That's interesting. It's seen as evil to want to protect America's various regional cultures and identities. I wonder how much of that is due to guilt over our very cruel history to non-white Americans and how much of it is due to our country never having had to make a large personal sacrifice since the Civil War? And, honestly, the culture at that time that represented ethnocentrism -- the South -- was pure fucking evil? Whereas, in Russian history, maybe that's not necessarily the case?
I really never thought about it like that. I can easily see why Russians would have a huge need to protect a Russian identity having sacrificed the way they did in WW II and various other times in recent history and not feel guilty about it or see it as evil. After all, what was it all for if they're just going to be replaced anyways? Why would they sacrifice -- you said 30 million ??! -- people to not become German if only to become a minority in their own country anyways?
Their history during WW II and such obviously has such a huge difference on the way they think as a nation and even on their policies today. They see their nation as tied to their native peoples and culture whereas we see our nation tied to a political system and political ideology. They've had to fight for the survival of their very peoples' existence whereas we've ever really only had to fight for America. That's just two different levels of sacrifice and, accordingly, two different sets of values.
Neither is necessarily better nor worse, good nor evil I think. But both come from a completely different history and I think that we should each understand each other's history instead of branding one or the other as good or evil.
