In reality, the so-called "All-Russian idea" reflects the desire of Russian chauvinists to Russify Ukrainians and transform them into Russians like those living in Russia. From this perspective, the Ukrainian language is regarded as foreign. Historically, Russian authorities repeatedly restricted, suppressed, and banned its use.
Recent historical events, including the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas, have reinforced the view that a large proportion of Russians hold hostile attitudes toward Ukrainians. According to this interpretation, proponents of the "All-Russian idea" see Ukrainians not as a distinct nation but as a population that can be Russified and assimilated into the Russian nation.
For the same reasons, it is argued that Russians and Ukrainians cannot be accurately described as either "brotherly" or "friendly" peoples. A genuine friend or brother would not seize another's territory or wage war against them. From this perspective, the ideological justification for the annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas was rooted in hostility toward Ukraine and Ukrainians.
Supporters of the self-proclaimed separatist forces in Donbas often claimed that they had taken up arms because they believed that remaining within Ukraine would eventually require them to use the Ukrainian language. In the Russian-occupied parts of Donbas, education in schools has been conducted exclusively in Russian, despite the fact that approximately half of the region's population before the full-scale invasion identified as ethnically Ukrainian.
The recurring Russian narrative that Russians and Ukrainians constitute "one people," while simultaneously expressing hostility toward Ukrainians, can be interpreted as an example of doublethink—the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs at the same time. One could even argue that this extends beyond doublethink to a broader acceptance of multiple mutually contradictory ideas.
From this perspective, statements about Russians and Ukrainians being "one people" are viewed as rhetorical rather than genuine. The underlying objective is seen as the assimilation of Ukrainians into the Russian nation. If Russians sincerely regarded Ukrainians as one people with themselves, this argument continues, there would have been no war, no killing or injury of Ukrainian civilians, and no destruction of Ukrainian cities.
Likewise, if the belief in a shared nation were sincere, one would expect Russians themselves to learn and use the Ukrainian language. Instead, Ukrainian is often ignored, and in many cases its public use has been restricted or suppressed in territories under Russian control. According to this interpretation, this reflects the perception that Ukrainian is a distinct language whose continued existence stands in the way of the Russification of Ukrainians.
The Ukrainian language is the language of the Ukrainian people. If the claim that Russians and Ukrainians are truly one people were genuine, then those identifying as Russians would also be expected to learn and use Ukrainian. In practice, however, the opposite pattern is often observed. From this perspective, this contradiction undermines the credibility of the "one people" thesis.
Accordingly, the argument concludes that Russian actions demonstrate that the assertion "Russians and Ukrainians are one people" functions as a political myth that conceals the objective of Russifying Ukrainians—that is, assimilating them into the Russian nation. This assessment, however, is presented as applying not to every Russian individual but to what the author considers to be the majority of Russians.