Originally posted by Eochaid
I just read what you wrote, and not only is it OT, but also a very narrow-minded vision. You say that there is no such thing as a Canadian or American culture, but that is not true.
American culture is a mix of several pre-existing cultures (English of course, but also French, Spanish, Native and African) facing the Frontier phenomenon and an isolated situation in the eightieenth and nineteenth centuries.
Just as Russian culture is a mix of several pre-existing cultures such as low-slavonic, Kievian, Norsc and Mongol. The distinct Russian culture appeared during the fourteenth and fifteenth century, when the whole region was under the rule of the Golden Horde.
The only difference between the two cultures is that Russian culture is older than the American or Canadian ones. But then Russian culture is younger than the Greek culture or the French culture.
If you want to discuss this further, I will pleased to do so, but please PM me instead of posting OT remarks on this Thread. 
Sergueï, sorry for interrupting this thread by this post. I'll come back to the subject in my next post
Well, excuse me if i offended thee, but my point is that you didn't get it - the very first line of yours shows that you're trying to interpret my words in a dfferent way - LET US NOT substitute the notions i used! We spoke about nations - not cultures - the whole topic was about nations not cultures!
Thus i see no reason for calling it an OT - OT was started by our Ukrainian-Canadian friend BarristerBoy who managed to offend the bigger part of Snowball forum - and Russian EU Community by using rude and improper means of stating his point of view.
As YOU can see i was just trying to contradict to him in the respect of terms - we cannot allege there were Ukrainian, Belorussian or other nations during that span of time! (this is one point)
Secondly, as ive understood from Sergei's posts - they do not like the idea of calling it RUS or Ros (the way Greeks called all tribes living in that region since 7th century). The alternative i have supported.
Thirdly, Russian as i said and Sergei admitted is the most generic term unless we want to create a chaos making every small tribe exist separately.
The fourth thing is that i was again talking about NOT american culture or Canadian but about national content of the countries - i suspect that it's quite a mixture, isn't it? And if we speak about US this is no secret that the dominant nations of those English, Irish, Scottish emmigrants are diminishing in number. And the Afro-American and Spanish population starts to prevail - the wave of emmigration is so all-embracing that i hardly can believe that those new Americans are fully integrated into the society and "nation" - that's impossible, therefore it serves not enriching the ethnos but blowing it out from within.
And culture, well, let it be! Nobody objects to!
As regards your words about Russian culture - well you're right at least in respect of incorporation of numerous elements from other nations - but again you have a certain misunderstanding in terms due to a linguistic knot of English whichhas no corresponding words to what i really meant, thus it might have seemed a bit awkward.
Russian as a nation is one thing, but since 15th-16th century - Russian as a nation (even not becoming a separate nation started to form just another concept of Russia - not RUS) RUS - is a country of ethnic Slavs, Russia is a home not only for Russians but other numerous nations - the 15-16th centuries - are the dates for Tartar incorporation into Russia as well as a multitude of Samoyed peoples.
The thing is that you might have not got the idea i meant.
Sincerely.
