Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As is the case, Eastern Europe falls behind Western Europe on a host of issues; social, economic, etc. But had WWII never happened and the SU had never happened do you think countries in Eastern Europe would be on the same levels as those in the western half?
Sure, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia (I'm guessing that a breakup was inevitable) and Hungary would likely be, almost at least. Although these countries were already behind in 1938, they had market economies and all countries had a strong and developed industrial sector. Czechoslovakia was a full democracy and likely would be at the same level as Austria today. What path Horthy's Hungary would've gone is more tricky thing to figure out, but if the militant irredentism would've been contained and forgotten, Hungary would in some decades likely turn to democracy.
The Baltic States would most likely be on the level of Western Europe. Estonia could be called a flawed democracy in 1938 and Lat and Lit dictatorships, but in order to survive, these countries couldn't turn inwards. Much depends on how much Sweden and Finland would've both invested and traded with Estonia and Latvia.
Lithuania would probably follow the way of Poland, whatever that would've been. This region was in 1938 richer than Poland and Hungary.
Romania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia were in 1938 already lagging behind today's Western Europe, Albania was a banana republic, as it is today. As a guess I say they would've taken the path of Greece. Romania had back then the largest oil reserves in Europe which was destined to boost the economy. But if the money would've gone into the pockets of corrupt oligharcs or to build the society is unclear. Both options are possible.
Yugoslavia is problematic. Without WWII no Tito, without Tito no Yugoslavia. A civil war was certainly likely and that could've doomed them. And when would that have happened? Hard to say. Let's assume Slovenia breaks apart without heavy bloodshed like it did in 1991, it would certainly be on the level of Western Europe. Just look how incredibly fast they have developed.
The former USSR I can't say. If WWI happens, USSR happens. No Belarus (part of it Poland), Ukraine or the Caucasus states.
You need to understand, WHY the so called Western countries became so "progressive" in social services after WWII. Not because they actually were progressive or because all of the socialist countries were so backwards.
As what you are looking at? How good life is in West vs East? Then what is "good"? Work little, be paid a lot, have fun and feel safe, have good (almost free) healthcare? Maybe don't even work at all and still have decent life?
What you need to understand is that in 1940s, after war and in 50s, there was huge impact onto the Western world form the USSR.
THEN everyone knew who won the war. THEN, everyone saw all the social developments in the USSR. LATER, propaganda ate all that and concealed it and twisted it.
So, what was done, a perpetual welfare state was implemented for the West. Just to show how BETTER life is in the West.
As those "advancements" slowly but steadily leaked into the socialist countries, precipitating into minds and ruining it. It was nothing but a part of a 50 year program to destroy the USSR and win cold war. So it worked.
But, as everything else, it backlashed. Now you have West that is not willing to actually work, have children, has unrealistic expectations about life standards and is slowly being swallowed by those who do not mind doing low to mid paid jobs.
It is rather hard to maintain a country where every indigenous citizen wants to be a manager, a professor, a doctor, a prosperous business owner or just an artist (well paid, of course). As someone, actually, has to WORK. Clean feces in hospitals. Or pick trash. Or be turner. Or a smith.
Hungary and the Czech Republic would. The rest have always been backwards.
Add Estonia to that, and Poland. Don't forget to include Austria.
All were industrial, cultural, and intellectual leaders in Slavic Europe for many centuries.
Some, especially Poland, were very rich in natural resources as well.
Nowadays, tiny Estonia is the most computer-literate nation in the world and very advanced in computer technology. Estonia is so small it has always relied on brain power for survival.
The Czechs, for example, are particularly renowned for the quality of their workmanship and craft. That was the reason why Hitler forbade the bombing of Prague; he needed the Czechs to construct and maintain his war machine.
The Russians had a simpler agenda. Their victory gave the Russians territory that buffered mother Russia from the depredations of the West for the first time in their history. The Czars were periodically stomped by Western Europeans forever, and the Communist leadership inherited the fear and distrust of the West growing up under the Czars.
All the Russians wanted most was the little guys between them and Europe to take the beating, not them again. That they got a tremendous amount of other valuable stuff from their buffer zone was a big bonus, but not so much as the desire for protection by buffer.
> Would Eastern European countries be on the same level as WE countries were it not for WWII and the SU?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marleinie
As is the case, Eastern Europe falls behind Western Europe on a host of issues; social, economic, etc. But had WWII never happened and the SU had never happened do you think countries in Eastern Europe would be on the same levels as those in the western half?
The one thing that set back parts of Eastern Europe that is rarely mentioned is the Ottoman Empire. Notice, the countries that other people mentioned in this thread as advanced - Austria, Hungary, the Czechs, Slovakia, Poland and Estonia were NOT part of the Ottoman Empire (Hungary was but was freed hundreds of years ago).
So IMHO, a lot of blame should go to the backward Ottomans. They also may have set back the nations in the Middle East.
Not that I would have wished the suffering and deprivation that Eastern Europe suffered under communism, but it seems like it's proving to be a blessing in disguise. Having experienced life under a brutal totalitarian ideology, they want no further part of it, now that it is appearing in the guise not of communism, but of radical Islam. Thus, they have barricaded themselves off from the hordes flooding in from the Middle East and North Africa, and they are being spared the miseries that are being inflicted on the "progressive" Western European nations.
Not that I would have wished the suffering and deprivation that Eastern Europe suffered under communism, but it seems like it's proving to be a blessing in disguise. Having experienced life under a brutal totalitarian ideology, they want no further part of it, now that it is appearing in the guise not of communism, but of radical Islam. Thus, they have barricaded themselves off from the hordes flooding in from the Middle East and North Africa, and they are being spared the miseries that are being inflicted on the "progressive" Western European nations.
Well they live under an open-border EU arrangement. They're certainly not "barricaded" from the world. The main reason why immigration into those countries is low, is due to the fact that lower living standards make them less attractive to immigrants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
> Would Eastern European countries be on the same level as WE countries were it not for WWII and the SU?
