4 ms·

A single event in Europe two decades ago? "The abrupt withdrawal of Soviet support for the local dictator?" True of, what, one country? Romania? Bah. The E

by Vivtek 16y ago

A single event in Europe two decades ago? "The abrupt withdrawal of Soviet support for the local dictator?" True of, what, one country? Romania? Bah. The European 80's/90's were just as complex and messy as 1848.

ugh 16y ago
The point is probably that the withdrawal of Soviet support is what connects all the revolutions in 1989 and 1990. Soviet tanks no longer came rolling in and crushed the revolts like before, in 1953 (East Germany), 1956 (Hungary) and 1968 (Czechoslovakia). There is, like in 1848, no such a central fact that connects all Arab revolutions. I think that’s a pretty superficial search for similarities. We don’t yet know how the revolutions will work out and there are not that many examples in the history of revolutions spreading from one country to the next like wildfire. (I can actually only think of 1848 and 1989/1990. Does anyone know more?) To what extent comparisons to 1848 and 1989/1990 make sense at all is certainly questionable.
- woodpanel 16y ago
  Some may argue, that there is a similarity between the 89/90 uprisings and todays arab revolutions: - 20 years ago the superpower USSR stopped to side with the opressors - nowadays the united states (and europe) stopped to side with the oppressors in both cases it might be out of weakness and/or a change in policy.
  - gloob 16y ago
    In Europe, the Soviets stopped backing the local princelings before the 89/90 revolutions happened. This time around, the relevant powers seem more to be backing whoever wins and congratulating themselves after the fact for supporting freedom/stability (as appropriate).
    - woodpanel 16y ago
      i think the relevant powers have used the same diplomatic tone back then as they do nowadays, because of the uncertainty of how things might turn out to be.
- Herring 16y ago
  >We don’t yet know how the revolutions will work out... The only thing we can be reasonably sure of is they probably won't work out, given the track record. Public institutions take a long long time to build.
  - ugh 16y ago
    I’m not so sure about that.
- JacobAldridge 16y ago
  "there are not that many examples in the history of revolutions spreading from one country to the next like wildfire. (I can actually only think of 1848 and 1989/1990. Does anyone know more?)" I don't know to what extent these really classify as either revolutions or spreading from one country to the next, but the collapse of Empires after WWI (notable the Hapsburgs) and WWII (the British) may qualify. The Reformation away from the Roman Church was also similar in spreading. Not as ostensibly political, but the Church and State were much more intertwined at that point so I'd slip it in. Much prior to that (say, the fall of the Roman Empire, though that was invasion more than revolution) and I think communication happened too slowly for a cascading revolutionary effect to generate, or at least it gets lost in a lot of other historic noise.
  - Sharlin 16y ago
    "The Reformation away from the Roman Church was also similar in spreading. Not as ostensibly political, but the Church and State were much more intertwined at that point so I'd slip it in." AFAIK, in many countries the decision to reform was very much indeed a political one. The local sovereigns desired independence from the then considerable Papal influence, as well as an excuse to "acquire" the (also considerable) wealth of the national Catholic parishes.
- Vivtek 16y ago
  I know that's the point, but it's wrong - nobody knew what the USSR was going to do in 1989. I know, I was living in Germany and marrying a Hungarian wife that year, and when the border guards in Hungary said to each other one fine summer day that it wasn't their job to keep vacationing East Germans bottled up away from Western Europe, and that if East Germany had a problem with that they could just come over here and say that, neener neener - none of that had anything to do with the USSR. And aside from Romania, there weren't any dictators in the story. Hungary had had something like a Brezhnev figure in the 70's, but he was long gone by 1989 and there was just a Parliament. Same with East Germany - there was a Heimatssicherheitsamt (just a little joke there) but there was certainly no dictator. And the crucial point is this - nobody knew that the USSR was going to wither up and blow away. This caused the USSR to wither up and blow away - it could very well have happened that the tanks would have rolled in by Christmas, but instead, the trucks rolled out and east. In 1956, things worked exactly in this same manner - the people revolted, and only after a couple of months did the tanks roll in. (My mother-in-law was 10. She told me some stories. It will fry your American brain to realize your mother-in-law was playing next to stacked bodies one winter). And actually in 1848 it was a similar situation. Here, the expectation is that America's tanks will roll in - or at least their bombers will scream by overhead. They're not going to, though - and in that point, this wave is very, very much like 1989/90 in Europe. Each individual country has its own story. Some had people with their backs up against the wall, others just ... merged with their cousins. To your second point - our own Revolution sparked off a few, France being one of them. And the European empires in Africa all fell within a few years of one another. When it happens, it changes maps.
  - ugh 16y ago
    I would be a bit more careful in disregarding the role of the weakening USSR. It’s true that history is never monocausal and it’s certainly not the weakening of the USSR alone that led to protests (you could even argue that the first protests in Poland in 1980 had nothing to do with the USSR) and later revolution but I think it played an important role. East Germany certainly hoped for support from the USSR and was denied the same by Gorbachev. It was certainly never completely certain that the USSR would not intervene but it was a lot more certain than in 1956.
  - 16y ago
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  Some other examples: Post-WWII wars of independence from European empires. Spanish American wars of independence in the early 19th century. The 16th century protestant reformation?
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

by Vivtek 16y ago

ugh 16y ago

The point is probably that the withdrawal of Soviet support is what connects all the revolutions in 1989 and 1990. Soviet tanks no longer came rolling in and crushed the revolts like before, in 1953 (East Germany), 1956 (Hungary) and 1968 (Czechoslovakia). There is, like in 1848, no such a central fact that connects all Arab revolutions. I think that’s a pretty superficial search for similarities. We don’t yet know how the revolutions will work out and there are not that many examples in the history of revolutions spreading from one country to the next like wildfire. (I can actually only think of 1848 and 1989/1990. Does anyone know more?) To what extent comparisons to 1848 and 1989/1990 make sense at all is certainly questionable.

woodpanel 16y ago
Some may argue, that there is a similarity between the 89/90 uprisings and todays arab revolutions: - 20 years ago the superpower USSR stopped to side with the opressors - nowadays the united states (and europe) stopped to side with the oppressors in both cases it might be out of weakness and/or a change in policy.
- gloob 16y ago
  In Europe, the Soviets stopped backing the local princelings before the 89/90 revolutions happened. This time around, the relevant powers seem more to be backing whoever wins and congratulating themselves after the fact for supporting freedom/stability (as appropriate).
  - woodpanel 16y ago
    i think the relevant powers have used the same diplomatic tone back then as they do nowadays, because of the uncertainty of how things might turn out to be.
Herring 16y ago
>We don’t yet know how the revolutions will work out... The only thing we can be reasonably sure of is they probably won't work out, given the track record. Public institutions take a long long time to build.
- ugh 16y ago
  I’m not so sure about that.
JacobAldridge 16y ago
"there are not that many examples in the history of revolutions spreading from one country to the next like wildfire. (I can actually only think of 1848 and 1989/1990. Does anyone know more?)" I don't know to what extent these really classify as either revolutions or spreading from one country to the next, but the collapse of Empires after WWI (notable the Hapsburgs) and WWII (the British) may qualify. The Reformation away from the Roman Church was also similar in spreading. Not as ostensibly political, but the Church and State were much more intertwined at that point so I'd slip it in. Much prior to that (say, the fall of the Roman Empire, though that was invasion more than revolution) and I think communication happened too slowly for a cascading revolutionary effect to generate, or at least it gets lost in a lot of other historic noise.
- Sharlin 16y ago
  "The Reformation away from the Roman Church was also similar in spreading. Not as ostensibly political, but the Church and State were much more intertwined at that point so I'd slip it in." AFAIK, in many countries the decision to reform was very much indeed a political one. The local sovereigns desired independence from the then considerable Papal influence, as well as an excuse to "acquire" the (also considerable) wealth of the national Catholic parishes.
Vivtek 16y ago
I know that's the point, but it's wrong - nobody knew what the USSR was going to do in 1989. I know, I was living in Germany and marrying a Hungarian wife that year, and when the border guards in Hungary said to each other one fine summer day that it wasn't their job to keep vacationing East Germans bottled up away from Western Europe, and that if East Germany had a problem with that they could just come over here and say that, neener neener - none of that had anything to do with the USSR. And aside from Romania, there weren't any dictators in the story. Hungary had had something like a Brezhnev figure in the 70's, but he was long gone by 1989 and there was just a Parliament. Same with East Germany - there was a Heimatssicherheitsamt (just a little joke there) but there was certainly no dictator. And the crucial point is this - nobody knew that the USSR was going to wither up and blow away. This caused the USSR to wither up and blow away - it could very well have happened that the tanks would have rolled in by Christmas, but instead, the trucks rolled out and east. In 1956, things worked exactly in this same manner - the people revolted, and only after a couple of months did the tanks roll in. (My mother-in-law was 10. She told me some stories. It will fry your American brain to realize your mother-in-law was playing next to stacked bodies one winter). And actually in 1848 it was a similar situation. Here, the expectation is that America's tanks will roll in - or at least their bombers will scream by overhead. They're not going to, though - and in that point, this wave is very, very much like 1989/90 in Europe. Each individual country has its own story. Some had people with their backs up against the wall, others just ... merged with their cousins. To your second point - our own Revolution sparked off a few, France being one of them. And the European empires in Africa all fell within a few years of one another. When it happens, it changes maps.
- ugh 16y ago
  I would be a bit more careful in disregarding the role of the weakening USSR. It’s true that history is never monocausal and it’s certainly not the weakening of the USSR alone that led to protests (you could even argue that the first protests in Poland in 1980 had nothing to do with the USSR) and later revolution but I think it played an important role. East Germany certainly hoped for support from the USSR and was denied the same by Gorbachev. It was certainly never completely certain that the USSR would not intervene but it was a lot more certain than in 1956.
- 16y ago
InclinedPlane 16y ago
Some other examples: Post-WWII wars of independence from European empires. Spanish American wars of independence in the early 19th century. The 16th century protestant reformation?

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]