Huh? Are you doing racial essentialism? Surely someone born in Ukraine and upbrought there is Ukrainian?
Their industrialization was often misguided at best and purposefully rigged to fail after dissolution at worst
Evil soviets planning the dissolution and disindustrialization of the peripheral regions? Don’t be absurd.
Most of the countries would be better off had they developed independently.
This is true for a total of 0 of the countries. Everything west of the Urals would have been genocided and enslaved by Nazis, and would be very similar to places like India, Brazil or Phillipines. Central Asian regions like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan or Turkmenistan are orders of magnitude better than neighboring Afghanistan or Pakistan, which were actual western colonies with similar pasts. Had tsarism continued or capitalism fluorished, the ethnic minorities in Russia proper would have been assimilated in the same way that they’re being assimilated now with Putin. My girlfriend’s mom and grandmom studied in their native language, but she was born after 1990 so she didn’t have that right. It took one generation for her language to be erased from her family, while it was maintained for 70+ years under communism. You yourself speak Lithuanian and your family too. For comparison with a capitalist country, in 1920 there were above a million Occitan speakers in southern France. By 2020 there’s barely 100k. THAT’S what erasure and assimilation looks like. Yakut people got to preserve their language, culture and traditions, so did Bashkir, Mari, Lithuanians and essentially all ethnic minorities in the USSR. Belarusians are specifically hard affected, I agree, and some other ethnicities like Crimean Tatars or Koreans were also targeted during WW2. Those are big mistakes and we must learn from them and never repeat them, but despite this, it was the most inclusive and multicultural state at the time. For comparison, my homeland Spain outright banned the use of Basque and Catalonia at the time. This is what happens when you don’t have Bolsheviks protecting you from fascism.
Doughnut Empire
So if USSR extracts resources from some regions it’s bad for said regions, but if it exports resources to other regions it’s also bad. The conclusion is that USSR bad no matter what it does, got your logic now. True doublethinking.
If Soviet Union left the Eastern Europe alone, it would be almost as prosperous as the Western Europe is now
There would be no Eastern Europe, there would be Greater Germany á-la British Empire.
The sad reality of Russia was that the people who were in charge of the dark half of the shadow economy gobbled up most of the former state enterprises put up for sale
This isn’t a sad unfortunate mistake, it’s literally the definition of capitalism, it’s a “winner takes it all” system without regard to public well-being. This was directed to happen this way by economic authorities using neoliberal shock therapy that killed millions.
But at least you’re not simping for Putin’s Russia
No, I don’t simp for capitalist oligarchs, unlike you when you praise the capitalism that hollowed out 1/4th the population of your homeland and when you claim without evidence that “capitalist countries 100 years backwards in development would have somehow avoided Nazi invasion and caught up with western Europe standards of living without having colonies like western Europe, like other famous equally capitalist and developed countries at the time such as Indonesia, Brazil or Mexico”.
Look at history: the only countries that developed close to western levels of industrialization since 1900 were either communist countries (Eastern Block and China) or USA-sponsored coldwar military bases (South Korea and to a lesser degree Taiwan. Japan was already an industrial power and imperialist country by the 1930s). Literally no other capitalist country developed, bring up an example otherwise and explain me how Lithuania would have developed so much better than Guatemala, Mexico or Brazil because Lithuanians are white
Surely someone born in Ukraine and upbrought there is Ukrainian?
Not if they keep speaking Russian and follow Russian norms and customs, they are still Russian. There are plenty of people in the Baltic states who don’t speak the languages of their corresponding countries but instead mostly use Russian. We do not consider them ethnically Lithuanian, Latvian or Estonian, but Russian and treating them otherwise creates a warped perspective of their history.
This was directed to happen this way by economic authorities using neoliberal shock therapy that killed millions.
And yet some countries did better in the transition than others.
Literally no other capitalist country developed, bring up an example otherwise and explain me how Lithuania would have developed so much better than Guatemala, Mexico or Brazil because Lithuanians are white
Finland. During the interwar period, it was a poorer country than Estonia and the gap between us as seen now is considered as what Soviet occupation took from us.
You keep refusing to admit that you’d be a Nazi colony. Come on, argue against this, don’t keep avoiding it. Tell me how Lithuania would have avoided being ethnically cleansed and enslaved if it weren’t for the Soviets.
Finland is now with a far right government, and in this past year they’ve put hundreds of thousands of people into poverty through austerity policy. The trend of European nations is downwards, and it has been since the USSR stopped being the beacon of worker rights that it was. Now that we don’t need some shiny microstates as examples of social democracy against communism, we can happily let them rot!
Just because one option was bad and the other option was worse, doesn’t make the first option good.
Tell me how Lithuania would have avoided being ethnically cleansed and enslaved if it weren’t for the Soviets.
We were ethnically cleansed and enslaved. By the Soviets, yes.
Finland is now with a far right government, and in this past year they’ve put hundreds of thousands of people into poverty through austerity policy.
They still fit your definition though. A non-communist country that industrialized.
The trend of European nations is downwards, and it has been since the USSR stopped being the beacon of worker rights that it was. Now that we don’t need some shiny microstates as examples of social democracy against communism, we can happily let them rot!
The trend downwards was caused by the Russian state actors meddling in our information space, but it sure is convenient to ignore that.
Huh? Are you doing racial essentialism? Surely someone born in Ukraine and upbrought there is Ukrainian?
Evil soviets planning the dissolution and disindustrialization of the peripheral regions? Don’t be absurd.
This is true for a total of 0 of the countries. Everything west of the Urals would have been genocided and enslaved by Nazis, and would be very similar to places like India, Brazil or Phillipines. Central Asian regions like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan or Turkmenistan are orders of magnitude better than neighboring Afghanistan or Pakistan, which were actual western colonies with similar pasts. Had tsarism continued or capitalism fluorished, the ethnic minorities in Russia proper would have been assimilated in the same way that they’re being assimilated now with Putin. My girlfriend’s mom and grandmom studied in their native language, but she was born after 1990 so she didn’t have that right. It took one generation for her language to be erased from her family, while it was maintained for 70+ years under communism. You yourself speak Lithuanian and your family too. For comparison with a capitalist country, in 1920 there were above a million Occitan speakers in southern France. By 2020 there’s barely 100k. THAT’S what erasure and assimilation looks like. Yakut people got to preserve their language, culture and traditions, so did Bashkir, Mari, Lithuanians and essentially all ethnic minorities in the USSR. Belarusians are specifically hard affected, I agree, and some other ethnicities like Crimean Tatars or Koreans were also targeted during WW2. Those are big mistakes and we must learn from them and never repeat them, but despite this, it was the most inclusive and multicultural state at the time. For comparison, my homeland Spain outright banned the use of Basque and Catalonia at the time. This is what happens when you don’t have Bolsheviks protecting you from fascism.
So if USSR extracts resources from some regions it’s bad for said regions, but if it exports resources to other regions it’s also bad. The conclusion is that USSR bad no matter what it does, got your logic now. True doublethinking.
There would be no Eastern Europe, there would be Greater Germany á-la British Empire.
This isn’t a sad unfortunate mistake, it’s literally the definition of capitalism, it’s a “winner takes it all” system without regard to public well-being. This was directed to happen this way by economic authorities using neoliberal shock therapy that killed millions.
No, I don’t simp for capitalist oligarchs, unlike you when you praise the capitalism that hollowed out 1/4th the population of your homeland and when you claim without evidence that “capitalist countries 100 years backwards in development would have somehow avoided Nazi invasion and caught up with western Europe standards of living without having colonies like western Europe, like other famous equally capitalist and developed countries at the time such as Indonesia, Brazil or Mexico”.
Look at history: the only countries that developed close to western levels of industrialization since 1900 were either communist countries (Eastern Block and China) or USA-sponsored coldwar military bases (South Korea and to a lesser degree Taiwan. Japan was already an industrial power and imperialist country by the 1930s). Literally no other capitalist country developed, bring up an example otherwise and explain me how Lithuania would have developed so much better than Guatemala, Mexico or Brazil because Lithuanians are white
Not if they keep speaking Russian and follow Russian norms and customs, they are still Russian. There are plenty of people in the Baltic states who don’t speak the languages of their corresponding countries but instead mostly use Russian. We do not consider them ethnically Lithuanian, Latvian or Estonian, but Russian and treating them otherwise creates a warped perspective of their history.
And yet some countries did better in the transition than others.
Finland. During the interwar period, it was a poorer country than Estonia and the gap between us as seen now is considered as what Soviet occupation took from us.
You keep refusing to admit that you’d be a Nazi colony. Come on, argue against this, don’t keep avoiding it. Tell me how Lithuania would have avoided being ethnically cleansed and enslaved if it weren’t for the Soviets.
Finland is now with a far right government, and in this past year they’ve put hundreds of thousands of people into poverty through austerity policy. The trend of European nations is downwards, and it has been since the USSR stopped being the beacon of worker rights that it was. Now that we don’t need some shiny microstates as examples of social democracy against communism, we can happily let them rot!
Just because one option was bad and the other option was worse, doesn’t make the first option good.
We were ethnically cleansed and enslaved. By the Soviets, yes.
They still fit your definition though. A non-communist country that industrialized.
The trend downwards was caused by the Russian state actors meddling in our information space, but it sure is convenient to ignore that.