4 ms·

Well, if people start missing the Soviet union, you probably got concerning problems. I think there is very little causality the other way around (missing the S

Well, if people start missing the Soviet union, you probably got concerning problems. I think there is very little causality the other way around (missing the Soviet leads to problems).

microtonal 3y ago
I think it happens naturally in many places because older people tend to look at their history with rose tinted glasses. You forget the bad parts and treasure the good parts (which is not a bad psychological coping mechanism in itself). Add to that that the current world looks more complex as it becomes harder to keep up with age. We see that even in Western countries, where a sizable set of boomers want to restore the order of the good old 50 or 60ies and vote conservative or right wing populist parties.. The question is what do the younger generations think and what portion of the population they are.
- incompatible 3y ago
  This period was a time of rebellion against the more authoritarian styles of government/society that existed in Western countries historically. I doubt that it's nostalgia for the 1960s that's driving modern conservativism. Perhaps any nostalgia for that period would be economic, in that it was still possible for a person (man) with one job to support a family and even own a house without much difficulty. Today, it seems like more of a struggle where people are working multiple jobs for decades to buy over-priced real estate. But modern conservatism doesn't seem to have any particular plan to go back to that kind of economy ... actually I'm not clear what it's actually trying to achieve.
  - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
    I certainly hear from many people on the left that it’s nostalgia for the religious and racial power structure that’s driving it, but I’m not sure I buy it. For the rank and file it might very well be economic, but the up and coming politicians seem to be more about money and power than any actual plan of governance.
    - incompatible 3y ago
      It's hard to imagine that there's a large group who are thinking that their lives will be so much better once abortion is banned and people are no longer allowed to dress as whichever gender they like. The irony about the economic issues is that tax rates and wealth redistribution were so much higher after WW2, and economic inequality was quite a bit less than today. The domination of right wing politics has been increasing inequality for decades, so why would anyone think that moving further to the right would help?
keiferski 3y ago
My point is more that in Poland, communism was always something of a foreign imposition by the Soviet Union, as the history (the Soviet invasion in 1939, plus Russian partitions before that) didn't lend itself to being happy about the situation. Bulgaria, on the other hand, was a close ally of the Soviet Union and more historically, of Russia (at least, more of an ally than Poland.) Yugoslavia wasn't in the Soviet sphere at all and was more "indigenous" and not as repressive as the Soviet states. So in Bulgaria and Ex-Yugoslavia, the memory of the communist era is not as clearly negative as it is in Poland. (Even if it's not positive, either – it's just more murky.)
- f6v 3y ago
  > My point is more that in Poland, communism was always something of a foreign imposition by the Soviet Union I think communism or not is besides the point. Poland has a strong imperial tradition where the state spanned from Baltic almost to the Black Sea. They’ve been occupying and ruling for much longer than they’ve been in a socialist camp, and that had a much bigger impact on their national identity. And, as some others noted, being close to Germany gives Poland a big advantage. On the point of “communism”, take Romania as an example. I took a tour of the Presidential palace when I was in Bucharest. The guide was extremely negative about the communist era(when the palace itself was built), as many Romanians are. She went on and on how the dictator forced the palace construction and how terrible it was. Ironically, the palace is one of the few attraction in Bucharest. Walk just 200m away and it’s going to be rubble and desolation. In summary, I don’t think being anti-communist helps them all that much. > Bulgaria, on the other hand, was a close ally of the Soviet Union and more historically, of Russia Correct me if I’m wrong, but Bulgaria never was an economic powerhouse or major European power, unlike Poland. Between the Ottomans and other empires, they probably don’t have a history of building a strong economy. Being between rock and a hard place, not having resources, etc. probably contributed much more than what you say.
  - NewsyHacker 3y ago
    If you think Bucharest has few attractions besides Casa Poporului, you must have not had a good guidebook and really missed out. The city is full of interesting sites. Yes, the socialist era and the big earthquake damaged the city, but there are still great museums, churches, parks, and sites connected with the artists and men of letters of the 19th century and prewar era.
paganel 3y ago
People miss communism because communist governments provided normal people with stable jobs and guaranteed housing. Present day neo-liberal governments do not provide normal people with stable jobs and guaranteed housing. As such, you could say that choosing neo-liberal governments over communist governments doesn't make utilitarian sense for normal people, they should choose the governments that provide them with the basic necessities of life (i.e. housing and the guaranteed opportunity to earn one's living).

Well, if people start missing the Soviet union, you probably got concerning problems. I think there is very little causality the other way around (missing the Soviet leads to problems).

microtonal 3y ago

I think it happens naturally in many places because older people tend to look at their history with rose tinted glasses. You forget the bad parts and treasure the good parts (which is not a bad psychological coping mechanism in itself). Add to that that the current world looks more complex as it becomes harder to keep up with age. We see that even in Western countries, where a sizable set of boomers want to restore the order of the good old 50 or 60ies and vote conservative or right wing populist parties.. The question is what do the younger generations think and what portion of the population they are.

incompatible 3y ago
This period was a time of rebellion against the more authoritarian styles of government/society that existed in Western countries historically. I doubt that it's nostalgia for the 1960s that's driving modern conservativism. Perhaps any nostalgia for that period would be economic, in that it was still possible for a person (man) with one job to support a family and even own a house without much difficulty. Today, it seems like more of a struggle where people are working multiple jobs for decades to buy over-priced real estate. But modern conservatism doesn't seem to have any particular plan to go back to that kind of economy ... actually I'm not clear what it's actually trying to achieve.
- amanaplanacanal 3y ago
  I certainly hear from many people on the left that it’s nostalgia for the religious and racial power structure that’s driving it, but I’m not sure I buy it. For the rank and file it might very well be economic, but the up and coming politicians seem to be more about money and power than any actual plan of governance.
  - incompatible 3y ago
    It's hard to imagine that there's a large group who are thinking that their lives will be so much better once abortion is banned and people are no longer allowed to dress as whichever gender they like. The irony about the economic issues is that tax rates and wealth redistribution were so much higher after WW2, and economic inequality was quite a bit less than today. The domination of right wing politics has been increasing inequality for decades, so why would anyone think that moving further to the right would help?

keiferski 3y ago

My point is more that in Poland, communism was always something of a foreign imposition by the Soviet Union, as the history (the Soviet invasion in 1939, plus Russian partitions before that) didn't lend itself to being happy about the situation. Bulgaria, on the other hand, was a close ally of the Soviet Union and more historically, of Russia (at least, more of an ally than Poland.) Yugoslavia wasn't in the Soviet sphere at all and was more "indigenous" and not as repressive as the Soviet states. So in Bulgaria and Ex-Yugoslavia, the memory of the communist era is not as clearly negative as it is in Poland. (Even if it's not positive, either – it's just more murky.)

f6v 3y ago
> My point is more that in Poland, communism was always something of a foreign imposition by the Soviet Union I think communism or not is besides the point. Poland has a strong imperial tradition where the state spanned from Baltic almost to the Black Sea. They’ve been occupying and ruling for much longer than they’ve been in a socialist camp, and that had a much bigger impact on their national identity. And, as some others noted, being close to Germany gives Poland a big advantage. On the point of “communism”, take Romania as an example. I took a tour of the Presidential palace when I was in Bucharest. The guide was extremely negative about the communist era(when the palace itself was built), as many Romanians are. She went on and on how the dictator forced the palace construction and how terrible it was. Ironically, the palace is one of the few attraction in Bucharest. Walk just 200m away and it’s going to be rubble and desolation. In summary, I don’t think being anti-communist helps them all that much. > Bulgaria, on the other hand, was a close ally of the Soviet Union and more historically, of Russia Correct me if I’m wrong, but Bulgaria never was an economic powerhouse or major European power, unlike Poland. Between the Ottomans and other empires, they probably don’t have a history of building a strong economy. Being between rock and a hard place, not having resources, etc. probably contributed much more than what you say.
- NewsyHacker 3y ago
  If you think Bucharest has few attractions besides Casa Poporului, you must have not had a good guidebook and really missed out. The city is full of interesting sites. Yes, the socialist era and the big earthquake damaged the city, but there are still great museums, churches, parks, and sites connected with the artists and men of letters of the 19th century and prewar era.

paganel 3y ago

People miss communism because communist governments provided normal people with stable jobs and guaranteed housing. Present day neo-liberal governments do not provide normal people with stable jobs and guaranteed housing. As such, you could say that choosing neo-liberal governments over communist governments doesn't make utilitarian sense for normal people, they should choose the governments that provide them with the basic necessities of life (i.e. housing and the guaranteed opportunity to earn one's living).