4 ms·

In East Germany in 1949, you had a left coalition like in the 1948 Italian election. It gained 66% of the vote to the 34% of the opposition. In the 1947 Hunga

In East Germany in 1949, you had a left coalition like in the 1948 Italian election. It gained 66% of the vote to the 34% of the opposition. In the 1947 Hungarian election, the communists got the most votes. So how come we never hear that Eastern Europe became communist democratically? After all, they can point to election numbers as you do. Well, the Red Army occupied them some say. But the US armed forces occupied Italy - they still do. Well, the USSR, a foreign power meddled in the elections. The US and CIA admit how massively they meddled in Italy's 1948 (and subsequent) elections. I can easily say that the non-communist and non-communist aligned parties in Eastern Europe "didn't even come close to winning" after World War II and the people of those countries democratically decided to become communist. After all, Hungary became communist after World War I without Russian intervention, a fact few in the West remember. It's odd to see the US and CIA admitting after decades they interfered in and fixed the Italian 1948 elections, yet you still hold up the phony results, yet everyone can easily discount the elections in eastern Europe after World War II, where Russia simply did the same thing the US did.

mikeash 10y ago
The main difference is that the US backed governments mostly didn't end up being horribly repressive, requiring military intervention to keep in power, and eventually overthrown. In any case, an argument that Eastern Europe's Communist governments were illegitimate cannot be countered by saying that Western Europe's governments were illegitimate, no matter how true that may be.
Camillo 10y ago
The US did not "fix" the elections. They did finance the DC campaign, just as the Soviet Union financed the FDP campaign. In the preceding 1946 elections, the Communists got 19% and the Socialists got 20%, for a total of 39%. In the 1948 elections, FDP (Communists + part of Socialists) got 31%, while the rest of the Socialists (including the man who was the leader of the Socialists in the previous elections) got 7%, for a total of 38%. In the following 1953 elections, the Communists got 23%, the Socialists (who broke out of the failed FDP alliance) got 13%, for a total of 36%. So we have 39% -> 38% -> 36%. You are arguing that the expected mid-point of that series would have been 51%, had it not been for the US fixing the elections. That is a Reptilian-level conspiracy theory.

mikeash 10y ago

The main difference is that the US backed governments mostly didn't end up being horribly repressive, requiring military intervention to keep in power, and eventually overthrown. In any case, an argument that Eastern Europe's Communist governments were illegitimate cannot be countered by saying that Western Europe's governments were illegitimate, no matter how true that may be.

Camillo 10y ago

The US did not "fix" the elections. They did finance the DC campaign, just as the Soviet Union financed the FDP campaign. In the preceding 1946 elections, the Communists got 19% and the Socialists got 20%, for a total of 39%. In the 1948 elections, FDP (Communists + part of Socialists) got 31%, while the rest of the Socialists (including the man who was the leader of the Socialists in the previous elections) got 7%, for a total of 38%. In the following 1953 elections, the Communists got 23%, the Socialists (who broke out of the failed FDP alliance) got 13%, for a total of 36%. So we have 39% -> 38% -> 36%. You are arguing that the expected mid-point of that series would have been 51%, had it not been for the US fixing the elections. That is a Reptilian-level conspiracy theory.