calimero
Hello Guest! Please sign in or register!

Author Topic: Democracy of convenience, not of choice: why is Eastern Europe different  (Read 329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lugdu

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1195
  • -Received: 720
  • Posts: 1735
  • Country: fr
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOCucJw7iT8
@Flatus Vocis
je trouve intéressante votre version de l'histoire contemporaine. Elle va contribuer à alimenter "l'Histoire Européenne du XX°" de ce forum que je vais lancer (dès que mon problème technique avec les pièces jointes sera résolu…). En effet la question amont de ces chapitres était "les rencontres des populations au cours de l'histoire au delà des rendez-vous politiques". Mais je ne l'ai pas démontrée réellement. Ce que vous dîtes, par contre l'illustre, pour cette période contemporaine.
Vous seriez aimable de reprendre les chapitres de cette Histoire de l'Europe (H.E.) que j'ai ouverts il y a quelques mois, afin d'y mettre peu à peu votre version : cela étoffera la vision générale, please…

selber

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 584
  • Posts: 1654
@Flatus Vocis
I came home late last night from a party, and I answered. A mistake, but a mistake I often make. I will now try  better to respond to your arguments. The immigration you call in the CSSR, West Germany had as well. From the EC and from Eastern Europe. Not only expelled Germans came from the East, but also Czechs, Poles and Russians, actually from everywhere.Actually, it was about the comparison GDR - CSSR. But sponge it, it was a non-useful discourse anyway.As you said for  Czechoslovakia, these Europeans also integrated well in the FRG. Your opinion is - that's because there were no Germans. The reason for my hostility.You say millions of people to expelled was  needed to secure their peace. You preach ethnic homogeneity, and you are advocating a Europe without borders and full of freedom of movement for every EU citizen, anywhere in the EU.You are in favor of the euro, which knows no other solution than a common state. You say it was impossible to live in peace with the Germans in Czechoslovakia, and yet you think it is possible in Europe. Territorially relatively separated, the Sudeten Germans also lived in the CSSR.You speak himself of empty swept areas and say it was impossible for the Czechs to populate them.In South Tyrol (Italy) or in Elsas (France) where German for centuries live (as in the sudeten mountains) there was never mass expulsions.And believe me - after World War II there was a lot of ressentiment among the peoples. Today, such areas are mediators between peoples. You have to make peace together or not at all.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2018, 19:08 by selber »

Lugdu

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1195
  • -Received: 720
  • Posts: 1735
  • Country: fr
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOCucJw7iT8
@selber
!¡ votre texte est bizarre, il y a plein de répétitions inutiles…

selber

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 584
  • Posts: 1654
@selber
!¡ votre texte est bizarre, il y a plein de répétitions inutiles…
I do not see that this way . And besides - double is better than saying nothing, just like you.

selber

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 584
  • Posts: 1654
@selber
!¡ votre texte est bizarre, il y a plein de répétitions inutiles…
Lugdu - When you talk about repetitions, you might mean that I repeat what Flatus said. I do that because it's important to show him his own contradictions.

Flatus Vocis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 438
  • -Received: 630
  • Posts: 688
@Flatus Vocis
You say millions of people to expelled was  needed to secure their peace. You preach ethnic homogeneity, and you are advocating a Europe without borders and full of freedom of movement for every EU citizen, anywhere in the EU.

Your mistake is that you apply moral judgements today to situation in 1944/45. Imagine that you are a politician of a victorious country in late 1944/early 1945 and you should come with a post-war arrangement that wouldn't lead to WWIII any time soon. The tough war is still raging/echoing and you have knowledge that post-WW1 arrangement 
(imposing high reparations and harsh conditions for the defeated countries including territorial adjustments but keeping their minorities across Europe intact) lead to a new war 20 years later. And you don't have a crystal ball to see impacts of your decisions 50 years later.  So would be your solution in such a situation?! 

My point was that I understand that they opted for completely opposite solution: Take minorities who cheered for the defeated country to core territories of the country and generously allow the defeated country to economically develop well (under temporary political supervision). Of course, it was a solution that affected many people but the whole Europe was in chaos already - the population of whole Europe was on the move - soldiers, prisoners, people who were in "Totaleinsatz" in Reich were returning (these were all male born in selected years) so in this context, the transfer of the minorities to core Germany was only a part of the whole chaos after the freshly finished war. Moreover, you forget that after Munich Agreement in 1938, similar transfer of inhabitants was done, when Czech speaking citizens and Czech administration of the annexed regions were transferred to core Czechoslovakia (also in harsh conditions in several days). So the precedent from 1938 was already there in 1945.

Of course, we can imagine a what-if experiment about an alternative reality:  How the world would look like if only the second part (i.e. allowing economic boom of Germany without moving the minorities to core German lands) was implemented. If I omit the fact that these people could have been subjects of spontaneous revenge on these territories that authorities would hardly be able to stop, it's not easy to predict. Maybe there would not be a war (also probably due to communism that subdued national quarrels). But there is a small-scale case that can be seen as an example and it is about Hungarians who were not transferred from neighbouring countries (Slovakia, Ukraine, Romania). There are no war-level escalations, yet we still can see tensions. And there still are politicians tempted to manipulate with their minorities in other countries - for example Hungary fights for their interests and give them special privileges (e.g. ID card of a "foreign Hungarian"), Putin manipulates with Russian speaking citizens of Ukraine up to armed conflict, Erdogan manipulates with Turkish minorities in Germany, etc. So seeing these examples today, I can hardly believe that there would be no political force in Germany that would be tempted to use the potential of 20 million German speaking citizens in Central and Eastern Europe for its purposes.... Another question is how would Germany itself look because without these 20 millions, the "Turks" (or any Gasterbeiters) would be needed not in 1970th but already in 1950th, so the population of Germany would be even less Germanic in that alternative reality today than in the real reality today.

And as for how it all fits current EU: Can you believe that the relationships between the transferred Germans (or their descendants) and current settlers in the border Czech lands are quite good today? Partially it's because time is the healer. But there has recently been a big jump in improving the relationships: it was when Landsmannschaft (the "spokesman" of the "Sudeten Germans") officially dropped the claims and thus changed its position from "we are the competitor who have claims for your land/estates" to "we are friends who are interested in this land and would like to participate in its development". Since than I can quite frequently can read articles like this: http://bit.ly/2CAVLmD

And that's exactly how the free movement of people across EU was intended: the intention was to drop barriers to individuals who would like to learn (and when they like then even stay forever) another EU member in a friendly way and also to corporations that would like to run (in a fair way) a business in another EU member. It was not intended for massive relocations of whole populations who would then change the shape of the host country to reflect their homeland or abuse local welfare system but also for businesses that would exploit cheap workforce. That's why it is desirable to develop all member states of EU to be good places for living so that intra-EU migration was a choice for individuals, not a necessity for masses because otherwise negative effects will emerge.

Flatus Vocis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 438
  • -Received: 630
  • Posts: 688
@Flatus Vocis
je trouve intéressante votre version de l'histoire contemporaine. Elle va contribuer à alimenter "l'Histoire Européenne du XX°" de ce forum que je vais lancer (dès que mon problème technique avec les pièces jointes sera résolu…). En effet la question amont de ces chapitres était "les rencontres des populations au cours de l'histoire au delà des rendez-vous politiques". Mais je ne l'ai pas démontrée réellement. Ce que vous dîtes, par contre l'illustre, pour cette période contemporaine.
Vous seriez aimable de reprendre les chapitres de cette Histoire de l'Europe (H.E.) que j'ai ouverts il y a quelques mois, afin d'y mettre peu à peu votre version : cela étoffera la vision générale, please…


Please feel free (you or the administrator of this forum) to move selected posts from this thread to the thread you mentioned, we would continue there then.

Lugdu

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1195
  • -Received: 720
  • Posts: 1735
  • Country: fr
  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOCucJw7iT8
Lugdu - When you talk about repetitions, you might mean that I repeat what Flatus said. I do that because it's important to show him his own contradictions.
Je reçois 3 ou 4 fois le même § ! "Territorially relatively separated, the Sudeten Germans also lived in the CSSR.You speak himself of empty swept areas and say it was impossible for the Czechs to populate them.In South Tyrol (Italy) or in Elsas (France) where German for centuries live (as in the sudeten mountains) there was never mass expulsions.And believe me - after World War II there was a lot of ressentiment among the peoples."

Par contre je vous trouve agressif… : je n'en vois pas l'intérêt !
« Last Edit: January 08, 2018, 11:28 by Lugdu »

selber

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1051
  • -Received: 584
  • Posts: 1654
Tour mistake is that you apply moral judgements today to situation in 1944/45.
No, that's what I accuse you. You justify the past in the rearview mirror. What happened is understandable at this time. But finding it right today is not understandable. And you do just that. I can even understand why Hitler was elected in 1933, but I would never say that was right. The circumstances are important to judge guilt. But the circumstances do not change the guilt. Guilt remains guilt. You say you wanted to avoid acts of revenge on the Germans. You could not have avenged yourself more .
« Last Edit: January 08, 2018, 12:44 by selber »

Conti

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 982
  • -Received: 1410
  • Posts: 2064
  • Country: it
@selber, @Flatus Vocis Are there any associations of German and Czech citizens promoting reconciliation between the two peoples?

Conti

  • Super-Hero Member
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 982
  • -Received: 1410
  • Posts: 2064
  • Country: it
@selber, @Flatus Vocis Are there any associations of German and Czech citizens promoting reconciliation between the two peoples?



From Wikipedia:
Quote
Antikomplex ist eine gemeinnützige Organisation, welche sich der kritischen Reflexion der Geschichte Tschechiens widmet. Der Blick richtet sich dabei insbesondere auf die ethnischen Säuberungen der Nachkriegszeit und das nachfolgende Schicksal der Landschaft, sowie der Gesellschaft im ehemaligen Sudetenland. Des Weiteren beschäftigt sie sich mit Innovationen in Bildung und politischer Bildung.

Antikomplex wurde im Jahr 1998 von einer Gruppe Studenten in Prag gegründet. Es war das Ziel, den kritischen Dialog über die eigene Geschichte zu fördern, insbesondere über die Vertreibung der Deutschen aus der Tschechoslowakei in der Nachkriegszeit. Anfangs waren die Themen breit gefächert. So widmeten sich beispielsweise einige Veranstaltungen dem Zusammenleben mit den Roma. Allmählich jedoch bildete sich das Profil zu einer Organisation heraus, die sich auf die Reflexion der deutschsprachigen Geschichte Tschechiens und auf die Reflexion des Schicksals des sogenannten Sudetenlandes konzentriert, also einem Gebiet, welches bis zum Jahr 1945 mehrheitlich von einer Deutsch sprechenden Bevölkerung besiedelt worden ist.

Quote
Antikomplex je nezisková organizace, která se věnuje kritické reflexi dějin českých zemí, zejména poválečné etnické očisty v českých zemích a následným osudům krajiny a společnosti v Sudetech. Dále se zabývá inovacemi ve vzdělávání a občanským vzděláváním.

Antikomplex založila v roce 1998 skupina studentů v Praze. Cílem bylo podpořit kritický dialog o vlastních dějinách, zejména o poválečném nuceném vysídlení Němců z Československa. V počátcích byla témata širší, několik akcí se věnovalo soužití s Romy. Postupně se ovšem Antikomplex vyprofiloval jako organizace zaměřená na reflexi německojazyčných dějin českých zemí a na reflexi osudu Sudet, tedy území, které až do roku 1945 bylo většinově osídleno německy mluvícím obyvatelstvem.