>This was stated by the doctor of historical sciences, senior research fellow of the Institute of Ukrainian History of the National Academy of Sciences Borys Cherkas
>"Among the Slav peoples, there are two peoples who are not Objective Slavs, but Slavicized - they are Bulgarians and Russians. The problem is that the Bulgarians do not hide it, but rather show it all the multifaceted history , its uniqueness, its ability to find a common language between the Turks and the Slavs. In Russian history, on the contrary: they are offended when you say this to them, they do not recognize it and never recognize it. And while they will recognize Kiev as their history, we We will have these problems - which we had in the past, today we have and will be in
The term Slav sort of lost all of it's meaning due to the fact that Slavs mixed with other populations. South Slavs mixed with Dinarics, Central Slavs mixed with the alpine people and East Slavs mixed with all sorts of ethnicities. So today, Slav is just sort of used to describe a cultural/linguistic group. However, I'd say that the "true Slavs" are the people who are genetically most similar to the Slavs of old before they mixed a lot (Even though the Slavs of old are also mixed, but then again so were all tribes to be perfectly fair). That's just my own subjective view of it doe.
