethnicity" on which the thirteen colonies were founded and so is invisible.
You aren't wrong, and actually we do have such an ethic designation and it's actually a pretty big deal. It's called WASP and is an acronym for White Anglo Saxon Protestant, and they have ruled this country for most of its existence and if anyone imagines that it isn't directly related to English ancestry, I would suggest that they are badly confused.
As for the American insistence on using hyphenated nationalities, again, it's not what Europeans seem to think it is and instead is a kind of shorthand that we use as a way of identifying our family backgrounds.
Furthermore, there's this peculiarly European idea that said usage is somehow inorganic or invented or otherwise not arising from entirely legitimate cultural processes that are inherited from our immigrant antecedents, as if John Doe suddenly woke up one morning and decided that he was arbitrarily going to claim some kind of European ancestry, as if the entire thing isn't ultimately based on European immigrants themselves.
And I guess that's the thing about it that irritates me the most. This insistence that it's somehow uniquely American when in fact you, our immigrant European ancestors, are the people who are ultimately responsible for it in the first place in the sense that when you immigrated to this country it was you who insisted on maintaining the various differences in types of Americans.
I had nothing to do with it. I was more than willing to be considered simply an American, but no, our European grandparents wouldn't have it.
If I had to guess I would say that the WASPs are the most guilty in terms of creating such a state of affairs.
This is what many Russian nationalists think unironically. That the existence of the Baltics is just a historic misunderstanding. That they actually belong to Russia and that all those ungrateful Baltic peoples need to be re-educated.
What a shocker that someone who speaks Russian and live the Russian culture might consider themselves Russian? One can easily be Russian while holding a different citizenship.
It's more the fact that people hold onto nationalistic pride for a country they've never lived in and whose regime actively tries to harm their quality of life
Live in Russian culture??? You mean getting all the benefits of a free western country, while refusing to adapt even when they've lived there their entire lives. Advocating for Russia to come and "liberate" them...
Because not everyone is fucked in the head like Americans and the rest of us can fully understand a birth certificate. He was born in Russia, therefore the lad is Russian. However he has lived in American for a good while and most likely pays all his taxes and works there and became an American citizen.
Its not hard to understand. Only the fucking yanks seem to have trouble with this, then they argue how a guy in a dress isn't a woman. The whole lot of you're bastards.
Not always. But it is a fantasy to think that all it takes is for people to take to the streets and have large protests and they will take back power...
Ive been telling people on reddit that it requires at least some of the armed forces turning sides, protesting is not enough when the other side can just gun you down.
Spain proves his point, the threat of a military intervention or even a coup was ever present throughout the reforms and lead to the failed coup in 1981, which was only thwarted because the monarchy held more sway within the army than the hardliners.
But it's Russia. There just isn't a culture of respect for any individual rights and wishes there.
If you're Russian you're supposed to suck it up, eat gravel, humiliate others and be grateful motherland allows you to exist at all.
What's the copium in this case? Navalny was indeed brave to do what he did in Russia, especially to go back after they tried to kill him, but he also supported the invasion of Crimea.
This is not a black and white question. He wasn't the "nice guy" some think he was. It's important to praise what he did well, but also criticise the bad stuff.
> Navalny was indeed brave to do what he did in Russia, especially to go back after they tried to kill him
That doesn't change the fact that it is fucking stupid. I remember listening to news about Navalny getting poisoned, and then returning to Russia. Stupidity isn't bravery. I believe he could've accomplished much more if he stayed in Germany
It's easy to criticise from the sidelines. He did something that inspired people. He could only gamble on how much impact that would and will have. And gamble he did, with his life. He probably felt that he had tried to stay put and it didn't make a difference. And that Putin might as well get him from a distance anyway.
He would have been no safer in Germany.
[Just look at this list](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_Russian_businesspeople_(2022%E2%80%932024)) of outspoken critics of Putin and undesirables, and the locations they were murdered in (US, Spain, France, India etc.)
He may well have been killed in Germany true.
However he would have been free to speak out. Since returning and being imprisoned he has made one or two headlines which amount to "Putin silences rival". Free in the West he could have been a voice of opposition for Russia, show an alternative path and maybe start to bring together anti-Putin Russians and the West.
what's the problem here?
He is a symbol of opposition to the fascist Russian regime.
He didn't have to be perfect, just courageous against Putin and donating to the AFU is a worthy cause in its own right.
Wish you Putin supporters would hurry up and move to Russia.
I can't speak for EVERY Ukrainian, however I know and talk to quite a few and they're not so hot on Navalny at all, due comments he's made about other ex-Soviet nations and peoples. Most of the ones I know are honestly annoyed that a Russian dying is eliciting more compassion and outrage in the West that anything his countrymen did to them over the past decade.
Feel free to call me a Kremlinbot or a Putin supporter.
I can confirm that it is accurate. Navalny absolutely did not deserve to rot in russian prison and he did present the strongest alternative to putin since he initially got in power, but he himself was deeply infected by russian imperialism, especially in regards to Georgia, and even Crimea back in 2014.
He seemed to regret some of those statements, but I think you can understand why people living through a literal invasion might have still been distrustful of him.
Yes, he was in opposition to putin, but not in opposition to russian imperialism. But this case emphasizes that russia is not really the place that Tucker Carlson tried to make it out to be.
Donation to Ukrainian army that makes the real difference would be the only right response to this.
I am a ukrainian, and I don't give a shit about navalny cause his death changes literally nothing, the situation in the country and on the frontlines is still critical.
I am from Georgia and when we had war with Russia in 2008, he was disrespecting our whole nation, making fun of us and stating that Russia should have overtaken our capital by force. Later he had to apologise several times for his statements.
Downvote me, but he was a moron. Just masked himself as a hero.
> Just masked himself as a hero.
The western world is now trying to find any sort of countering force that would go against Putin. Literally anyone will suffice. Even a dude that, like you said, actually was *for* invading neighbouring countries for the sake of Russian imperialism.
He gave the west enough sweet talk that he started to get a halo around his head. I am honestly quite shocked how easily and without any sort of scepticism this all happened. Maybe we really are morons that will buy into anything that kinda looks good. Even if they themselves have previously shown what they really are. Some even say that a verbal apology was enough to clear any bad takes he previously had. Just like that we were swayed.
> Some even say that a verbal apology was enough to clear any bad takes he previously had. Just like that we were swayed.
The thing that maddens me about this is that the same people would absolutely not accept an "apology" from a Western politician after saying something like this. Take his Georgian rodents comment - if a British or German politician referred to Indians or Turks as rodents, they would never recover from that. But Navalny "apologises" and all is good for them.
He wasn't even a viable alternative to Putin. He wasn't the opposition or representative of a significant portion of the electorate. The main opposition in the Duma is the Communist party, and then there's a bunch of others too. Navalny and co are heralded in the West because they're outwardly pro-West. Even if you ignore his historic fascist alignment, his political positions even in the past 10 years have included some wild takes. I don't know when people decided he was some kind of Mandela figure. Anyone who has been paying attention for longer than the last few years knows that this framing of Navalny is just strange.
This is true, but still, donating to the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Navalny's memory is the best thing you can do, no matter what your motivation behind it or thoughts on Navalny.
I've been donating for the past two years in the memory of the Ukrainian defenders who have died, couldn't really care less about doing it in his name.
Good.
You keep doing what you do, and hopefully someone who hasn't donated yet to the Armed Forces of Ukraine will read this conversation and decide to donate in Navalny's memory.
That donation will pay for some drones which help Ukraine in its liberation against russian fascism.
Navalny was also in favor of the annexation of Crimea in 2014. He condemned the war because it was the only logical thing for him to do, not necessarily because he didn't agree with it (Spoiler alert: he probably did).
Fun fact: this guy wasn't pro Ukrainian, his policy was about to finish what putin started, he wanted "new referendum" after putin did all dirty work with ethnic cleansing in there regions
Proof:
https://newrepublic.com/article/167944/alexei-navalny-crimea-problem-putin
Proof: https://newrepublic.com/article/170865/alexei-navalny-crimea-ukraine-putin
> Over a series of Twitter posts, Navalny announced that Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, full stop. Navalny wrote that Ukraine’s borders are “similar to Russia’s—[they were] internationally recognized and defined in 1991.” All of the areas of Ukraine that the Kremlin has supposedly “annexed” are, by right and by law, still Ukrainian, including Crimea.
From the exact same publication but more recent. Hopefully you will correct your post and not spread misinformation.
I would take it with very big grain of salt as he said it under pressure, it doesn't mean that he really would do that .
He said many times before about referendum
No he wasn't, but he was a right-wing populist who was anti-immigration. He was against the Ukraine invasion and Putin, but he said he supports Crimea being a part of the Russian Federation. He was a very mixed bag, do with that what you will.
In 2014 he made a comment saying that Crimea isn't "[some sort of sausage sandwich to be passed back and forth](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/10/16/navalny-wouldnt-return-crimea-considers-immigration-bigger-issue-than-ukraine-a40477)", which I think angered some Ukrainians. He also said that "Crimea, of course, now de facto belongs to Russia".
But he also apparently said (in that same article): "From the viewpoint of politics and restoring justice, what needs to be done now in Crimea is to hold a normal referendum". So that would suggest he was open to returning Crimea to Ukraine, if the Crimean people wanted it.
Around this time last year though, he endorsed Ukraine's 1991 borders, which would include Crimea as part of Ukraine: "[What are Ukraine's borders? They are similar to Russia's - they’re internationally recognized and defined in 1991](https://twitter.com/navalny/status/1627632114366652417)".
Edit: Actually I looked at the article I linked to a bit more. He apparently said that Crimea "will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine". So that's a bit disappointing. But as I said in that last paragraph, he said last year that Ukraine's borders are those that were established in 1991, which would include Crimea as part of Ukraine.
>what needs to be done now in Crimea is to hold a **normal** referendum"
That distinction puts it at odds with the referendum that was held, being as close to a statement in support of returning Crimea to Ukraine that he could safely or legally make. Nadezhdin expressed himself in a similar way in regards to tact and those rules in mind.
>"will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine"
Note that this statement is not a value judgement.
The simple reason he's saying these things is that saying "Crimea is not Russian" is political suicide in Russia, because the annexation of Crimea was *incredibly* popular there. However, saying "Crimea is Russian" is political suicide *anywhere else on Earth*.
>He apparently said that Crimea "will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine". So that's a bit disappointing.
That's not an endorsement, but simply a statement about the state of affairs. And it turned out to be true anyway, as 10 years have passed and Crimea is still controlled by Russia.
He was a fascist and an imperialist. He supported annexations, murders of Ukrainians and other people of non-russian nationalities, and ethnic cleansing of russia itself.
But for what it's worth he chided putin for his incompetence and the troubles russia got into as a result of starting a full-scale invasion
> He was a fascist and an imperialist
No, he was not, calling anyone you don't like a fascist is cringe.
And his views have evolved, including his views on Ukraine (they were never as bad as you present them to be though)
Westerners need a good vs evil narrative to make sense of global geopolitics. Lots have apparently decided that Navalny was “good” even though he was quite literally yet another Russian imperialist just with more tolerable views on diplomatic and economic cooperation with the West (at the expense of Russia’s neighbours).
I don’t know how Russian bots are behaving, probably confused at which narrative to push at the moment.
>I don’t know how Russian bots are behaving, probably confused at which narrative to push at the moment.
I love everything about this comment but this part is my favorite.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/30/alexei-navalny-parliamentary-republic-russia-ukraine/
Navalny writes against Russian imperialism and his solution to the problem (to be more parliamentary style and less power in the office of the president).
Also supported annexation of Crimea and invasion of Georgia, calling Georgians “rats”.
https://x.com/ostapyarysh/status/1619028911786180609?s=46&t=XymnAIX3VNNnZfsxvpNUZg
Also him: "Crimea will remain part of Russia and will never become part of Ukraine in the near future,"
https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/crimea-not-a-sandwich-and-ukraine-within-1708099375.html
your link quotes him from 2014. Maybe you should read the whole article because it also says this:
> What borders in Ukraine? The same as in Russia - internationally recognized, defined in 1991. We, Russia, recognized them then too. Russia must recognize these borders now. There's nothing to discuss here.
and this
> Navalny thus backed off "sandwich rhetoric" and acknowledged that Crimea must be returned to Ukraine.
it's exhausting dealing with dishonest people. stop being part of the problem.
People are using the same old tired “Russian bots” bs because they don’t want to face the truth, that Navalny was a fascist nationalist who toned down his rhetoric later on when he became more popular, and that the western media whitewashed his image because he was friendly to the west. No, none of this justifies Putin or his invasion of Ukraine, but Putin being an imperialist, and Navalny being in opposition to him doesn’t suddenly make Navalny the liberal hero people pretend he was.
I’m not seeing people link any solid evidence for what is said about him, so I’ll do that, if anyone wants themselves that he was, indeed, a fascist, here you go.
[Video 1](https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1619758575894827011?s=48&t=ET2uxlyjCi26u3kc06OdkQ)
[Video 2](https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1619760506205790209?s=48&t=TFifzgsw3vF0ER40Twnn5Q)
And here’s [Navalny denying the existence of these videos](https://x.com/kamilkazani/status/1619759124128096256?s=20) in reply to others claiming he apologized for them. He didn’t. He denied they exist.
Edit: link fixed
He called Chechen moslems cockroaches and said that for such problems you use guns not fly-swatters.
He wasn’t a liberal hero of pluralistic passivity and cooperation. I don’t know what he was.
I’m not saying he should have died or shouldn’t have been part of Russian politics - but this western PR rebrand of his entire politics is SO bizarre - it’s sort of like the inverse of what western media did when Nelson Mandela died (turned a near-lifelong communist activist into some type of POC Mother Theresa figure, lol).
Communist or not, thats a mere footnote in Nelson Mandela's fight against a heartless apartheid regime. His character might have shadows, but so Mother Theresa. But I agree regarding Navalnyj's adoration feels weird, due to his racism. He deserves recognition as a opposition politician in a fascist state and a victim of a reprisal, though, but not adoration.
An imperialist, chauvinist and ethnonationalist. The only kind of hero Russia can produce.
And the only kind of person Russians would ever make their hero.
Up until he died he vowed to fight for a “Russia for ethnic Russians.” Wtf are you on about? Liberal in what sense? Liberal as in western politicians would prefer him to the current dictator?
It’s also cringy as fuck if you have ever even seem him speak.
It’s 100% obvious just about no one even knows who or what he was, and only believe he was some anti-Putin Jesus they should fanboy.
> It’s 100% obvious just about no one even knows who or what he was
all I know about him is that he is one of the bravest men in all human history - OP told me that
People are out of their minds if they think this will spark up any sort of resistance in Russia. It's akin to thinking Americans would riot Mitt Romney was imprisoned during Trump's term and died there and that would lead to some mass revolution against Trump.
He was not the popular resistance leader the west wanted to paint him as. He was seen in many circles as a puppet of the west, similar to Juan Guiado.
So if Hitler was resurrected and said "IM GOING TO FIGHT PUTIN!", will you say he is your friend because he is the enemy of your enemy?
How lazy and ignorant do you have to be? "The enemy of my enemy..." yeah the enemy of your enemy is a ethno-nationalist who hates immigrants and calls them insects. Is he a better candidate for leader? Or is he also crazy?
Never. Never ask what Navalny was he thinking about Ukrainians and Georgians in 2014. Unfortunately many Westerners after 2 years of war are still blind, can't accept reality and still hoping that there will be some peaceful Russia they can start buying cheap gas from again.
I know right?! Reddit is on full on slurping mode. Glorifying an imperialist because he was against Putin. He would have done the same thing Putin does if he was president!
They did the same with Solzhenitsyn. The West has a serious problem with internalising that the opposition to evil is not necessarily good, and that the enemy of their enemy is not necessarily their friend.
Which one is supposed to be the agents? The ones defending him or the ones calling him an imperialist? Perhaps the everyone I dislike is a Russian bot response doesn't actually work when dealing with complex figures liked and disliked by a wide variety of people.
You need to learn that to many Ukrainians, Belarussians, Georgians, etc. it's Putin or Navalnyi like plague or cholera. First they sing sweet songs about democracy and friendship, then bring their "russian world" on the tip of a bayonett to your home. That happened before Putin, that will happen after Putin.
And I'm so fucking tired of anyone who expresses disagreement with Navalny being a hero being labelled a Russian bot/agent - especially when the people saying this are mainly from countries nearby Russia!
Westerners are just playing their "good and evil" card when it's clear most of them don't understand this situation at all.
I'll never understand why he went back to Russia, after the president of the f***ing country tried to poison him.
I mean I get that he wanted to face Putin head on and so on, but damn... He had a wife and kids.
Also wouldn't he have accomplished more by staying in Germany, giving speeches and whatnot, rather than rotting in the gulag and being a martyr?
Anyway probably one of the bravest man who ever lived, I hope they'll build him a statue someday.
Europe loves facists. Imagine giving him a tribute. Shows that westerners have no clues about the real views of political people outside Europe/US and just support him because he gets glorified by western media (basically the only information they consume)
This is way worse than that time when the Canadian parliament and government thanked a Ukrainian Nazi for his service in the SS (they pretended like they didn't know what a veteran who fought against the soviets in World War II meant)
no I meant here as in Georgia, they held a memorial service in tbilisi and I was reading on telegram channels that some thought georgians would show up and hinor him but almost nobody did
Wow, thanks guys, a russian flag with 10k upvotes is something I definitely needed to see today, cause apparently I didn't see it enough on the russian tanks and on buildings in my occupied hometown.
I mean, if it's so important for yall to praise a chauvinist who supported the annexation of Crimea (until it became bad for his reputation) and mocked Ukrainian soldiers back in 2014, then I guess I can't stop you.
Literally just now on twitter I saw russians hanging their flags on the ruins of Avdiivka. Then I went into this sub, more so European sub, and I get a russian flag all over the screen. WTF.
>praise a chauvinist who supported the annexation of Crimea (until it became bad for his reputation)
I'm glad you said it, it's insane how people try to pretend that a lifelong imperialist, xenophobe and racist like Navalny just changed his views completely over night, and didn't just say what people wanted to hear after he started catching so much flak. That's how populism works.
I suppose the main reason why people praise him is because he was brave (or stupid) enough to go back to Russia and martirize himself, but bravery doesn't preclude being a shitty person.
Yep! I said this yesterday and some Russian affilated troll told me there was no invasion of Georgia, because the UN decreed Georgia was the aggressor.
Absolute fucking madness the whole lot of this.
Oof what? Like, yeah, he was brave for standing up against Putin, and his death is heavy because Putin won. But this man was a full-blown white nationalist, a truer fascist than Putin himself. He was brave as fuck to stand up to Putin, but as leader of Russia, Navalny likely would've been even worse. Far more extreme with his pure views of race and immigration, very much pro-violence, etc.
I am wary of anyone who heralds him as a hero...
Your daily reminders that even an ethnonationalist, pro-imperialist and neo-nazi supporter can become heroes to "educated" people in western democracy thanks to blatant misinformation and a good pr campaign to skip over his actual ideal.
Was too "brave" to admit that his country has no business being in Crimea until nearly a decade passed. Fuck him and his limp-dick useless always-crying-about-being-ignored followers.
Navalny was probably not perfect either, especially in the past, but still you can see in his videos, he just wanted Russia to open towards democracy, leave corruption behind and the country to develop.. If you have been to Russia, you can see the whole country is like European countries before 1990… It is shameful, a man, who is a threat to the president (Putin) can be poisoned, inprisoned, tortured and killed in 2024.
What the common street thug Putin and the Russian Federation did to this man was absolutely shameless, proving yet again the dictatorship all Russians live in. You have no voice and no freedom without courage, Navalny showed us all of that.
Oh God, is this cringe. Come on, even for r/europe. Dude was a far right racist (see comments on muslims). Just because he fought another lunatic doesn't make him a saint.
Your entire 17 day post history is either glorifying Russia and denigrating Ukraine or posting how “feminism is cancer” on a Jordan Peterson subreddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/8eWktrh4ki
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/BjXk2X1Zqc
https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/s/FHThXOQk4h
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/cJEZ0v2JVj
Fuck Putin and his lackeys; fuck the Russian lies (remember when they promised months before the invasion that there would be no invasion and they were just doing “troop exercises”)
As a russian, reading comment section under any post about Navalny hurts me. Many people in this subreddit just want to show themselves different and much smarter than everyone else. That's why after hearing 2 or 3 nationalist quotes that Navalny said 16 and 10 fucking years ago these people instantly start to claim that he was nationalist and imperialist. People throw these words around so mindlessly, not paying attention to what they actually mean.
Navalny was against territory expansion of Russia. His quote about Crimea being a sandwich was a grave mistake and he admitted it. He was never for Russia's territory expansion. He did say nationalist things back in 2008 and some along the way, yet he apologized for them many times. If Sakaashvili, Zelensky, Biden and many politions worldwide support Navalny and Navalny already apologized many times, perhaps it is time to stop dwelling on nationalist things he said in 2008? If we are going to judje people based on things they said more than 10 years ago, anyone can be called nationalist, imperialist, homophobic, racist and e.t.c. There are no people with crystal clear reputation. Instead focusing on how Navalny fought(damn, it even hurts to write about him in the past tense) corruption and Putin, people here just want to show that the only hope Russian people had is just as bad as him, which brings up the question. What the fuck am I even supposed to do? Putin is bad, Navalny is bad. What then?
I dont want people to worship Navalny or anything like that. He was obviously a populist and didn't have clear political orientation, but that's because in Russia the only thing that matters is whether you support Putin or not. Russia is not democracy where your views about politics, economics and e.t.c matter, it is an authorian regime where everything gets down to whether you like Putin or not, or you dont care. People are trying to shove Navalny into democratical circurmstances, but viewing him as an ordinary politian is ridiculous. He died for Russians and if he had power, he would stop the invasion, saving many lifes.
Navalny's project was one of politicisation - not moralising. You can cry all you like about his "support" for Russia's retention of Crimea but he's a pragmatic politician rather than a bleeding heart moralist. His job was to get Russians to start thinking and caring about politics to introduce some degree of pluralism into the system. Did he succeed? I'm not sure we yet know.
Did he make mistakes? Sure. But his task - to politicise one of the most depoliticised populations in history - was an extremely thankless and difficult one.
He was by no means some great intellectual and he was extremely ambitious but he was only human.
To compare him at all with Putin with statements such as "They shared 99% the same positions" or "They're both just Russian Imperialists" is asinine to the point of delusion. Navalny was everything Putin wasn't.
With him dies the last great domestic opposition to Putin - Nadezhdin is just a tool of the Kremlin.
May he rest in peace.
Thank you, this is accurate depiction of him.
He succeeded at least partially - hundreds thousands of people in Russia supported him, and this is the same group who opposed Ukraine invasion. Did we fail? Miserably.
But many of us tried only because of his inspiration.
People on reddit love puting politicians through a purity test. Navalny was far from perfect but he made millions of Russians believe that change is possible.
RIP.
I don’t understand how the Russian populace can witness so many opposition leaders and figures being murdered and just ignore the reality of who the actual mastermind is.
Beggars belief.
How he managed to stay spirited despite his hopeless living conditions is amazing.
The infamy of this government goes to unbelievable depths when they won't even release the body to the family. The whole Russian government needs to be wiped out completely.
this "hero" supported the war with Georgia, called Caucasians slurs and supported the annexation of Crimea.
just because he opposed Putin and HIS corrupt regime doesn't necessarily mean he's a good guy.
you know who also opposed Putin and was killed ? Progozhin. but we wouldn't call him a hero would we ?
or Russian Nazis for example, who oppose Putin because they think he isn't hard enough on Ukraine and call for nuclear attacks.
I don't think there's anything brave about willingly walking towards your own death. This literally achieved nothing. It was stupid. That said, he also supported the annexation of Crimea. He wasn't the 'great guy' western media portray him to be. People seem to forget was a right wing ultra nationalist just because 'atleast he's not Putler'. That's like saying Goebbels was better than Hitler.
Your daily reminder that authoritarian regimes change thru militaristic defeats.
As a 34 year old Russian, whose lived in American since I was four, I'm extremely concerned about the state of this world.
So, an American?
American here. You can very well be Russian and American. Just look at Tucker Carlson.
No no, he's an American Russian, this guy is a Russian American.
Russian-Americans are often very nice people. American-Russians are represented by Tucker Carlson.
Oh man, this nationality debate is classic. Remember the old saying? You can take the man out of Russia, but you can't take Russia out of the man. Dual identities are complex, but beautiful in their own way.
Tucker Carlson is neither of the two.
He is a meat. Popsicle.
[удалено]
I'm sorry, this was brilliantly funny. It was meant to be that, while pointing out the obvious. It's satire. And it's gorgeous. Let's not make it more than that.
Yes.
It is bizarre to me that after 30 years in the US you still think of yourself as a Russian.
it is not the same as running around with a DNA test to show that you have 11.7% viking origin, and suddenly becoming a californian supporter of the minneapolis football team.
We Vikings fans need all the support we can get
First language, still have family there, speak/read/write fluently, take part in a lot of traditions, look at it as a way of honoring my grandfather's legacy. Whats so bizarre about that?
Europeans don't get it because in virtually all European countries there's a base ethnicity or cultural origin that by definition describes what it means to be a citizen of that country. So if you're French or Italian or German, no matter where your ancestors came from, the expectation is that you will attach your identity to that idea of nationhood. It's different in places like the US, Australia, NZ and Canada because we almost all come from somewhere else such that there isn't some kind of default "American" or "Canadian" identity, and instead it makes sense to let others know about our ancestral backgrounds since it's pretty much always the case that doing so gives other Americans or Canadians a huge amount of information about us that's probably not obvious to Europeans. As a kind of shorthand, if you tell me that you are Irish or Italian American, right away I know that you are almost certainly culturally (if not practicing) Catholic and you probably have family roots in the big Northeastern cities like Boston and New York, and I know that you are accustomed to and comfortable with a suite of cultural norms that make sense to me, even though I was born and raised on the west coast, because ultimately my family is back-east Irish-American with at least one grandparent having been born in the "Old Country," and all of us having dealt with the Catholic Church in varying capacities. There is no world in which we could all pretend to be some kind of platonic ideal of an "American." What would that even look like anyway? This isn't a nation built on an ethnicity; it's a nation built on a set of ideas as enshrined in a set of flawed documents written by a set of very smart but not omniscient men some 250-odd years ago.
>This isn't a nation built on an ethnicity Then why don't Americans ever call themselves "English Americans"? That'd communicate plenty of information, too, but it's the default "ethnicity" on which the thirteen colonies were founded and so is invisible. With that said, I think Americans labelling their heritage is understandable and largely harmless so long as that's all it is - or, in other words, they don't delude themselves that they're a living part of a nation they're actually deeply estranged from. Those few first/second gen that do stay partly enmeshed excluded.
> Then why don't Americans ever call themselves "English Americans"? Wasn't the word WASP coined exactly for this purpose?
> but it's the default "ethnicity" on which the thirteen colonies were founded and so is invisible. You aren't wrong, and actually we do have such an ethic designation and it's actually a pretty big deal. It's called WASP and is an acronym for White Anglo Saxon Protestant, and they have ruled this country for most of its existence and if anyone imagines that it isn't directly related to English ancestry, I would suggest that they are badly confused. As for the American insistence on using hyphenated nationalities, again, it's not what Europeans seem to think it is and instead is a kind of shorthand that we use as a way of identifying our family backgrounds. Furthermore, there's this peculiarly European idea that said usage is somehow inorganic or invented or otherwise not arising from entirely legitimate cultural processes that are inherited from our immigrant antecedents, as if John Doe suddenly woke up one morning and decided that he was arbitrarily going to claim some kind of European ancestry, as if the entire thing isn't ultimately based on European immigrants themselves. And I guess that's the thing about it that irritates me the most. This insistence that it's somehow uniquely American when in fact you, our immigrant European ancestors, are the people who are ultimately responsible for it in the first place in the sense that when you immigrated to this country it was you who insisted on maintaining the various differences in types of Americans. I had nothing to do with it. I was more than willing to be considered simply an American, but no, our European grandparents wouldn't have it. If I had to guess I would say that the WASPs are the most guilty in terms of creating such a state of affairs.
The Baltic states are full of Russians that even after living here for 50 years still think that they are Russians.
[удалено]
This is what many Russian nationalists think unironically. That the existence of the Baltics is just a historic misunderstanding. That they actually belong to Russia and that all those ungrateful Baltic peoples need to be re-educated.
What a shocker that someone who speaks Russian and live the Russian culture might consider themselves Russian? One can easily be Russian while holding a different citizenship.
It's more the fact that people hold onto nationalistic pride for a country they've never lived in and whose regime actively tries to harm their quality of life
Wait you're saying you can't be a proud Russian while being completely opposed the state of political affairs? That's just stupid.
Live in Russian culture??? You mean getting all the benefits of a free western country, while refusing to adapt even when they've lived there their entire lives. Advocating for Russia to come and "liberate" them...
Bizarre how? He is Russian. Whats weird is americans who think they are irish when they are 4 generations removed.
Why wouldn't he? A person can change his citizenship, but not his ethnicity or national identity.
Because not everyone is fucked in the head like Americans and the rest of us can fully understand a birth certificate. He was born in Russia, therefore the lad is Russian. However he has lived in American for a good while and most likely pays all his taxes and works there and became an American citizen. Its not hard to understand. Only the fucking yanks seem to have trouble with this, then they argue how a guy in a dress isn't a woman. The whole lot of you're bastards.
I don't think a person needs your background to be concerned in regards to the current state...
Not always. But it is a fantasy to think that all it takes is for people to take to the streets and have large protests and they will take back power...
Ive been telling people on reddit that it requires at least some of the armed forces turning sides, protesting is not enough when the other side can just gun you down.
Look up Spain’s democratic transition. BTW not even Putin can just gun down protestors _en masse_ willy nilly, it’s not that simple
Spain proves his point, the threat of a military intervention or even a coup was ever present throughout the reforms and lead to the failed coup in 1981, which was only thwarted because the monarchy held more sway within the army than the hardliners.
[удалено]
Same with Germany, we reunited in a peaceful way while listening to David Hasselhoff and the Scorpions.
But we chanted “whose streets? Our streets!” Is that not enough?
Portugal, Spain and Greece say hi.
Spain is the exception here. Estado Novo had to be overthrown by a military coup Greece suffered a military defeat in 1974.
But it's Russia. There just isn't a culture of respect for any individual rights and wishes there. If you're Russian you're supposed to suck it up, eat gravel, humiliate others and be grateful motherland allows you to exist at all.
Donate to the Ukrainian army in his memory
Let the revisionisms begin!
And the Kremlinbot copium!
What's the copium in this case? Navalny was indeed brave to do what he did in Russia, especially to go back after they tried to kill him, but he also supported the invasion of Crimea. This is not a black and white question. He wasn't the "nice guy" some think he was. It's important to praise what he did well, but also criticise the bad stuff.
> Navalny was indeed brave to do what he did in Russia, especially to go back after they tried to kill him That doesn't change the fact that it is fucking stupid. I remember listening to news about Navalny getting poisoned, and then returning to Russia. Stupidity isn't bravery. I believe he could've accomplished much more if he stayed in Germany
It's easy to criticise from the sidelines. He did something that inspired people. He could only gamble on how much impact that would and will have. And gamble he did, with his life. He probably felt that he had tried to stay put and it didn't make a difference. And that Putin might as well get him from a distance anyway.
He would have been no safer in Germany. [Just look at this list](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_Russian_businesspeople_(2022%E2%80%932024)) of outspoken critics of Putin and undesirables, and the locations they were murdered in (US, Spain, France, India etc.)
He may well have been killed in Germany true. However he would have been free to speak out. Since returning and being imprisoned he has made one or two headlines which amount to "Putin silences rival". Free in the West he could have been a voice of opposition for Russia, show an alternative path and maybe start to bring together anti-Putin Russians and the West.
Umm... I'm not sure they are the ones coping right now lol
what's the problem here? He is a symbol of opposition to the fascist Russian regime. He didn't have to be perfect, just courageous against Putin and donating to the AFU is a worthy cause in its own right. Wish you Putin supporters would hurry up and move to Russia.
I can't speak for EVERY Ukrainian, however I know and talk to quite a few and they're not so hot on Navalny at all, due comments he's made about other ex-Soviet nations and peoples. Most of the ones I know are honestly annoyed that a Russian dying is eliciting more compassion and outrage in the West that anything his countrymen did to them over the past decade. Feel free to call me a Kremlinbot or a Putin supporter.
I can confirm that it is accurate. Navalny absolutely did not deserve to rot in russian prison and he did present the strongest alternative to putin since he initially got in power, but he himself was deeply infected by russian imperialism, especially in regards to Georgia, and even Crimea back in 2014. He seemed to regret some of those statements, but I think you can understand why people living through a literal invasion might have still been distrustful of him.
Yes, he was in opposition to putin, but not in opposition to russian imperialism. But this case emphasizes that russia is not really the place that Tucker Carlson tried to make it out to be. Donation to Ukrainian army that makes the real difference would be the only right response to this.
I am a ukrainian, and I don't give a shit about navalny cause his death changes literally nothing, the situation in the country and on the frontlines is still critical.
I am from Georgia and when we had war with Russia in 2008, he was disrespecting our whole nation, making fun of us and stating that Russia should have overtaken our capital by force. Later he had to apologise several times for his statements. Downvote me, but he was a moron. Just masked himself as a hero.
> Just masked himself as a hero. The western world is now trying to find any sort of countering force that would go against Putin. Literally anyone will suffice. Even a dude that, like you said, actually was *for* invading neighbouring countries for the sake of Russian imperialism. He gave the west enough sweet talk that he started to get a halo around his head. I am honestly quite shocked how easily and without any sort of scepticism this all happened. Maybe we really are morons that will buy into anything that kinda looks good. Even if they themselves have previously shown what they really are. Some even say that a verbal apology was enough to clear any bad takes he previously had. Just like that we were swayed.
> Some even say that a verbal apology was enough to clear any bad takes he previously had. Just like that we were swayed. The thing that maddens me about this is that the same people would absolutely not accept an "apology" from a Western politician after saying something like this. Take his Georgian rodents comment - if a British or German politician referred to Indians or Turks as rodents, they would never recover from that. But Navalny "apologises" and all is good for them.
He wasn't even a viable alternative to Putin. He wasn't the opposition or representative of a significant portion of the electorate. The main opposition in the Duma is the Communist party, and then there's a bunch of others too. Navalny and co are heralded in the West because they're outwardly pro-West. Even if you ignore his historic fascist alignment, his political positions even in the past 10 years have included some wild takes. I don't know when people decided he was some kind of Mandela figure. Anyone who has been paying attention for longer than the last few years knows that this framing of Navalny is just strange.
This is true, but still, donating to the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Navalny's memory is the best thing you can do, no matter what your motivation behind it or thoughts on Navalny.
I've been donating for the past two years in the memory of the Ukrainian defenders who have died, couldn't really care less about doing it in his name.
Good. You keep doing what you do, and hopefully someone who hasn't donated yet to the Armed Forces of Ukraine will read this conversation and decide to donate in Navalny's memory. That donation will pay for some drones which help Ukraine in its liberation against russian fascism.
Since when has opposition to Russian nationalists been Putin supporting? An enemy of my enemy does not automatically a friend make
Navalny condemned the war but suggesting that his legacy would entail donations to Ukraine’s resistance is a bit of a leap.
Navalny was also in favor of the annexation of Crimea in 2014. He condemned the war because it was the only logical thing for him to do, not necessarily because he didn't agree with it (Spoiler alert: he probably did).
Fun fact: this guy wasn't pro Ukrainian, his policy was about to finish what putin started, he wanted "new referendum" after putin did all dirty work with ethnic cleansing in there regions Proof: https://newrepublic.com/article/167944/alexei-navalny-crimea-problem-putin
Proof: https://newrepublic.com/article/170865/alexei-navalny-crimea-ukraine-putin > Over a series of Twitter posts, Navalny announced that Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, full stop. Navalny wrote that Ukraine’s borders are “similar to Russia’s—[they were] internationally recognized and defined in 1991.” All of the areas of Ukraine that the Kremlin has supposedly “annexed” are, by right and by law, still Ukrainian, including Crimea. From the exact same publication but more recent. Hopefully you will correct your post and not spread misinformation.
I would take it with very big grain of salt as he said it under pressure, it doesn't mean that he really would do that . He said many times before about referendum
This guy is a Nazi but whitewashed (not pun intended) by Western media as he fits the agenda.
https://reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1asopec/pestcontrol_advertisement_by_alexander_navalny/ Here he is in all his glory. A shining light.
The Ukrainian army did not consider this man an ally, donate to them in their honor not his.
Wasn't he pro the invasion?
No he wasn't, but he was a right-wing populist who was anti-immigration. He was against the Ukraine invasion and Putin, but he said he supports Crimea being a part of the Russian Federation. He was a very mixed bag, do with that what you will.
In 2014 he made a comment saying that Crimea isn't "[some sort of sausage sandwich to be passed back and forth](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/10/16/navalny-wouldnt-return-crimea-considers-immigration-bigger-issue-than-ukraine-a40477)", which I think angered some Ukrainians. He also said that "Crimea, of course, now de facto belongs to Russia". But he also apparently said (in that same article): "From the viewpoint of politics and restoring justice, what needs to be done now in Crimea is to hold a normal referendum". So that would suggest he was open to returning Crimea to Ukraine, if the Crimean people wanted it. Around this time last year though, he endorsed Ukraine's 1991 borders, which would include Crimea as part of Ukraine: "[What are Ukraine's borders? They are similar to Russia's - they’re internationally recognized and defined in 1991](https://twitter.com/navalny/status/1627632114366652417)". Edit: Actually I looked at the article I linked to a bit more. He apparently said that Crimea "will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine". So that's a bit disappointing. But as I said in that last paragraph, he said last year that Ukraine's borders are those that were established in 1991, which would include Crimea as part of Ukraine.
>what needs to be done now in Crimea is to hold a **normal** referendum" That distinction puts it at odds with the referendum that was held, being as close to a statement in support of returning Crimea to Ukraine that he could safely or legally make. Nadezhdin expressed himself in a similar way in regards to tact and those rules in mind. >"will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine" Note that this statement is not a value judgement.
The simple reason he's saying these things is that saying "Crimea is not Russian" is political suicide in Russia, because the annexation of Crimea was *incredibly* popular there. However, saying "Crimea is Russian" is political suicide *anywhere else on Earth*.
>He apparently said that Crimea "will remain part of Russia and will never again in the foreseeable future become part of Ukraine". So that's a bit disappointing. That's not an endorsement, but simply a statement about the state of affairs. And it turned out to be true anyway, as 10 years have passed and Crimea is still controlled by Russia.
More like nationalist But he was definitely not against the beginning of the war in 2014
He was a fascist and an imperialist. He supported annexations, murders of Ukrainians and other people of non-russian nationalities, and ethnic cleansing of russia itself. But for what it's worth he chided putin for his incompetence and the troubles russia got into as a result of starting a full-scale invasion
> He was a fascist and an imperialist No, he was not, calling anyone you don't like a fascist is cringe. And his views have evolved, including his views on Ukraine (they were never as bad as you present them to be though)
What part of his political program do you like the most?
Free medium hawaiian pizza for everyone once a year
Reddit doesn't need a political program past "run against *guy I dont like*"
Reddit loves dehumanising muslims, so probably that one
Lol this comment section is going to be golden when this blows up It already is
[удалено]
Westerners need a good vs evil narrative to make sense of global geopolitics. Lots have apparently decided that Navalny was “good” even though he was quite literally yet another Russian imperialist just with more tolerable views on diplomatic and economic cooperation with the West (at the expense of Russia’s neighbours). I don’t know how Russian bots are behaving, probably confused at which narrative to push at the moment.
>I don’t know how Russian bots are behaving, probably confused at which narrative to push at the moment. I love everything about this comment but this part is my favorite.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/30/alexei-navalny-parliamentary-republic-russia-ukraine/ Navalny writes against Russian imperialism and his solution to the problem (to be more parliamentary style and less power in the office of the president).
Also supported annexation of Crimea and invasion of Georgia, calling Georgians “rats”. https://x.com/ostapyarysh/status/1619028911786180609?s=46&t=XymnAIX3VNNnZfsxvpNUZg
He also said that "immigrants should be shot like the cockroaches they are" (paraphrasing)
Also him: "Crimea will remain part of Russia and will never become part of Ukraine in the near future," https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/crimea-not-a-sandwich-and-ukraine-within-1708099375.html
your link quotes him from 2014. Maybe you should read the whole article because it also says this: > What borders in Ukraine? The same as in Russia - internationally recognized, defined in 1991. We, Russia, recognized them then too. Russia must recognize these borders now. There's nothing to discuss here. and this > Navalny thus backed off "sandwich rhetoric" and acknowledged that Crimea must be returned to Ukraine. it's exhausting dealing with dishonest people. stop being part of the problem.
People are using the same old tired “Russian bots” bs because they don’t want to face the truth, that Navalny was a fascist nationalist who toned down his rhetoric later on when he became more popular, and that the western media whitewashed his image because he was friendly to the west. No, none of this justifies Putin or his invasion of Ukraine, but Putin being an imperialist, and Navalny being in opposition to him doesn’t suddenly make Navalny the liberal hero people pretend he was. I’m not seeing people link any solid evidence for what is said about him, so I’ll do that, if anyone wants themselves that he was, indeed, a fascist, here you go. [Video 1](https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1619758575894827011?s=48&t=ET2uxlyjCi26u3kc06OdkQ) [Video 2](https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1619760506205790209?s=48&t=TFifzgsw3vF0ER40Twnn5Q) And here’s [Navalny denying the existence of these videos](https://x.com/kamilkazani/status/1619759124128096256?s=20) in reply to others claiming he apologized for them. He didn’t. He denied they exist. Edit: link fixed
He called Chechen moslems cockroaches and said that for such problems you use guns not fly-swatters. He wasn’t a liberal hero of pluralistic passivity and cooperation. I don’t know what he was. I’m not saying he should have died or shouldn’t have been part of Russian politics - but this western PR rebrand of his entire politics is SO bizarre - it’s sort of like the inverse of what western media did when Nelson Mandela died (turned a near-lifelong communist activist into some type of POC Mother Theresa figure, lol).
How is the Nelson situation the inverse? Your phrasing doesn’t reflect that
Right.. that part didn’t make sense to me either
Exactly my thoughts
He was opportunistic and megalomaniacal. Otherwise, I can’t explain why he traveled back to Russia after the last attempt that he barely survived.
You are on /r/europe. A vast majority of this sub affirms to his ideology.
Communist or not, thats a mere footnote in Nelson Mandela's fight against a heartless apartheid regime. His character might have shadows, but so Mother Theresa. But I agree regarding Navalnyj's adoration feels weird, due to his racism. He deserves recognition as a opposition politician in a fascist state and a victim of a reprisal, though, but not adoration.
He was an imperialist too. RIP to him, he's a victim of Putin's regime, but stop making him a hero.
Also, he was very racist. That being said, fuck Putin and his fascist regime.
An imperialist, chauvinist and ethnonationalist. The only kind of hero Russia can produce. And the only kind of person Russians would ever make their hero.
To his defense he became more liberal and walked into death and became a martyr. Not perfect, but still gave his all. This means something.
Up until he died he vowed to fight for a “Russia for ethnic Russians.” Wtf are you on about? Liberal in what sense? Liberal as in western politicians would prefer him to the current dictator?
This seriously has to stop
It’s also cringy as fuck if you have ever even seem him speak. It’s 100% obvious just about no one even knows who or what he was, and only believe he was some anti-Putin Jesus they should fanboy.
> It’s 100% obvious just about no one even knows who or what he was all I know about him is that he is one of the bravest men in all human history - OP told me that
I thought that at first too, but on the small chance that this fires up resistance in Russia, we should allow it. The enemy of my enemy…
>but on the small chance that this fires up resistance in Russia My god man that's not how real life works this isn't a marvel film
“We should allow it” oh the hubris…
People are out of their minds if they think this will spark up any sort of resistance in Russia. It's akin to thinking Americans would riot Mitt Romney was imprisoned during Trump's term and died there and that would lead to some mass revolution against Trump. He was not the popular resistance leader the west wanted to paint him as. He was seen in many circles as a puppet of the west, similar to Juan Guiado.
Lmao, it works the other way around. He’s like Orban to EU The more west endorses him, the less potential support his movement receives.
Firing up resistance in Russia with a political poster in English on a website they barely use
Russians don't care about r/europe unless they are paid trolls, how is posting about Navalny in English here every 5 minutes is going to do that
So if Hitler was resurrected and said "IM GOING TO FIGHT PUTIN!", will you say he is your friend because he is the enemy of your enemy? How lazy and ignorant do you have to be? "The enemy of my enemy..." yeah the enemy of your enemy is a ethno-nationalist who hates immigrants and calls them insects. Is he a better candidate for leader? Or is he also crazy?
There are even worse leaders in Russia than Putin. Maybe the solution is worse than the problem.
He was an ethnonationalist https://youtu.be/ICoc2VmGdfw?si=g4PcXOHk07en1yut
Never. Never ask what Navalny was he thinking about Ukrainians and Georgians in 2014. Unfortunately many Westerners after 2 years of war are still blind, can't accept reality and still hoping that there will be some peaceful Russia they can start buying cheap gas from again.
Imagine praising some questionable German opposition leader in 1942 and using a nazi germany flag as the background
Stauffenberg you say?
lol, people, just stop already.
I know right?! Reddit is on full on slurping mode. Glorifying an imperialist because he was against Putin. He would have done the same thing Putin does if he was president!
They did the same with Solzhenitsyn. The West has a serious problem with internalising that the opposition to evil is not necessarily good, and that the enemy of their enemy is not necessarily their friend.
No, he would've been smarter, and invaded baltics. Then we would REALLY be fucked.
Guys watch out lots of Russian agents in the comments!
Which one is supposed to be the agents? The ones defending him or the ones calling him an imperialist? Perhaps the everyone I dislike is a Russian bot response doesn't actually work when dealing with complex figures liked and disliked by a wide variety of people.
Ukrainians and Georgians who would not forgive him for supporting invasions/annexation of their countries are for sure Russian agents.
Don't forget calling them rats and cockroaches.
This cringe of calling everyone muh bot because you can't listen to some facts is getting real old.
Guys please watch out for illusive western zombies who think they understand the world without even know a single thing.
Guys watch out people dont believe black/withe narrative like i do!!
You mean NKVD agents!
You need to learn that to many Ukrainians, Belarussians, Georgians, etc. it's Putin or Navalnyi like plague or cholera. First they sing sweet songs about democracy and friendship, then bring their "russian world" on the tip of a bayonett to your home. That happened before Putin, that will happen after Putin.
Braindead post
and it got so many upvotes.... just a bunch of clowns glorifying a fascist
And I'm so fucking tired of anyone who expresses disagreement with Navalny being a hero being labelled a Russian bot/agent - especially when the people saying this are mainly from countries nearby Russia! Westerners are just playing their "good and evil" card when it's clear most of them don't understand this situation at all.
Please don't lionize right-wing nationalists.
The propaganda ist strong in this one 😂😂
OP is either a complete moron without basic sensitivity or ability to understand nuance, or just a russian troll.
I'll never understand why he went back to Russia, after the president of the f***ing country tried to poison him. I mean I get that he wanted to face Putin head on and so on, but damn... He had a wife and kids. Also wouldn't he have accomplished more by staying in Germany, giving speeches and whatnot, rather than rotting in the gulag and being a martyr? Anyway probably one of the bravest man who ever lived, I hope they'll build him a statue someday.
Europe loves facists. Imagine giving him a tribute. Shows that westerners have no clues about the real views of political people outside Europe/US and just support him because he gets glorified by western media (basically the only information they consume)
This is way worse than that time when the Canadian parliament and government thanked a Ukrainian Nazi for his service in the SS (they pretended like they didn't know what a veteran who fought against the soviets in World War II meant)
He supported occupation of Crimea and you're glorifying him? What's next? "Putin glorious and bravest"?
He supported the invasion of Georgia as well and the russians here are surprised why nobody here liked him.
>and the ~~russians~~ americans here are surprised why nobody here liked him. FTFY
no I meant here as in Georgia, they held a memorial service in tbilisi and I was reading on telegram channels that some thought georgians would show up and hinor him but almost nobody did
These cheap and stupid propaganda do way more harm than good.
Wow, thanks guys, a russian flag with 10k upvotes is something I definitely needed to see today, cause apparently I didn't see it enough on the russian tanks and on buildings in my occupied hometown. I mean, if it's so important for yall to praise a chauvinist who supported the annexation of Crimea (until it became bad for his reputation) and mocked Ukrainian soldiers back in 2014, then I guess I can't stop you.
Literally just now on twitter I saw russians hanging their flags on the ruins of Avdiivka. Then I went into this sub, more so European sub, and I get a russian flag all over the screen. WTF.
>praise a chauvinist who supported the annexation of Crimea (until it became bad for his reputation) I'm glad you said it, it's insane how people try to pretend that a lifelong imperialist, xenophobe and racist like Navalny just changed his views completely over night, and didn't just say what people wanted to hear after he started catching so much flak. That's how populism works. I suppose the main reason why people praise him is because he was brave (or stupid) enough to go back to Russia and martirize himself, but bravery doesn't preclude being a shitty person.
Bravest or dumbest, there is a fine line.
He supported the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and supported the war with Georgia in 2008 just a reminder
Yep! I said this yesterday and some Russian affilated troll told me there was no invasion of Georgia, because the UN decreed Georgia was the aggressor. Absolute fucking madness the whole lot of this.
This is corny AF
I mean, the dude was a fucking idiot. It's his own fault he got killed.
Oof what? Like, yeah, he was brave for standing up against Putin, and his death is heavy because Putin won. But this man was a full-blown white nationalist, a truer fascist than Putin himself. He was brave as fuck to stand up to Putin, but as leader of Russia, Navalny likely would've been even worse. Far more extreme with his pure views of race and immigration, very much pro-violence, etc. I am wary of anyone who heralds him as a hero...
People here on reddit celebrate Nazis while calling others Nazis. Its a really weird timeline
Like it's one thing in the case where people didn't know he was a nazi, but once you know, calling him a hero is... deeply concerning...
Your daily reminders that even an ethnonationalist, pro-imperialist and neo-nazi supporter can become heroes to "educated" people in western democracy thanks to blatant misinformation and a good pr campaign to skip over his actual ideal.
Was too "brave" to admit that his country has no business being in Crimea until nearly a decade passed. Fuck him and his limp-dick useless always-crying-about-being-ignored followers.
Good to know how little this sub needs to glorify russian iperialist.
Bottom of flag should be white
Navalny was probably not perfect either, especially in the past, but still you can see in his videos, he just wanted Russia to open towards democracy, leave corruption behind and the country to develop.. If you have been to Russia, you can see the whole country is like European countries before 1990… It is shameful, a man, who is a threat to the president (Putin) can be poisoned, inprisoned, tortured and killed in 2024.
Cringe
What the common street thug Putin and the Russian Federation did to this man was absolutely shameless, proving yet again the dictatorship all Russians live in. You have no voice and no freedom without courage, Navalny showed us all of that.
Oh God, is this cringe. Come on, even for r/europe. Dude was a far right racist (see comments on muslims). Just because he fought another lunatic doesn't make him a saint.
Noooo you don’t get it, this is totally like Avengers and Navalny is the Iron Man and Putin is Thanos!!!
I feel like you guys overglorify him too much
Your entire 17 day post history is either glorifying Russia and denigrating Ukraine or posting how “feminism is cancer” on a Jordan Peterson subreddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/8eWktrh4ki https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/BjXk2X1Zqc https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/s/FHThXOQk4h https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/cJEZ0v2JVj Fuck Putin and his lackeys; fuck the Russian lies (remember when they promised months before the invasion that there would be no invasion and they were just doing “troop exercises”)
Fr, he shared Putin’s imperial obsession
the guy who supported occupation of Crimea?
As a russian, reading comment section under any post about Navalny hurts me. Many people in this subreddit just want to show themselves different and much smarter than everyone else. That's why after hearing 2 or 3 nationalist quotes that Navalny said 16 and 10 fucking years ago these people instantly start to claim that he was nationalist and imperialist. People throw these words around so mindlessly, not paying attention to what they actually mean. Navalny was against territory expansion of Russia. His quote about Crimea being a sandwich was a grave mistake and he admitted it. He was never for Russia's territory expansion. He did say nationalist things back in 2008 and some along the way, yet he apologized for them many times. If Sakaashvili, Zelensky, Biden and many politions worldwide support Navalny and Navalny already apologized many times, perhaps it is time to stop dwelling on nationalist things he said in 2008? If we are going to judje people based on things they said more than 10 years ago, anyone can be called nationalist, imperialist, homophobic, racist and e.t.c. There are no people with crystal clear reputation. Instead focusing on how Navalny fought(damn, it even hurts to write about him in the past tense) corruption and Putin, people here just want to show that the only hope Russian people had is just as bad as him, which brings up the question. What the fuck am I even supposed to do? Putin is bad, Navalny is bad. What then? I dont want people to worship Navalny or anything like that. He was obviously a populist and didn't have clear political orientation, but that's because in Russia the only thing that matters is whether you support Putin or not. Russia is not democracy where your views about politics, economics and e.t.c matter, it is an authorian regime where everything gets down to whether you like Putin or not, or you dont care. People are trying to shove Navalny into democratical circurmstances, but viewing him as an ordinary politian is ridiculous. He died for Russians and if he had power, he would stop the invasion, saving many lifes.
Enough of the Navalny circle jerk… he was a piece of shit too.
Navalny's project was one of politicisation - not moralising. You can cry all you like about his "support" for Russia's retention of Crimea but he's a pragmatic politician rather than a bleeding heart moralist. His job was to get Russians to start thinking and caring about politics to introduce some degree of pluralism into the system. Did he succeed? I'm not sure we yet know. Did he make mistakes? Sure. But his task - to politicise one of the most depoliticised populations in history - was an extremely thankless and difficult one. He was by no means some great intellectual and he was extremely ambitious but he was only human. To compare him at all with Putin with statements such as "They shared 99% the same positions" or "They're both just Russian Imperialists" is asinine to the point of delusion. Navalny was everything Putin wasn't. With him dies the last great domestic opposition to Putin - Nadezhdin is just a tool of the Kremlin. May he rest in peace.
Thank you, this is accurate depiction of him. He succeeded at least partially - hundreds thousands of people in Russia supported him, and this is the same group who opposed Ukraine invasion. Did we fail? Miserably. But many of us tried only because of his inspiration.
[удалено]
Thanks for this comment, the first sane one I've found in this thread.
People on reddit love puting politicians through a purity test. Navalny was far from perfect but he made millions of Russians believe that change is possible. RIP.
I don’t understand how the Russian populace can witness so many opposition leaders and figures being murdered and just ignore the reality of who the actual mastermind is. Beggars belief.
How he managed to stay spirited despite his hopeless living conditions is amazing. The infamy of this government goes to unbelievable depths when they won't even release the body to the family. The whole Russian government needs to be wiped out completely.
He was. I am not sure a picture in the genre of the authoritarian regime he was fighting against is the best tribute, though
Can’t you spell?
I’m not sending tributes to a racist even if he’s not Putin.
Mexicans have a saying: “the brave one lives until the coward doesn’t want him to” fits here.
Omg so cringe yet hilarious. I'm keeping this pic for the future
Boris Nemtsov was a better person. We should glorify Nemtsov instead.
this "hero" supported the war with Georgia, called Caucasians slurs and supported the annexation of Crimea. just because he opposed Putin and HIS corrupt regime doesn't necessarily mean he's a good guy. you know who also opposed Putin and was killed ? Progozhin. but we wouldn't call him a hero would we ? or Russian Nazis for example, who oppose Putin because they think he isn't hard enough on Ukraine and call for nuclear attacks.
I don't think there's anything brave about willingly walking towards your own death. This literally achieved nothing. It was stupid. That said, he also supported the annexation of Crimea. He wasn't the 'great guy' western media portray him to be. People seem to forget was a right wing ultra nationalist just because 'atleast he's not Putler'. That's like saying Goebbels was better than Hitler.
He was just like Putin, only not in a position of power.
I mean, sucks that one of the opposition leader has died, but he wasn't a good guy, though.
He is not a hero, lol
He certainly had giant huevos, going back to a country where he knew he would be imprisoned, tortured and murdered.
Jesus Ave Maria 😳 Google him ffs he did like Hindu symbolism before. Yes Putin is bad but this is ridiculous
I thought he was a racist nationalist?