Here is a very good point I never thought of before. I was told by my colleague there that a right wing Italian newspaper recently complained:
“Why do people not celebrate the fall of communism in 1989?"
A very good question, though the answer may not suit them. The various events around the so called 'fall of communism' in Eastern Europe are 30 years ago this year. But there are no large scale parties or celebrations about that at all... even though people still celebrate things like Thanksgiving and Guy Fawkes day from much further back in time.
Some of the key events happened exactly at this time: in June 1989 Solidarity claimed victory in Polish parliamentary elections, and in July Gorbachev announced that each country in the Soviet zone ‘could take its own path to socialism’. Earlier in the spring the Hungarian Communists renounced it’s ‘leading role’ and proposed a multi-party political system. In November 1989 the Berlin Wall was opened and the Czechoslovakian Communist government resigned.
Out of all of that and more only the fall of the Berlin wall is widely remembered. Even then it seems mostly because its a simple symbol of change that everyone can easily visualise. And because it symbolises the uniting of a country, rather than the fall of communism.
I suggest that the fact that there are no such celebrations perhaps indicates that people know there is something false and empty about it. This centers around two aspects: a suspicion or knowledge that it was not really 'communism' that ended, but something else; and that the dream of freedom and a better system was not fulfilled by the neo-liberal free market system that came in.
I noticed a conservative posting about this subject. They SAID:
"So while the BBC is happy to celebrate many significant 30th anniversaries, along with some frivolous ones, I’m not expecting too much about Europe escaping from Communist tyranny. Neither am I expecting recognition to be shown to those many people, famous and unknown, who showed resolution and strength, took enormous risks or made great sacrifices, for the freedom of Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, we should remember them."
We can dismiss the silly 'left wing media bias' point. This is a cliche that right wingers often trot out and it takes very little research and thought to see that it is false. The mainstream media is massively dominated by a few giant capitalist corporations. That is a factual point.
Actually, though, I agree that such people should be remembered. Since they fought in very difficult circumstances against a bad system. But we can not call it ‘Communist tyranny’. Any reasonable historical analysis of how those societies operated shows quite clearly that they fell far short of various criteria necessary to think of them as fully working communism. They simply fail the test. Yes they CALLED themselves ‘communist’, but so what? You can call yourself a doctor, walk around in a white suit, you could even believe it in your deluded state…but if you failed the medical exams then there is something suspect about you. You don’t really have the right to call yourselves a doctor, and I certainly wouldn’t want you operating on me.
Very few on the left support those eras now. Even those that do see various positive aspects in the Stalinist or Maoist eras hesitate from saying confidently: ‘Yes, that was fully working communism’. At best they say things like: ‘Those systems were not as evil and twisted as we are led to believe, they did have some admirable aspects and achievements…despite the very negative aspects and falling far short of a good communist society.’
Either way, what fell 30 years ago can be more clearly called ‘corrupt state socialism’ or ‘state dictatorship’. However it does not suit the capitalists powers to call it that, then or now. They wished for it to be seen as the final defeat of communism, so that their capitalist system can be seen to be the only way. But, much to their annoyance, the idea that there IS an alternative refuses to go away. Over the last 10 years or so we have seen a very considerable increase in interest in alternative ways of organising society. The recent wave of school age rebels trying to save the environment has a strongly anti-capitalist aspect to it.
"So while the BBC is happy to celebrate many significant 30th anniversaries, along with some frivolous ones, I’m not expecting too much about Europe escaping from Communist tyranny. Neither am I expecting recognition to be shown to those many people, famous and unknown, who showed resolution and strength, took enormous risks or made great sacrifices, for the freedom of Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, we should remember them."
We can dismiss the silly 'left wing media bias' point. This is a cliche that right wingers often trot out and it takes very little research and thought to see that it is false. The mainstream media is massively dominated by a few giant capitalist corporations. That is a factual point.
Actually, though, I agree that such people should be remembered. Since they fought in very difficult circumstances against a bad system. But we can not call it ‘Communist tyranny’. Any reasonable historical analysis of how those societies operated shows quite clearly that they fell far short of various criteria necessary to think of them as fully working communism. They simply fail the test. Yes they CALLED themselves ‘communist’, but so what? You can call yourself a doctor, walk around in a white suit, you could even believe it in your deluded state…but if you failed the medical exams then there is something suspect about you. You don’t really have the right to call yourselves a doctor, and I certainly wouldn’t want you operating on me.
Very few on the left support those eras now. Even those that do see various positive aspects in the Stalinist or Maoist eras hesitate from saying confidently: ‘Yes, that was fully working communism’. At best they say things like: ‘Those systems were not as evil and twisted as we are led to believe, they did have some admirable aspects and achievements…despite the very negative aspects and falling far short of a good communist society.’
Either way, what fell 30 years ago can be more clearly called ‘corrupt state socialism’ or ‘state dictatorship’. However it does not suit the capitalists powers to call it that, then or now. They wished for it to be seen as the final defeat of communism, so that their capitalist system can be seen to be the only way. But, much to their annoyance, the idea that there IS an alternative refuses to go away. Over the last 10 years or so we have seen a very considerable increase in interest in alternative ways of organising society. The recent wave of school age rebels trying to save the environment has a strongly anti-capitalist aspect to it.
However, there are some celebrations, of a sort, in various countries. None in Italy, or the UK, or France or the USA, etc. But in Poland and the Czech republic and in Berlin there are some. But nothing like the triumphant 'capitalism won!' type celebrations that right wingers may feel are warranted. Just to focus on Poland, a REPORT about the country notes: "In a display of bitter divisions between ruling elites and the opposition, celebrating the 30th anniversary of the partly free election that marked the end of the 45-year Communist rule in Poland was an overwhelmingly partisan affair....The ruling right-wing populists from the Law and Justice (PiS) party held a number of official events in the capital Warsaw, carefully planned not to give too much credit to heroes of the anti-communist resistance of the 1980s – among them Lech Walesa – who now happen to be in the opposition’s camp."
So we note there two things: the celebrations symbolise the divisions in the country, between right and left. The role of democratic left people in combatting the ruling soviet regimes is downplayed and they try to make it look like a victory of right wing free market and conservative forces. That such things rings false is probably one of the reasons that the ‘fall of communism’ is not universally celebrated as a clear and positive thing. And notice, that, quite the contrary to that which the above right winger noted, it was not a biased left wing media who downplay the events, but a right wing government with a strong control over the media.
Another commentator NOTES: "We didn't build a Poland of enlightened, free citizens who want to live in a tolerant society," whereas other bemoan not having taken Poland back to its Christian roots. Another REPORT looked at attitudes and economic performance and mentions very considerable doubt among those old enough to have lived through the changes: "Those who experienced the events of those years would be forgiven for wondering why so many outsiders were celebrating the fall of communism. Moreover, even as incomes eventually recovered and then rose to new heights, it came at the expense of significantly longer working hours, incomparably more stress, frayed family relations and social bonds, and massive cultural change....For all these reasons, those old enough to remember the Polish People’s Republic remain ambivalent even today about the transformations."
Research from Eastern Europe in the 90s supports this: “We didn’t realize what we had” has become a common refrain. “The latest public opinion surveys show that many Russians consider Brezhnev’s era and even Stalin’s era to have been better than the present-day period, at least as far as economic conditions and personal safety are concerned” (New York Times, 10/15/95). Is it any wonder they feel half hearted about celebrating something that a significant section then and now feel may not have been such a good idea? The common idea put around in the west is that folk in central and eastern Europe were crying out for a western free market system. However, it now seems that many of them simply wanted a more democratically organised form of socialism than had been the case under the authoritarian soviet system. Since they didn’t get that, then why celebrate?
If we look at the data mentioned in that report we can see that it took until 2006 until Poland’s economy recovered to the point that take home pay achieved the rate it was in 1989. That is hardly a glowing support for the free market. Though we can see that the present rate is now far above the 1989 rate, which may indeed be due to free market driven growth (let’s be fair here!). However, look at the longer term data: from this we can see that from 1950 to 1970 the take home pay doubled, and that by 1980 it had more than tripled — I estimate a rough increase of a 360%. Whereas, by 2016 it had only just reach the point of being double the level at 1990. So lets say that by this year, 2019, its at 260% more than in 1990. Forgive my crude calculations, but doesn’t that mean the money the average Pole had increased MORE under so called communism? Quite a lot more.
So we note there two things: the celebrations symbolise the divisions in the country, between right and left. The role of democratic left people in combatting the ruling soviet regimes is downplayed and they try to make it look like a victory of right wing free market and conservative forces. That such things rings false is probably one of the reasons that the ‘fall of communism’ is not universally celebrated as a clear and positive thing. And notice, that, quite the contrary to that which the above right winger noted, it was not a biased left wing media who downplay the events, but a right wing government with a strong control over the media.
Another commentator NOTES: "We didn't build a Poland of enlightened, free citizens who want to live in a tolerant society," whereas other bemoan not having taken Poland back to its Christian roots. Another REPORT looked at attitudes and economic performance and mentions very considerable doubt among those old enough to have lived through the changes: "Those who experienced the events of those years would be forgiven for wondering why so many outsiders were celebrating the fall of communism. Moreover, even as incomes eventually recovered and then rose to new heights, it came at the expense of significantly longer working hours, incomparably more stress, frayed family relations and social bonds, and massive cultural change....For all these reasons, those old enough to remember the Polish People’s Republic remain ambivalent even today about the transformations."
Research from Eastern Europe in the 90s supports this: “We didn’t realize what we had” has become a common refrain. “The latest public opinion surveys show that many Russians consider Brezhnev’s era and even Stalin’s era to have been better than the present-day period, at least as far as economic conditions and personal safety are concerned” (New York Times, 10/15/95). Is it any wonder they feel half hearted about celebrating something that a significant section then and now feel may not have been such a good idea? The common idea put around in the west is that folk in central and eastern Europe were crying out for a western free market system. However, it now seems that many of them simply wanted a more democratically organised form of socialism than had been the case under the authoritarian soviet system. Since they didn’t get that, then why celebrate?
If we look at the data mentioned in that report we can see that it took until 2006 until Poland’s economy recovered to the point that take home pay achieved the rate it was in 1989. That is hardly a glowing support for the free market. Though we can see that the present rate is now far above the 1989 rate, which may indeed be due to free market driven growth (let’s be fair here!). However, look at the longer term data: from this we can see that from 1950 to 1970 the take home pay doubled, and that by 1980 it had more than tripled — I estimate a rough increase of a 360%. Whereas, by 2016 it had only just reach the point of being double the level at 1990. So lets say that by this year, 2019, its at 260% more than in 1990. Forgive my crude calculations, but doesn’t that mean the money the average Pole had increased MORE under so called communism? Quite a lot more.
One way or another there seems to be a very high level of dissatisfaction about how the revolutions of 1989 played out. The dream of economic prosperity and political freedom has only partially come true and in a very uneven way. The reality of how capitalism works seems to have disappointed many in Eastern Europe. And in Western Europe and North America the increasing economic inequality and stagnation of both the working class and the middle class has created a deep dissatisfaction with how capitalism is working — or not working. Added to this the damage the capitalist system is doing to the environment means that we may well reach a point in countries such as the UK, Spain and Denmark etc, where a majority of people reject it and demand another revolution. Rather than this round being called the ‘velvet revolution’ it may become known as the ‘eco-revolution’. Among the young it seems to already be starting.
The big question then, is when the ‘eco-revolution’ reaches flood point, so to speak, will the capitalist powers in various countries lay down their arms without a fight? The supposedly bloodthirsty evil tyrannies of the Soviet bloc almost all did. But will the ‘freedom loving’ capitalists?
I doubt it. Which in itself tells us a lot.
The big question then, is when the ‘eco-revolution’ reaches flood point, so to speak, will the capitalist powers in various countries lay down their arms without a fight? The supposedly bloodthirsty evil tyrannies of the Soviet bloc almost all did. But will the ‘freedom loving’ capitalists?
I doubt it. Which in itself tells us a lot.