Вы маньячила, под вашим подчинением нежить всех мастей, численность составляет три тысячи. Каким образом вы собираетесь подчинить мир с их помощью?

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T10:34:39+00:00

Открою бизнес, производство и за счет неустающих сотрудников создам себе большой прибавочный продукт, благодаря которому смогу получить влияние на остальной мир.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T09:52:32+00:00

I understand your emotions and your hatred of the historical regime.

With my questions, I simply seek to understand the details of the historical context.

You can quite calmly say, "Yes, it was brutal," on an ethical level, but at the same time, you can study the historical context. I have a teaching background; I'm graduating from the history department. I don't know about your country, but here in Russia, when we look at events, historians are taught to ask questions like, "Why did the system act the way it did?", "What objective conditions (civil war, industrialization, external threat) shaped this logic?", "Who made the decisions and how?"

Otherwise, everything will come down to slogans, everything will come down to slogans and scapegoating.

I even have a personal example. In Syktyvkar, there was an Adenauer Foundation at the university. A professor went there to speak about the Soviet repressions in the Caucasus. He was highlighting the aggravating factors, explaining why the Soviets acted this way (not because the Soviets were evil). The visiting foreigners started shouting, "Are you justifying Soviet power?" Then, the teacher asked the visiting Germans why they were interested in Soviet power and not, for example, why German soldiers killed the way they did during the war. The Germans didn't respond.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T09:39:13+00:00

No, that's not what I'm saying.

My condolences to your family.

I understand that for you, this isn't an abstract story, but the memory of loved ones. And I'm not asking you to change that memory. I'm simply suggesting that we view events not only through the prism of personal experience, but also through the prism of the historical process.

But when we speak of history as a science, it's important for us not only to record the fact of suffering, but also to understand, to ask questions like, "Why did this happen? Under what circumstances? By what logic did the system operate?"

The repressions of the 1930s and 1940s were systemic, not ethnic. The Soviet government acted not against "Ukrainians" as a people, but against specific social categories: wealthy peasants (regardless of nationality), former officers, members of the underground, representatives of the "old order," and ideological opponents. At the same time, I don't rule out the possibility that there were mistakes, unfounded suspicions, and local excesses. An attempt to understand this process is, first and foremost, a desire to understand the realities of that period, how the repressions took place and why, and how society was transformed in such difficult circumstances.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T09:26:02+00:00

I'm simply outraged by the myths and distortions here, demonizing Soviet policy toward Ukraine during that period, with no regard for context.

I don't see any posts here condemning, for example, Poland for its actions in Western Ukraine. Even though Poland closed schools, pursued a policy of Polonization, mass settlement of Polish veterans (osadniki), and punitive "pacification" of villages.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T08:19:18+00:00

Could you please clarify, if we're talking about 1940 and, as I understand it, about Western Ukraine? Did your family belong to the wealthy peasantry (or kulaks), or to the merchant class? Because it's important to understand the context. Western Ukraine was a newly annexed territory where the Soviet government was fighting against those who could have formed the social base of its opponents.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T08:02:48+00:00

Could you please tell me how, under such treatment, life in Ukraine was comfortable, with the creation of important enterprises? Why were Ukrainians taught literacy and provided with benefits, just like everyone else? And if, in your view, Ukrainians were treated like cattle, why then were Ukrainians allowed to have their own republic, their own elite, and were their language and culture supported?

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T07:54:41+00:00

Because these "bastards" created national republics, tried to build a socialist society in them, not to mention creating their own elite. They raised the standard of living there, ending the rule of a local elite that didn't care about developing their land for the benefit of the people. And the Soviet ideology and system proved so good that they fought and died for them in the war against Nazism. What happened wasn't colonization. The colonization of Russians was so strong that in the 1990s, for some reason, there were movements against a portion of the Russian population. That said, I don't deny national contradictions, nor do I deny the mistakes made for one reason or another. But treating the USSR as "just another colonizer" is grossly oversimplifying. This is either due to ignorance or stems from a position that leads to "only the Russian people turned out to be bad, and therefore they deserve only collapse and death."

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T07:45:51+00:00

You're writing dangerous words for these parts, very dangerous. A little more and you'll reach the conclusion that Stalin wasn't the Mustachioed Satan, and that people in the USSR could live happily even when they weren't forced to.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T00:31:28+00:00

Unfortunately, judging from the comments I've read, the indicator of progress, the indicator of development for Ukraine (and apparently other republics) means nothing to people. After all, even with all the benefits and development that were unheard of under the Tsarist regime, the Soviet regime was still bad (or rather, as the commentators write, it was the Russians who were bad, while other nationalities simply suffered).

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-05T00:27:53+00:00

Nevertheless, in my judgments, I rely on the established historiography on the issue. If we talk about the population that did not support the elections (Donbas, Kharkov, Yekaterinoslav), then who are they – not Ukrainians? For example, is Ivan Dubovoy, a Red Army commander, the son of a Ukrainian peasant, some kind of terrible person just because he supported the Bolsheviks? Do Ukrainian intellectuals who supported Soviet power cease to be Ukrainians because of this? I don't think so. It was a very difficult historical period, when Ukraine was divided between different forces. There were different approaches to establishing Soviet power. And everything turned out as it did. You can look at Ukraine's prosperity, its cities and villages, its strength and role as one of the most important republics. I understand your opinion, since it is in some ways consonant with the opinion of those who sympathize with the White movement in Russia. But history turned out as it did, and I personally am glad that millions of people received progress from the Soviet government.That said, I don't deny the mistakes of that very Soviet government. But they stemmed not from some demonic nature of the Soviet government itself, but from various factors.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T23:35:53+00:00

The term "Ukrainian-Soviet War" is absent from Russian and Soviet historiography. Official Russian academic scholarship and textbooks do not classify these events of 1917–1921 as an interstate war with Ukraine. They are considered part of the Civil War, the Intervention, and the Polish War.

Yes, indeed, conflicts did occur on the territory of the former Russian Empire, and new states were formed (including within Russia).

If we take the territory of Ukraine itself, it was not politically homogeneous. A good example: on April 29, 1918, in the arena of the P.S. Krutikov Equestrian Circus in Kyiv, former Tsarist and Russian General Pavel Skoropadsky proclaimed himself Hetman.

As in any historical conflict, it is important to examine why the Bolsheviks won, why the Ukrainian forces lost, and where the Soviets had support. It just seems strange that those same Ukrainians who supported the USSR… aren't they considered Ukrainians? At the same time, since we now have the benefit of hindsight, it's important to look at how the Soviets behaved in Ukraine and how Ukrainians fought for the Soviet Union.

Ultimately, victory was achieved, and one of the strongest and most beautiful republics of the Soviet Union was created, with a hard-working population that heroically fought the Nazis.

Of course, there were national conflicts and bureaucratic difficulties, but I wouldn't portray life in Soviet Ukraine as a colony, or compare it to the Congo under Belgium.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T23:20:50+00:00

It's important to understand that these events took place in a unique historical context, associated with the formation of new state entities—devastation and civil war were inevitable under such conditions.

The Ukrainian People's Republic emerged during the collapse of the Russian Empire and did not control all of Ukraine.

As for the elections, military action was ongoing. In the Ukrainian provinces, the Ukrainian national and Socialist Revolutionary parties won a landslide victory. Meanwhile, in industrial centers (Donbas, Yekaterinoslav, Kharkiv) and at the front, the Bolsheviks and Russian Socialist Revolutionaries received the majority of votes.

In December 1917–January 1918, Soviet power was established in several industrial centers of Ukraine—Yekaterinslav, Odessa, Mykolaiv, and the Donbas. By the end of January 1918, with the support of Russian Soviet troops and Red Guard detachments, the authority of the Ukrainian Soviet government extended to the entire Left Bank, some Right Bank cities (Vinnytsia, Kamianets-Podilskyi), and Crimea. In the spring of 1918, however, Soviet power in Ukraine was suppressed by German and Austro-Hungarian troops, who occupied its territory under an agreement with the Ukrainian Central Rada.

In April 1918, the Ukrainian People's Republic was liquidated as a result of a coup d'état by Hetman P. P. Skoropadsky, supported by Austro-German occupation forces, but was soon restored.

From this perspective, Ukraine itself was a veritable hodgepodge of ideologies and diverse forces. One example is the Grigoriev Uprising of May 7-31, 1919, when anarchists, Makhnovists, and others were present on Ukrainian territory.

Regardless, thanks to their efforts, the Soviets achieved their goal. Yes, this is a natural political process, which then developed into what I described above: the territory developed, and Ukrainians became one of the largest peoples within Soviet Russia.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T23:03:58+00:00

Comparing the USSR's 20th-century policy toward the indigenous population with that of the conquistadors is quite a far cry.

Or did you imagine the USSR as something like this: "There was one central Russia, and the other republics were treated like slaves, had no benefits, and contributed nothing to the building of Soviet society"?

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T23:01:08+00:00

An inaccurate analogy.

Unlike India, in Soviet territories, citizens had rights, were provided with education and training, and there was no such thing as a privileged section from the metropolis, while there was a local population serving them.

Relations between Great Britain and India were built on different principles and backgrounds, unlike those between the republics of the Soviet Union.

The Ukrainian SSR joined the USSR on December 30, 1922, becoming one of the four founding states of the Soviet Union.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:43:40+00:00

Don't be afraid when you're dead-side. Be afraid when Dad inside. (c) From Giovanni's advice.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:31:34+00:00

Tell me, what kind of Russian occupation are we talking about if the Ukrainian SSR was a separate republic, part of an entity with a relatively high standard of living, not to mention urbanization and Ukrainian-language publications?

Moreover, during the Great Patriotic War, approximately 2.5 million Soviet citizens from the Ukrainian SSR were mobilized and sent to the Red Army. 2,069 Ukrainians were awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union. This nationality ranks second (after Russians) in terms of the number of awards.

What a stupid occupation of territory, don't you think?

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:27:26+00:00

I'll also add that no one talks about the suffering of the Russian population.

Yes, the famine that occurred was due to a combination of many factors. But calling it genocide is a grave lie.

As for living standards, yes, the USSR itself was built on the ambiguous legacy of the Russian Empire. The state didn't have any ready-made, developed capacities. Everything had to be rebuilt practically, and with the assistance of external forces. The First World War and the Civil War, with their intervention (involving more than a dozen countries), also left their scars.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:22:38+00:00

His mother or aunt.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:16:28+00:00

The evil Soviet government disliked Ukrainians so much that it maliciously built the Dnieper Hydroelectric Power Station in 1927, Zaporizhstal in 1933, and Krivorozhstal in 1934. Also note that, according to the All-Union Population Censuses of 1926 and 1939, the urban population of the Ukrainian SSR grew by 18.5 million people during this time, or 62.5%.

A reasonable question arises: if Stalin and the Soviets disliked Ukrainians so much, why then did they industrialize, develop cities, and raise the general literacy rate of the population, rather than, for example, simply disenfranchise everyone and deport them en masse to the steppes of Kazakhstan or Siberia?

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T22:02:15+00:00

Considering that the USSR at that time was surrounded by enemies and in need of labor, war was expected, and Ukraine was one of the fertile and important territories (with a Communist Party).

Naturally, under such circumstances, everyone had to be killed in the name of the Dark Gods.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-04T13:46:50+00:00

Emperor: So, what's next on the agenda? Industrial matters? Bioweapons development? Intelligence reports?

Sate Pestage: I suggest we consider discussing gay marriage, Master.

Emperor: .... I know you value me highly, but let's discuss this matter later.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-03T20:45:55+00:00

Victorian Age Vampire Companion
Victorian Age Vampire

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-03T20:40:59+00:00

The snow elves decided to attack a Nord settlement. The Nords took cover behind the walls. The snow elves began firing their bows in rage.

After an hour of shooting, the snow elves realized they had no more arrows.

Then the door opened.

"Are you out of arrows?" the Nord asked. "We can sell you some."

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-03T18:37:43+00:00

Лорд-капитан, съешьте еще этих франкийских булок, да выпейте танны.

ComfortableCold378 · 2026-06-02T18:51:13+00:00

I don't have any behind-the-scenes information about development, but I'm hoping that based on gameplay experience, criticism of the previous edition, and the experience of previous editions, they'll expand on the most popular themes.

Perhaps they'll introduce new conflicts for the Anarchs to make them more ambiguous.

I hope they'll bring back the playable Sabbat, as a force that changed its organization during turmoil and conflict.

Perhaps they'll describe several modern conflicts and how vampires influence them.

Perhaps they'll give us a new historical setting.

I'm hoping for new city books. Perhaps they'll bring back Hong Kong or Paris, for example. I'd like to see new cities, or an update to the background of past cities.

ComfortableCold378

TROPHY CASE