This whole thread, titled 'make Russia stick to the West', uses West as a cultural term.
And it was explained by more than one posters that "West/East" terminology is too modern to be of a practical meaning in the forum restricted by 1900 as the latest date.
Russia may have been considered somewhat European, but it was clearly an 'other' from Western Europe - while by the XVIII Century Poland was far more ingrained, due to political, cultural and social influences, into the concept of the West.
Well, by the mid-XVIII Russia was proclaimed as being "European" by the French (who at that time gave themselves a license on using the terminology

) and none of the contemporaries had been seriously questioning that status or its status as one of the "Great Powers" (which was strictly "European", the Ottomans were not included). I have no idea what "somewhat European" means and who and how was making that distinction. OTOH, to say that by the XVIII century Poland (or rather the PLC) was ingrained into the "West" is more than a little bit silly: the country was a complete political and economic mess (thanks to its ruling class) sneered upon by its neighbors and eventually consumed by these neighbors. An attempt to reform country to catch up with the existing political "European standards" came too late and was doomed. The downfall process started at least in the early XVII when PLC lost Livonia to Sweden and by the late XVIII the PLC was going down the tubes full speed because it was practically ungovernable. What could be learned from it at that time? XV - XVI centuries was a different story but, even prior to spreading beyond Volga, the Muscovite state started having problems with its immediate Western neighbors and looked for the things "advanced" elsewhere. When the "western dress" was initially _officially_ adopted in Tsardom (reign of Alexis or Feodor II), the model was Hungarian, not Polish and the foreigners had been coming from Germany, Netherlands, England, Scotland, France.
It's kinda absurd to say that European cultures thought everyone was the same before the Russian Revolution, considering, for example, how mediaeval historians described Byzantium.
Well, if you are familiar with the "European cultures" of the late XIX, you definitely know that they hardly considered themselves as being "the same". The French despised Germans and tended to have a little bit caricature view of the Brits, the Brits were looked down their noses on pretty much everybody else, etc.. But Russia was a part of the whole circus even if there were/are certain confusions: it seems that the Brits (judging by 2 modern British writers) are still under impression that Chekhov was famous as an author of the boring plays and not as the greater Russian humorist, quite a few people on the left side of the Atlantic coast are under impression that "Overture of 1812" is dedicated to the 2nd War of American Independence (I checked) and very few are aware of the fact that "War and Peace" is not an accurate translation of the title. On an encouraging side, it seems that nobody is confused regarding the "Pavlovian reflexes".
Colonialism and direct territorial annexation are two very different things, and Britain wasn't influenced by India or East Africa until very late in the colonial era, while it's ludicrous to say that Tatars, Bolghars and Turks didn't influence Russian culture profoundly.
I'm always open to the new ideas, providing they have some facts behind them. Can you describe at least some details of the "profound" Bulgarian impact on the Russian culture? Ditto for the Tatars (which ones?). The "Turks" (as in "inhabitants of Turkestan") became part of the Russian empire (or its vassals) only in the mid-/late-XIX century and probably can be ignored.
Calm down, I'm not being condescending (I never said that Russia didn't conquer existing civilisations, and when I said nomadic I referred mostly, as my post said, to Siberian peoples and steppe tribes,
They simply were not numerous or developed enough to amount to any noticeable impact. Not even in the terms of folklore or some fashions, as was the case with the American Indians.
and OBVIOUSLY not to, say, Sogdiana) nor did I EVER said it was one way (in fact, conquered peoples in Central Asia are OBVIOUSLY more influenced by Russia than Russia is by, say, Kazakh culture) but to say there's not an influence of seminomadic tribes in Russian culture that sets it apart from other contemporary Europeans (well into the CE, when Europe was no longer 'a big forest' - btw, talk about condescending) is, frankly, absurd.
This is not condescending or absurd: what was Germany at the time of the Early Empire? A huge forest.
And, personally, I can't figure out any significant impact of these seminomadic tribes on anything. Oops, sorry: the Chukchi by no fault of their own became one of the most popular subject of the jokes in the Soviet Union (but AFAIK not in Tsarist Russia).
And regarding the XVI century, that point is clearly moot, since my argument is that for Russia to be tied to Poland and therefore more western-oriented the POD must happen WELL before the arbitrary date you set in your argument, when Russia had already conquered the Volga Basin and large parts of Western Siberia. So please stop strawmanning my argument, thanks.
Well, your argument did not make too much of a historic sense because it starts with a failing premise: Russian state centered on Kiev. This was not a possibility even before the Mongolian conquest - centers moved to the Western Rus (Galitz-Wolynia) and Central Rus (Vladimir). As experience of the Galitz-Wolynia demonstrated, peaceful "ties" were not quite possible: in a series of wars this entity had been consumed by Lithuania and later joined to Poland.
Extension beyond Volga happened after the Muscovite state became a well-defined cultural and political entity so it is anything but clear in which way the minuscule tribes of Siberia (most of which were not a part of the Muscovite state prior to the mid-XVII) could have any noticeable impact on the Russian culture. Ditto for the CA: its real conquest did not even start seriously until mid-XIX and by that time it was a little bit too late for the "Asiatic" cultural influence.