Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reagan, the Cold War, and the people of Eastern Europe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Reagan, the Cold War, and the people of Eastern Europe

    Originally posted by Admiral
    I was going to post this in Che's Vietnam thread, but the discourse moved away from the point I wanted to make.

    I really hate and despise how Reagan gets all the credit for ending the Cold War. I don't hate it because I think that Reagan did things that lengthened the cold war, or made it worse. In fact, I'm willing to accept that his policies ended up putting more international pressure on the USSR than existed before. I hate the crediting of Reagan because he was not critical to the collapse of the USSR.

    The people who were are the people of the Warsaw Pact, the people making up Solidarity, the people "living in truth" in Hungary, in the Czechleslovakia, and elsewhere. It was these people who undid the totalitarian regimes in place in their countries, not by challenging it outright, but by building communities outside the jurisdiction of the State. These people were somewhat supported by the West, primarily by John Paul II and the Church, but not really by the US (where was the US in 1948? In 1956? In 1968? And didn't something go down in 1960 as well?).

    It was these people who forced reform in the Warsaw Pact, who made Gorbachev realize that the USSR could not survive without restructuring, and whose power prevented Gorbachev from brutally repressing the breakaway republics the way he may have wanted to.

    The dominant theory of power in the West holds that force equals power, and this has precluded recognition of the resistence in Eastern Europe. They didn't use force, they did not resort to violence (Romania is the exception), so in the eyes of many, there has to be some other impetuous for the collapse of the USSR. These people have turned to Reagan, for he is an obvious substitute. He was the most prominent anti-communist, he stepped up the rhetoric, he must be responsible.

    And this really points to a greater failing. We like to look for problems in the USSR in its economy. It was Communist, therefore in its economy we can find its fatal flaws. And here, we are deluding ourselves. Yes, Reagan's arms race put a strain on the Soviet economy, but that, on its own, is meaningless. The South's economy was in shambles during the Civil War here, and yet they fought on. The economy only becomes an issue when there are greater problems.

    And the real problem is the authoritarian/totalitarian state. In the Warsaw Pact, it was the violence of the state that became the problem. In the face of a hostile state, and especially with that state being the puppet of a foreign power, the power of the discontented masses won the day. Hannah Arendt argues that violence and power are mutually exclusive, and that a state perpetuated by violence must eventually fall. The Eastern Bloc demonstrates just that. The people opposed the state monopoly of violence with constructive nonviolence, building broad movements like Solidarity that did not violently challenge the state but created a system where the violence of the state became irrelevent.

    In order to maintain control over the Eastern Bloc at this point, the USSR would have had to kill the vast majority of the people there. Had Gorbachev sought to retain control, he would have fought a bloody war that in the end would have failed just as the Soviets failed in Afghanistan, and we failed in Vietnam. It is in recognizing this that Gorbachev shows his leadership skills.

    The question, then, is how this transfers into the implosion of the USSR. Basically, the totalitarian USSR only survived because it kept people ignorant about the West, with the people accepting their oppression because they accepted the state-constructed differences between themselves and the West. When Gorbachev allowed liberalization of the Warsaw Pact, people in the USSR demanded the same rights, especially in places like the Baltic Republics, which still remembered their pre-WWII independence. Once again, with the people on the side of reform, Gorbachev would've had to fight a very difficult guerilla war to maintain Soviet unity. It is worth noting that when the hardline communists launched a coup, the spirit of reform had spread so much that the soldiers themselves, often thought by politicians to be pawns without independent thought, identified with the reformers more than their superiors, and refused to obey orders.

    So, my overall point is that the "Reagan Ended the Cold War" crowd not only distort history, they do it in such a way as to rob a truly brave group of people the recognition these people deserve. Once again, Reagan did contribute to an economic crunch that exacerbated conditions and may have shortened the USSR's life by a couple of years. But the seeds for the defeat of the USSR were sown in ashes of the Prague Spring of 1968, and were tended by the people of the Eastern Bloc. Had Reagan been the only power opposed to the USSR, we would still be in a cold war today.
    Blah

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Lancer
      It all started going downhill for the Rooskies when I took up my post on the border with East Germany in late '75. Lets see, born in '58, plus 17, yeah, '75. As a Cavalry trooper I was charged with the mission of crushing the red menace if they dared venture forth from their dark lair. It is said that they were about to do so, but the imposing sight of my slight but wirey 17 year old form standing astride the border, resolutely with weapon held high, gave them pause, and left a yellow puddle at their feet.

      Yup, I won the cold war in my early days, left them commies an empty shell which nevertheless took some time to fall. Reagan finished my work, finished that evil empire, God bless him.

      That was just the begining for me, I'll have to tell you the epic saga of my entire life one day, but most of you are far too young to hear the tails of my greater conquests.

      You see, chicks dig me, but who can blame them? Were it not for Ted Striker, I would be the foremost stud on these forums.
      http://www.hardware-wiki.com - A wiki about computers, with focus on Linux support.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Agathon
        You lie Oerdin!! Reagan cured my impotence.
        I thought you said it was Thatcher?
        He's got the Midas touch.
        But he touched it too much!
        Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!

        Comment


        • #19
          Defeating the Soviets was a big job, and millions of us had a hand in it. Reagan was important without a doubt and is given credit largely because he was seen as being largely responsible for the invigoration of the U.S. at a critical juncture.
          He's got the Midas touch.
          But he touched it too much!
          Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!

          Comment


          • #20
            to the OP
            Quendelie axan!

            Comment


            • #21
              I think it can be truthfully said that the Reagan years were a turning point in the Warsaw pact alliance. For reasons not fully clear the Soviet Union decided that it would not hold it's zone of influence together by brute force. When dissident East Europeans challenged them in 1990 and 1991 virtually the entire second world unravelled. I'm convinced that it was during the period from 1980 to 1988 that the crucial changes in attitude occurred. Was it due to Reagan's aggressive military expansion? Arguably the SU could have refused to match him, secure in the knowledge that they had more than enough nukes to wipe out the world and also that cheap guerillas were an effective means of discomforting the west. Was it Reagan's showboating challenges to the SU's heavy handed means of controlling its people and its allies? Reagan wasn't the first western leader to challenge the SU on this issue, but he may have had the most flair of any challenger since Winston Churchill. On the whole I think that Reagan was one of many chips in the wall that finally collapsed in 1991. Many of these chips may have been as much internal as external.
              "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                Comment


                • #23
                  The Baltics must be some of the most anti-Russian people if they choose to praise nazis of all people for fighting the communists. Then again if that is only a minority it is ok. Butit has raised some eyebrows in an EU that is not nor should it be accustumed to such exhibitions....
                  Saras?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I think it can be truthfully said that the Reagan years were a turning point in the Warsaw pact alliance. For reasons not fully clear the Soviet Union decided that it would not hold it's zone of influence together by brute force. When dissident East Europeans challenged them in 1990 and 1991 virtually the entire second world unravelled. I'm convinced that it was during the period from 1980 to 1988 that the crucial changes in attitude occurred. Was it due to Reagan's aggressive military expansion? Arguably the SU could have refused to match him, secure in the knowledge that they had more than enough nukes to wipe out the world and also that cheap guerillas were an effective means of discomforting the west. Was it Reagan's showboating challenges to the SU's heavy handed means of controlling its people and its allies? Reagan wasn't the first western leader to challenge the SU on this issue, but he may have had the most flair of any challenger since Winston Churchill. On the whole I think that Reagan was one of many chips in the wall that finally collapsed in 1991. Many of these chips may have been as much internal as external.



                    Bunnies!
                    Welcome to the DBTSverse!
                    God, Allah, boedha, siva, the stars, tealeaves and the palm of you hand. If you are so desperately looking for something to believe in GO FIND A MIRROR
                    'Space05us is just a stupid nice guy' - Space05us

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by paiktis22
                      The Baltics <...> choose to praise nazis of all people for fighting the communists.
                      Where the phuck do you get this crap?

                      But it has raised some eyebrows in an EU that is not nor should it be accustumed to such exhibitions....
                      Saras?
                      ?
                      Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                      Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                      Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        it was in the news but some months ago.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Link?
                          Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                          Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                          Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            no link
                            what it understood was that there was a tolerance or even praise of the nazis in the baltics (there were people there fighting for the nazis IIRC) and that had to do with the relationship these countries had (have?) with USSR/Russia

                            but the government of the baltic state in question withdrew what it was doing after the reaction. that was a long time ago btw.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Sikander
                              I thought you said it was Thatcher?
                              "And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man." -- JFK Inaugural, 1961
                              "Extremism in the defense of liberty is not a vice." -- Barry Goldwater, 1964 GOP Nomination acceptance speech (not George W. Bush 40 years later...)
                              2004 Presidential Candidate
                              2008 Presidential Candidate (for what its worth)

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by paiktis22
                                no link
                                what it understood was that there was a tolerance or even praise of the nazis in the baltics (there were people there fighting for the nazis IIRC) and that had to do with the relationship these countries had (have?) with USSR/Russia

                                but the government of the baltic state in question withdrew what it was doing after the reaction. that was a long time ago btw.
                                Never ever has a Baltic government (disclaimer: Latvia and Estonia I could be wrong, but very small probability) endrosed or maintained an even neutral stance over nazis and their atrocities. Individual idiots, on the other hand, are around. But that is hardly exclusive to the Baltics, now, is it?

                                There were people fighting for the nazis EVERYWHERE. Even Greece.
                                Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                                Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                                Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X