There are a lot more travel tips that just this one. It's a good article. To make sense of them, you have to keep in mind that they are written by a Russian for Russians.

Reading the comments is amusing, because there are two big categories:

- Americans who haven't traveled much, saying "no, no, we're not like that at all".

- Americans who have spent time abroad, saying "yep, that's exactly how it is".

Be sure to read the long comment by "87544" - it's practically an extension of the article. His remarks about WWII are sure to set of some of the commenters here, as well...

Similarly:

You may find that American students smile easily and are not hesitant to talk, but this is not an automatic commitment to friendship.

I've always wondered why I always end up friends with Eastern European women above any other group. They constitute the majority of my female friends percentage wise.

I think that I like while they're beautiful they're not sensitive. Sometimes they're outright "rude" and blunt by middle class women American standards..

As to the friendliness Crid. I've said this before but everyone finds us overtly loud and friendly except Latin Americans who view us as tepid.

But real out of this world friendliness comes certain African groups in my opinion.

Bradley13,

Loved the long comment. It reminds me how we've elevated the status of concentration camps to a Hollywood cliche when very few Americans know the Japanese were doing arguably a lot worse on a bigger scale and were forgiven for it.

Here is an excerpt:

3. Speaking of history, don't bring up WWII unless you want your (Russian) head to explode. Every American will tell you that they won WWII and the world should thank them everyday of their lives. Obviously, the US was on the winning side and a major contributor to the war but the way it is talked about is as if the US was the only reason the war was won. The 'If it wasn't for us, y'all be speaking German' mentality is more common than you think. Only a few Americans truly recognize the contribution in blood and strategy the Soviets gave and how late in the game the US was involved in Europe. This, again, is directly attributed to the narrow education in history which can be insulting to some given the topic. They can name Concentration Camps by heart but will look puzzled if you ask about Georgy Zhukov. I've had this argument many times and its best to be avoided (good luck).

I just chose that passage to sell the rest of the link. There are a lot of interesting patterns in there.

You can count on Eastern Europeans and others who come from communist countries to be realistic about life and politics in a way Americans are not. Cubans are an example.

I also agree with Ppen. Just had a conversation for about half an hour on the sidewalk about a month ago with an amazing Senegalese guy. I love how he (very sweetly and respectfully) called me "momma" when he talked -- and with that beautiful accent.

Only a few Americans truly recognize the contribution in blood and strategy the Soviets gave and how late in the game the US was involved in Europe.

I agree that most Americans have absolutely no idea of the outsize role of the Eastern war in WWII, but this sentence leans a little in the opposite direction. I wonder what "strategy" the writer has in mind: throw under-armed bodies at the opposing side and shoot anyone who tries to escape? And, while American boots were not on the ground until relatively late in the war, lend-lease was sending money to the allies from the very beginning (indeed while the USSR was still working with Germany to divvy up Poland).

Every nation develops their war myths and Russia's is no more accurate than ours.

Oh, and I should say that I went to a conference in St. Petersburg and had the best conference dinner ever. It was a classic Russian banquet, complete with vodka toasts, one for every country represented at the conference: 13. The Russian woman opposite my colleague and me chided us for sipping part of our toasts instead of slamming them back. "This is Russia; you do not sip your vodka!"

So by the time the main course showed up, the locals were pretty drunk. When they took to the dance floor, they proved that geeks are geeks in any culture and can't dance anywhere. I was collared by the director of the large telescope the Russians have in the Caucasus who wanted me to share a glass of champagne with him. With the champagne sloshing in every direction except the glass, he says to me "Your talk was wonderful. You're a star! You're a star!"

I remember that moment when I'm frustrated with work.

3. Speaking of history, don't bring up WWII unless you want your (Russian) head to explode. Every American will tell you that they won WWII and the world should thank them everyday of their lives. Obviously, the US was on the winning side and a major contributor to the war but the way it is talked about is as if the US was the only reason the war was won. The 'If it wasn't for us, y'all be speaking German' mentality is more common than you think. Only a few Americans truly recognize the contribution in blood and strategy the Soviets gave and how late in the game the US was involved in Europe. This, again, is directly attributed to the narrow education in history which can be insulting to some given the topic. They can name Concentration Camps by heart but will look puzzled if you ask about Georgy Zhukov. I've had this argument many times and its best to be avoided (good luck).

Posted by: Ppen at August 25, 2014 1:54 AM

This is an extremely simplistic, and militaristic view of World War II. Yes, Americans think we won the war, and they think that for all the wrong reasons.
The real truth is the Soviet Union lost millions of people in World War II, and accomplished nothing strategically of any long term consequence.

This is something they don't like to be reminded of.

The United States won the war by emerging as the sole superpower both economically and militarily, in the World, and they did so by winning the peace through rebuilding Japan, and Western Europe after the war.

So the comment you posted is just as wrong headed as the average American beliefs about World War II.

The Soviets like to conveniently forget all the supplies and arms that they received from the US, before we actively entered the conflict as combatants which kept them from being over run by the Nazis before the US military even set foot in Europe.

The 'If it wasn't for us, y'all be speaking German' mentality is more common than you think.

Ah, so no thanks for the whole lend-lease supply lines? gotcha. The linky points to the north Atlantic convoy runs, one of the most dangerous, but it mentions the Persian and Pacific routes.

Uh--were in the comment did he dispute anything you said? Merely he was explaining the Russian viewpoint during the war, not after.

Also it was in the context of cultural differences and things you don't bring up. There are things about WWII I won't speak of to Polish friends no matter how "right" I think I am. It's a null argument for both sides in terms of person to person relations.

"Obviously, the US was on the winning side and a major contributor to the war but the way it is talked about is as if the US was the only reason the war was won."

"Uh--were in the comment did he dispute anything you said? Merely he was explaining the Russian viewpoint during the war"

What I posted above is pretty much the gist of it.

The Soviets emerged from World War II with nothing but a short term tactical victory, that was largely supported and financed logistically by Americans.

And this short term tactical victory (keeping a miserable impoverished totalitarian dictatorship in power for another 45 years) came at the cost of 20 million Russian lives, including all of the relatives of my grandparents who were born in Russia.

It's typical stuff: every country writes its history books to show itself in the best possible light. There is generally little occasion to read history books written by/for other countries, unless you are a scholar of history.

Hence, if you read Italian history books, you'll find out that an Italian invented the telephone. Alexander Graham Bell is nowhere to be found. In France, it was a Frenchman. And so forth.

For major historical events like WWII, the disparity of viewpoints is even greater. We are the heroes, our allies deserve brief mention, our enemies are evil incarnate. Reality might have involved more shades of gray...

For major historical events like WWII, the disparity of viewpoints is even greater. We are the heroes, our allies deserve brief mention, our enemies are evil incarnate. Reality might have involved more shades of gray...

Posted by: a_random_guy at August 25, 2014 8:24 AM

All viewpoints are not equal. Some of them are backed by facts, and others by little more than misplaced cheerleading.

My original point, was that the Russians view of World War II is even less fact based than the average Americans.

Criticizing others for having a simplistic American centric view of World War II, is only valid when when you yourself recognize that you may not possess "the truth" either.

So why this particular Russian would want to chide Americans over their simplistic knowledge of World War II, is a mystery to me.

Failure to learn the real lessons of war, by populations on the losing end, or those, like Russia, with Pyrrhic victories, is what leads to more wars.

I live in Japan part time. You would not believe the wacky statements I have heard, about why the Japanese lost World War II.

There is a whole class of politicians over there still dedicated to white washing the brutal atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers against Europeans, and a lot of other Asians, and recasting Japan as the good guys.

When they stomp their feet, and whine about how terrible the American occupation of Japan has been, I just agree with them, and say that I think we all would have been far better off, if we had just handed the entire country of Japan over to the Russians, and the Chinese.

It turns out,that this isn't precisely the different alternative that they had in mind.

"Merely he was explaining the Russian viewpoint during the war, not after."

I think it was the "strategic" bit that set a lot of people off. Russian sacrifices in the war should definitely not be marginalized, but it's also true that as a military commander, Stalin was an idiot, and the horrendous Russian losses didn't really accomplish all that much (other than getting rid of some groups of people whose existence Stalin found inconvenient). The thing that really stopped the Nazis from reaching Moscow was not the Soviet army, but their own inability to manage the logistics. And it is not to be forgotten that Stalin used the pretext of the war to gobble up a lot of Eastern Europe, plus the attempted invasion of Finland.

And... there was that whole Pacific war thing, where the Soviets were little help. That was mainly fought by American and ANZAC troops.

There are a lot of Russians living in my little city and they vary - some are eager to speak English, some refuse and hate life in California, but they all have the same attitude I found in the Portenos of Buenos Aires:

"Yeah, life is so messed up here/at home I decided/want to emigrate, but you people are cowards/warmongers fat/emaciated loud/shy cokeheads/teetotalers um, by the way, can you get me a job/some money or help me move to/integrate in the US?"

I just chalk it up to their being napkin-headed potato farmers and figure their next generation will fit right in.

With every year that passes, I see less to admire in Russian character.

I know, I know... I studied their history and geography in college. I don't want to hear any more.

Fuck 'em.

What is this shit?

It's 20 fucking 14.

"So why this particular Russian would want to chide Americans over their simplistic knowledge of World War II, is a mystery to me."

He is an American and isn't chiding anyone merely providing tips to Russian on the American interpretation of WW2. His point was that Americans believe they are the ONLY reason the Allies won the world war, and aren't aware of any large or small contributions by the Soviets. If a Russian wants to get a headache he should bring it up (I'm starting to understand why).

""My advice is not offering a solution as to 'Who won WWII' ... It is to advise any Russian coming to the US to be mindful of American still present Cold War attitudes."

The whole point of the post was different cultural views no matter how "right" or "wrong" they are. I learned long ago not to bring up WW2 to my Eastern European friends who still live over there.

Gog,

Perhaps because white Americans don't view themselves as truly European, living in European cities, with cultured European sensibilities I find that aspect of Buenos Aires really off putting, ridiculous and at times rage inducing.

" An Argentine is an Italian who speaks Spanish acts French and wishes to be English. "

"Russian on the American interpretation of WW2. His point was that Americans believe they are the ONLY reason the Allies won the world war, and aren't aware of any large or small contributions by the Soviets. If a Russian wants to get a headache he should bring it up (I'm starting to understand why)."

America is the only reason that World War II was won, as I tried to point out to you.

World War I essentially had no winners, which is why it was re fought as World War II.

This guy is such an idiot, he doesn't know the difference between a war and a battle.

A war is much much more than two armies going up against each other. The Soviets as CousinDave, and Crid rightly pointed out contributed exactly nothing to the culture, the peace, the prosperity, or the security of the world for the last century.

They continue to contribute nothing.

And by the way, after World War II the entire Soviet economy, military and otherwise relied on looted German machine tools, stolen and copied American, and European designs.

Yes, losing 20 million people so you can pack up and ship home entire Germany factories, so your people can build things like this, is quite a victory.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAZ-M20_Pobeda

Isab:
Yes, losing 20 million people... is quite a victory.

You need to remember that fighting for the motherland is and always has been patriotic, and the people dying were largely peasants, who don't really count. Dying for whatever your master is up to this time is normal peasant life. If you look at say, the horrors of siege of Leningrad, you can see their patriotism went to the bone.

You might die in the military, you might die in the mines, you might die cutting timber or mending roads, You might get taken off in the cart and just never be seen or heard from again, taxes might be high enough that you starve to death that winter (taxes were payable in produce). You never know. At least in the military they give you a spiffy uniform and you get to shoot a gun.

There were good reasons why the Russians were so big on alcohol and religion. I don't know if they had good or bad strategy, but I do know that the Russians chewed up large numbers of German soldiers, and kept them well away from the reconquest of Western Europe.

" The Soviets as CousinDave, and Crid rightly pointed out contributed exactly nothing to the culture, the peace, the prosperity, or the security of the world for the last century."

Bullshit.

Did you check who is in charge of White House lately? He is in charge of the country you claim to be the sole source of all of the progress humanity achieved. But I think he stole a lot of ideas from the Marx's book.

Besides, without AK 47 made in Soviets, you would still see this sign in public parks all over the China in 2014.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uJHeGf3yMDE/T1pdW3f0q4I/AAAAAAAAAGU/klP1IbkIL5s/s1600/CC_DogSin.jpg

Every American will tell you that they won WWII and the world should thank them everyday of their lives. Obviously, the US was on the winning side and a major contributor to the war but the way it is talked about is as if the US was the only reason the war was won.
________________________________

I have never heard any American make any of those claims. But then, most American adults I know have the sense not to talk about things they don't really know about.

From the article:

"US etiquette also forbids lamenting the troubles of life, or sharing your problems with others. Sharing in this country can only be positive emotions — sorrows and frustrations are impermissible. In the US you only complain to acquaintances in the most extreme cases. Serious problems are for close friends and relatives only."

A good (and real) etiquette rule, yes, but one that gets constantly broken in the U.S. to the point of seeming fashionable. Or so it often seems when you read advice columns.

Here's one from Miss Manners (1984):

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1320&dat=19840613&id=5T5WAAAAIBAJ&sjid=8ukDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4875,3858696

Excerpt:

"But from the smallest children to those in the , most authoritative positions, the explanation has come to take the place of the achievement — or even the apology that used to accompany an admission of failure. Telling one's troubles has become an art form, no longer limited to one's intimates, and our biggest heroes are those — hostages and other victims — with the greatest claims on our sympathy. We have become a nation of wounded birds."

"America is the only reason that World War II was won as I tried to point out to you."

No reputable scholar says the US was the ONLY reason World War II was won. I've read that it was the MAJOR reason by some but I've never read the ONLY one.

You can also find many debates on the exact subject online by WW2 buffs from all over the world, which I like to read. Even American buffs don't make that claim and acknowledge some Soviet contribution (however small or large varies by individual).

Chang here will tell you the Asian perspective isnt one of American heroism. The Chinese view themselves as doing all the dirty work, us coming in and helping some by giving a minor slap in the hand to the Japanese. They like the Soviets better.

Poles view themselves as betrayed. Canadians as unacknowledged. Finns are forgotten. Brits as the true reason the war was won. All in all I don't care whose right when I'm traveling, which was the point of the commenter.

As he said: ""My advice is not offering a solution as to 'Who won WWII...It is to advise any Russian coming to the US to be mindful of American still present Cold War attitudes"

(I must admit my favorite perspective is the Malaysian one. They viewed it as a war of the white savages while they were meekly but intellectually negotiating their independence)

> Did you check who is in charge of
> White House lately? He is in charge
> of the country you claim to be the
> sole source of all of the progress
> humanity achieved.

Kinda goosed the argument a 'lilbit, there, didincha?

Specifically— Nobody is "in charge of the country," certainly nobody in the White House. Those guys are just hired help.

The people who most often make your mistake are (A.) immigrants from ancient authoritarian cultures (kingdoms and the like)and (B.) ninny personalities, often from ninny families, who've never learned to distinguish their petty household resentments and unremarkable existential angst from the greater pattern of their relationships with others...

Which kind are you?

Instead of trudging through your days so resentfully here in the United States —as a broken teacup on a dusty shelf— why not go live someplace where you can be the free and decent man you've always wanted to be?

I like Kagan. Late in this video, he acknowledges that no matter how many opportunities you give less-developed cultures to get their shit together and grow rich, they're probably going to need to be contained for a good long while.

"No reputable scholar says the US was the ONLY reason World War II was won. I've read that it was the MAJOR reason by some but I've never read the ONLY one."

What part of my statement that wars are not won on the battlefield did you miss PPen?

The war was won by turning Germany, Italy, And Japan into democratic republics with market economies.

Please point out one single contribution of Russia or the old Soviet Union to consolidate peace or enhance prosperity, after the end of the fighting.

If you want two really good examples of why winning battles does not win wars, take a look at Afghanistan, and Iraq right now.

Declaring victory and going home, is not the same as "winning".

This is essentially what the Soviets did after their grand victory in World War II. They stuck around in Western Europe as looters, rapists, and pillagers , not as rebuilders,

To win, you have to be in it, and invested for the long haul. Even then, there are no guarantees.

That the Soviet Union had actually lost World War II, and the following Cold War, became quite clear in late 1989.

The Russians, have been hyping and exaggerating their battlefield successes now for over seventy years, as if winning some battles was actually strategically important in the grand scheme of things. I guess if they have to look that far back for something to bolster their national pride, it says something about their total lack of achievement anywhere else.

Why anyone actually takes them seriously is beyond me.

http://www.johndclare.net/RoadtoWWII8.htm

Recommended reading for those who want to view the Soviet Union as a stalwart ally, and major player in the war against the Axis powers.

Meanwhile, a NASA study says the 'business as usual' model, perpetuated by wealthy elites buffered from the negative effects of their greed, will destroy industrialized society.

So we've got that going for us.

We also have misplaced blog comments. Ack!

Gog, see this.

Here's one from Miss Manners (1984):
__________________________

There are two versions of that column. I prefer the one she put in "Miss Manners' Guide for the Turn-of-the-Millennium" - especially the first third of the column. Here it is:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ju1XvqoMookC&pg=PA342&lpg=PA342&dq=%22postpone+my+own+vacation%22&source=bl&ots=5IvhyIK5AP&sig=wxrvZWsm5lkTVBcSNtlRFHAXgpk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lIv8U4n8NMPhsATsuoHgCQ&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22postpone%20my%20own%20vacation%22&f=false

(pages 342-343)

Only problem I have with it is, she wrote that she says a very cold and formal "I'm very sorry" when she could have said "I'm very sorry to hear it." Big difference, as I've mentioned in previous threads. (I must write to her about that.)

Thanks, Crid.

That crossdresser with the little dog is a bit disconcerting, though.

@bradley13 "Reading the comments is amusing, because there are two big categories:

- Americans who haven't traveled much, saying "no, no, we're not like that at all".

- Americans who have spent time abroad, saying "yep, that's exactly how it is"."

As someone in category 2, I think this comment nails it.

A lot of people say traveling is a great way to learn about other cultures, but I prefer to say that traveling is a great way to learn about your OWN culture.

There are thousands of assumptions of things you accept as 'normal' and universal until you see an outsider's perspective on it.