3 ms·

While not agreeing with them, I was interested in your arguments in the parent comments. This one is wrong to the point of making you seem delusional. > The G

While not agreeing with them, I was interested in your arguments in the parent comments. This one is wrong to the point of making you seem delusional. > The GDR was poor because it was small, It was about double the size of Switzerland, four times the size of Norway or Denmark, 30 times the size of Luxembourg. Do you see where I am going here? > didn’t start out with much industry, Berlin and Prussia have a rich industrial history. > had a hostile enclave forced on half its capital, Calling West-Berlin the hostile enclave is insulting to hundreds of people getting shot trying to flee towards it. You should be ashamed for this sentence. > paid reparations, ... enforced on it by their communist puppet-master. > competed with the US-funded western part The effects of the Marshall plan are overestimated. It competed with its dysfunctional system against a functioning one. > and was under constant attack from it. I am confused. Are you talking about the care-packages sent to Eastern Germany by western family members?

FredPret 5y ago
That person should watch The Lives of Others/Das Leben der Anderen
lucian1900 5y ago
I understand it is difficult to question much of what one has learned growing up about the past. It took me a lot of talking to older Eastern Europeans and reading history and political theory to begin questioning the default narrative. The GDR was small and with little industry compared to its Western counterpart, not in absolute terms. When we’re talking about people moving between the two that is what is relevant. It’s not the people of West Berlin that were hostile, but its state and US occupiers. The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Leaving Nazis in positions of power in the west was the second. Now you are insulting the people of the former GDR by implying they were puppets of the Soviets. Did you know the USSR were against the wall, but the GDR built it after all? In terms of reparations, it’s normal for an invader to pay reparations to their victim, if nothing else to rebuild. What is unusual is that the rest of Germany didn’t pay reparations to Eastern Europe. In addition to the Marshal plan (which was significant in West Germany), imperialism continued. As the most obvious example, West German banks continued to export capital at extortionate rates to extract profits from poorer countries. There were numerous covert attacks against the GDR, what do you think the Stasi were fighting? Western agents were found all over Eastern Europe spreading lies, arming fascists, assassinating people, etc. I recommend you speak to some people that experienced the GDR. Their opinions are instructive.
- allendoerfer 5y ago
  > The GDR was small and with little industry compared to its Western counterpart, not in absolute terms. When we’re talking about people moving between the two that is what is relevant. I repeat my point: Switzerland is tiny compared to Germany, yet it is richer. Russia is big compared to Germany, yet it is way poorer. China is enormous compared to Germany, yet it took ages to overtake German productivity and is still somewhat within range. > The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Historically just wrong. There were different plans during and after WW2. Britain had the idea to do a North-South division. The UDSSR wanted to split Germany permanently and as small as possible. Read what Stalin said in Teheran in 1943. It was not the US, who proposed to divide Germany. All of them invaded Germany, but the US did so comitting less war crimes (e.g. against women) themselves than the UDSSR and with less intend to destroy everything or move it to America. That's of course also, because their people were less affected. We all know, who they acted in the Pacific. But it was also, because they had learned from WW1 and tried to bring stability to Europe. The UDSSR brought a totally different kind of "stability". > In terms of reparations, it’s normal for an invader to pay reparations to their victim, if nothing else to rebuild. What is unusual is that the rest of Germany didn’t pay reparations to Eastern Europe. If you ignore giving up 25% of its landmass with entire cities like Königsberg/Kaliningrad, which is now impoverished because of the system you are defending, then sure. I also don't know whether Poland and other Eastern European countries would have called the UDSSR a victim, after they had been invaded by them. > The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Germans have to be forever thankful for the US keeping tabs on Berlin. It is part of the reason why Germany could reuinte eventually. You probably know about the Berlin Airlift. The UDSSR has proven its open inhumanity not only against enemies but also its own people and people they controlled time and time again. > There were numerous covert attacks against the GDR, what do you think the Stasi were fighting? It's own people. The documents are still there, you can look at them. It was a horrendous system. I cannot imagine why you defend it. I can admit that the West is not perfect. We can find ways to improve it, without defending a system that is so clearly worse.
- 5y ago

FredPret 5y ago

That person should watch The Lives of Others/Das Leben der Anderen

lucian1900 5y ago

I understand it is difficult to question much of what one has learned growing up about the past. It took me a lot of talking to older Eastern Europeans and reading history and political theory to begin questioning the default narrative. The GDR was small and with little industry compared to its Western counterpart, not in absolute terms. When we’re talking about people moving between the two that is what is relevant. It’s not the people of West Berlin that were hostile, but its state and US occupiers. The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Leaving Nazis in positions of power in the west was the second. Now you are insulting the people of the former GDR by implying they were puppets of the Soviets. Did you know the USSR were against the wall, but the GDR built it after all? In terms of reparations, it’s normal for an invader to pay reparations to their victim, if nothing else to rebuild. What is unusual is that the rest of Germany didn’t pay reparations to Eastern Europe. In addition to the Marshal plan (which was significant in West Germany), imperialism continued. As the most obvious example, West German banks continued to export capital at extortionate rates to extract profits from poorer countries. There were numerous covert attacks against the GDR, what do you think the Stasi were fighting? Western agents were found all over Eastern Europe spreading lies, arming fascists, assassinating people, etc. I recommend you speak to some people that experienced the GDR. Their opinions are instructive.

allendoerfer 5y ago
> The GDR was small and with little industry compared to its Western counterpart, not in absolute terms. When we’re talking about people moving between the two that is what is relevant. I repeat my point: Switzerland is tiny compared to Germany, yet it is richer. Russia is big compared to Germany, yet it is way poorer. China is enormous compared to Germany, yet it took ages to overtake German productivity and is still somewhat within range. > The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Historically just wrong. There were different plans during and after WW2. Britain had the idea to do a North-South division. The UDSSR wanted to split Germany permanently and as small as possible. Read what Stalin said in Teheran in 1943. It was not the US, who proposed to divide Germany. All of them invaded Germany, but the US did so comitting less war crimes (e.g. against women) themselves than the UDSSR and with less intend to destroy everything or move it to America. That's of course also, because their people were less affected. We all know, who they acted in the Pacific. But it was also, because they had learned from WW1 and tried to bring stability to Europe. The UDSSR brought a totally different kind of "stability". > In terms of reparations, it’s normal for an invader to pay reparations to their victim, if nothing else to rebuild. What is unusual is that the rest of Germany didn’t pay reparations to Eastern Europe. If you ignore giving up 25% of its landmass with entire cities like Königsberg/Kaliningrad, which is now impoverished because of the system you are defending, then sure. I also don't know whether Poland and other Eastern European countries would have called the UDSSR a victim, after they had been invaded by them. > The insistence of the US on a split Germany with half of the capital as an enclave was the first such hostile action, especially when the USSR was proposing a united neutral Germany. Germans have to be forever thankful for the US keeping tabs on Berlin. It is part of the reason why Germany could reuinte eventually. You probably know about the Berlin Airlift. The UDSSR has proven its open inhumanity not only against enemies but also its own people and people they controlled time and time again. > There were numerous covert attacks against the GDR, what do you think the Stasi were fighting? It's own people. The documents are still there, you can look at them. It was a horrendous system. I cannot imagine why you defend it. I can admit that the West is not perfect. We can find ways to improve it, without defending a system that is so clearly worse.
5y ago