The world after 1989

Walls in the mind


See article

Readers' comments



I do not remember "muddy coffee" in Prague in those years. However, I noticed that most people in the UK or US even today drink a thin watery brew which does not deserve to be called coffee :-)


Nov. 13, 2009,
From the Statement by President Obama on the Ukrainian Holodomor Remembrance Day:

“Seventy six years ago, millions of innocent Ukrainians – men, women, and children – starved to death as a result of the deliberate policies of the regime of Joseph Stalin. Tomorrow, we join together, Ukrainian-Americans and all Americans, to commemorate these tragic events and to honor the many victims.
From 1932 to 1933, the Ukrainian people suffered horribly during what has become known as the Holodomor – “death by hunger” – due to the Stalin regime’s seizure of crops and farms across Ukraine. Ukraine had once been a breadbasket of Europe. Ukrainians could have fed themselves and saved millions of lives, had they been allowed to do so. As we remember this calamity, we pay respect to millions of victims who showed tremendous strength and courage. The Ukrainian people overcame the horror of the great famine and have gone on to build a free and democratic country.”


Seven839 wrote:"People are hungry but happy with “orange revolution” i guess – what a joke. Where is US help.."

Blah, blah, blah, the same trush, only even more incoherent ...


This is amazing that Albania is ahead of Ukraine in per capita GDP. Instead of being a bread basket of Europe, Ukraine is becoming a European beggar. People are hungry but happy with “orange revolution” i guess – what a joke. Where is US help...oh, there is only interest in military and NATO expansion. Some suggest that ppp should be applied, well they are dead wrong. In today global economy, the emphasis is on world prices and ppp is using subsidised domestic prices. Would it be right to use subsidised oil price before Russian correction? For comparison, the figures in table are right.


This post is instigated by the birkozo insult…
1. The historical documents place Slovaks on the present Hungarian territory in the 6th century while Magyars hordes were still north of Crimea in 9th century; in fact nomadic Magyars aggressiveness split the southern Slavs from the northern. Present Hungary has population of 9 million and from that half are Slavs.
2. Hungary was in both wars on the side of the evil and lost and since when a loser decides the post-war arrangement? Is Versailles agreement illegal? Only for revisionists, that dream of greater Hungary.
3. The fact is that there were ½ a mill. Hungarian in post war Slovakia and ½ a mill. Slovaks in Hungary and presently the Hungarian minority increased while Slovak minority in Hungary has been decimated by the administrative harassment and denial of the language rights.
4. Hungarian minority in Slovakia has more rights than any other minority – EU said so.
This article is about the is a shame that Hungary is an economic beggar of Europe and needed bailout because of mismanagement, and with the present economic indicators would not qualify for the EU membership.


math-phys wrote: " History can never be hidden, especially historical recent facts : 40 millions of Russians were killed in the second world war"

The principle is right, your facts and figures are wrong. Somehow you have missed the fact that it was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ( of which Russia was only one of 16 republics) that fought the war in Eastern Europe. It has become fasionable to escallate and enhance RUSSIAN losses and to minimise or ignore more severe losses in relative terms suffered by other nations that fought Hitler's armies. All you need to do is to look at the map of Central and Eastern Europe and trace the line of easternmost advance by Hitler's armies in order to see that all territories of Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic states, Moldova were occupied by the Germans while at best only one third of the European Russia suffered from the fighting.
Far from being a Russian army, the Soviet Red army consisted of several fronts, dozens of army Groups and hundreds of divisions manned by the most diverse manpower imaginable, - yes, Russians, Ukrainians, Poles, Belorusians, Armenians, Chechens, Georgians to Kazakhs, Turkmen, Tartars, Yakutians and a long list of other nationalities. Millions died, more millions were wounded at the front and even more millions fell victims of Nazi slave labour practices.

For you or anyone else to call them all Russians is an insult to their memories. You wouldn't call millions of British Commonwealt servicemen, including Scotts, Irish, Australians, Canadians, Indians and many others, - all just simple English, would you ?

Learn to respect others if you want to earn their respect.

Tighimog Posporo

Cynicism is a direct product of communism. Filipino director's bisaya films on the pointlessness of cars suggest that no perfect system can occur and it's only a matter of time before we realize we're neither enemies to each other because, unless global warming is another capitalist propaganda, nature is the real foe.


The table of the GDP is misleading without showing the relative debt. Some West European countries can sustain higher GDP only by borrowing, in addition a non-productive sector ratio to productive is important.


Math Physics

History can never be hidden, especially historical recent facts : 40 millions of Russians were killed in the second world war .The " Berlin Wall" was just one more development of this beyond imagination humanitarian European war disaster- a kind of brutal war repay so well accepted in European wars protocols, which by its turn ,were another development of the XIX European colonization brutal and ruthless waged wars in the third world as can be seen from a famous square in central London City acknowledging that contries that had contributed to Britsh Empire wealthness."


What an amazing article! In all fairness, it filled me with emotions and memories from those difficult but exuberating transition years...By the way, those smoky cafes still exist in some places, with people bashing the EU these days... Would be better if they had constructive discussions on how to improve it!!!


To Birkozo;

I am for any nations using its own language anywhere in any country, however, Hungary has never been an example for minority protection. Slovaks (and others)have the right to use their own languages, but this was not the case since Hungary gained autonomy from the Habsburgs in 1867.
Today, Hungary has all the laws the EU demands for minorities, but there are barely any linguistic minorities left. They have all been assimilated in one way or another. If we want to go back into history as far as Saint Stephen...or even before, we can mention that Slavs lived in western Hungary before the Magyars arrived. Slovaks and other minorities did not have their own schools in the interwar years. After WWII, the Germans were driven away and their language was discouraged. After 1948, the state clamped down on the southern Slavs...while the Slovaks were able to keep their gimnazium in Budapest and Bekescsaba for their large pockets of population in the country. As recently as 30 years ago, the state refused to write my brother's ( and other relatives') name in the official record because they were not "Hungarian" names. Many Hungarians point out that communism was at fault for that, but this policy went on long before that.
As soon as Horthy's armies marched into Slovakia and Bacska, they made all the schools Hungarian even in the communities where there were no Hungarians present.
On the other hand, Hungarians had their schools, political parties, cultural organizations in all neighbouring countries (including a university in Slovakia today, higher schools of education in Romania and Serbia (that even Milosevic did not touch). Hungarians should not worry in neighbouring countries, they are strong and well established.
Hungary might have all the laws to protect it minorities, but they are barely present.



The article is titled "walls in the mind". So I just add on the humble observations of an experienced man. - No ideology attached to it. I'm just thinking that it might be helpful to look into as many aspects as possible . . . for not becoming tunnel-visioned over an unreachable goal, like the famous “hamster on the wheel”.

If someone turns intelligent observations into narrow-minded "visions", then this is rather such a “religious approach” you’ve mentioned. But this might be a question of "temperament" - not a question of permission or refusal of free thoughts. Every thesis is checked by its own antithesis – if we allow it to be.

Only this way it is guaranteed that visible facts don’t become a “tunnel visions" - not more and not less. The one who stops observing the obvious and ignores visible facts is the "ideologue" - not the one who dares to think.

My thesis here is that traditions can be a stimulus or a handicap, if they are deep-rooted in a society.

The Ottoman Empire failed because of its administrative inefficiencies in modern times – and because of deep rooted nepotism. European societies that were e.g. under Ottoman rule and carry this “character” still inside, will probably scantily advance as long as this burden is not completely shed off.

The Russian Empire stumbled over its inflexibility and corruption. Modern societies that carry this historic burden with them, might be still handicapped compared to societies that don’t have these negative qualities.

Thus, it might be wise to root out those “social handicaps” if social and economic advance is desired. . . . And there is surely no “ideology” behind these thoughts.


To Hermitter,

I think there is truth in your comment on the cultural factors on economic development.

But I also think what you say is (1) only part of the story, because culture is only one process in the picture, and (2) that graph now is only a photo of the process that is still ongoing, so it is premature to draw conclusions on such a graph (nor take it as a proof from anything, not now).

Romania for example, was a pole of development of the Europe before WWII, and a country of Immigration. Reasons for this were several:

- the go-for-it and let's-do-it mentality,
- especially because there was a period of freedom from imperial interferences,
- also the natural resources (Romanians were pioneer in petrol exploitation technologies,
- just to give just one example) and good lands,
- also a booming industry (cutting-edge for that time; very much of it developed locally)
- also the strategic geographical position,
- doubled by good commercial skills and a rich culture and mentality of both pride and collaboration with all nations,
- good and developing infrastructure, good engineers and scientists,
- a tradition of democratic society
- and also the size: Romania was a big European country before the bolshevik calamity.

What counted in the two decades after the fall of the communism was especially how geographically close a country was from the free-and-developed Europe, because the first years could only hope by development by "contamination" from the west.

From now on, what will count will be the power of a country to be itself a pole of development. And this is a different story; the next two decades will look very different.

I have looked at the dynamics numbers, and Romania is the both the fastest developer and the richest in development potential from all countries above 9-10 million in Central Europe. Romania has 22 million (still un-united with Rep. Moldova). From my point of view, and because of the reasons that were partly enumerated above, Romania will be pivot in the development of Central Europe and a pillar of development of the European Union.


I am a brit expat living and based in Warsaw Poland since 1990.I have just spent several weeks travelling on business from Finland down to Greece, visiting the three Baltic States, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria, all recently new members of both NATO and the EU. Plus Serbia, the rump of ex-Yugoslavia and badly in need of integration with its more prosperous neighbours to the north.
The differences between the countries are enormous, just as there are major differences beteen the UK,Spain, Germany Greece etc. They have a common history prior to 1989 as the ex-colonies of the Soviet Russian European Empire. Since then though there has been a common purpose to freely democratise, modernise amd integrate with the more economically advanced parts of Europe. All for the better, thereby providing hope for a better future for the ordinary citizens.
People quickly forget just how bad it was 20 years ago in this part of Europe. Just look at the current life style and standard of living and personal freedom "enjoyed" by the ordinary citizens of the Ukraine, Moldova, Byelarus and Russia itself. Not failed States but certainly grossly failing their citizens, in marked contrast to the eastern member States of the EU.
One last point: please do not confuse authoritarian dictatorships (political and economic system in one)with capitalism which is simply an economic system implemented mostly in democracies. "Democratic socialism" is niether democratic nor socialist. Its a propagandist's term used to mask dictatorial communism.


to kornilov:

You need to understand economic indicators. As already pointed out on the PPP basis Ukrainian per capita GDP is US $ 9,308 (IMF data for 2008). That certainly at least 10% of West Europe.

Learn something about purchasing power parity.



The problem with such theories is just like with marxist vision of history in communist regimes - i.e. everything leads to the inevitable victory of the Communism and facts are chosen to support that idea.

I belive that in the next year the list will be much, much different considering the rate of growth in the region.

What would you do with your theory then ?

Anyway random statistics in the middle of a fluid process matter little.
Of course there are some obvious truths - territory of the present Czech Republic was an industrial hub of Austro-Hungary, Hungary was in general better shape than Romania, Latvia and Estonia were the richest parts of the USSR, Bulgaria was usually among the poorest etc.
BUT those factors can be defeated, sometimes faster than anyone could expect.
Let's wait a decade or two we will see impressive changes, I am sure.


Here comes my “historic-cultural-relevance-theory” again: The top GDP earners, as far as relevant to indicate wealth and performance, were also in the past culturally and socially much more tied to the “West” than their less performing peers. This might explain their performance-advantage we see now over the “rest of the pack”.

Slovenia, Czechoslovakia, Croatia, and Hungry were all part of the Hapsburg-Danube monarchy (whereby Croatia is not even yet an EU-member). Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia were part of the rich North German Hanse-League and Estonia has beyond that close cultural and linguistic ties to Finland.

To “lean” more towards a traditionally Western society (maybe through intensive cultural exchange) might be a recipe to follow for the underperformers.


@Central European :

Please give me a "functioning" state in your dear Central Europe other than the Czech republic or Slovenia ?
Its easy to critisize everything but at least Belgium is not governed by the mob. Think before saying such nonsense


To Didomyk:

Didn't you notice the table included in the article where your beloved "Ukraine's" per capita GDP is more than 3.5 times less than Russia's????



Products and events


Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines

