Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to Western

It wasn't in either circumstance.

You rarely ever hear anything about Eastern Europe in history books besides the Russian Empire (which was a shithole), so...

>>2426255
>What is the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth?

>>2426255
One time I read the original Dracula book from 1890 or something. At the start the main dude (Keanu Reeves) is travelling from England across Europe to Transylvania, and he comments on how Europe gets worse the further East you go. So it, or at least the social perception of it, predates Communism

>>2426255
>Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to Western Europe
No

>>2426408
Irrelevant?

>>2426255
Mongols literally fucked their brains out

>>2426421
Today we will play: Find the protestant

>>2426402
I find it funny that people consider how of often a nation gets mentioned in public education as some sort of measurment on how relevant a nation is.

>>2426597
Uhhh...

File: 1481420128029.png (839KB, 750x3250px) Image search: [Google]

839KB, 750x3250px

Certainly throughout modern history. There is a meme beloved by sundry nationalistic types that Hungary and Poland were on par with Germany before big bad Stalin came along, but that's a load of trash.

Perhaps in the medieval or early modern period things were different. It's hard to get good per capita estimates for those days, most contemporary authors focused on the wealth of the court rather than the people. Certain the crown of Poland was insanely wealthy.

>>2426255
>France
>NATO country

Pick one

>>2426255
>Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to Western Europe or only when it's under occupation of Communism Regimes?
No&no. Communists stopped progression, not made countries under occupation poor. Poor countries from Western Europe during that time did a lot better(like Spain).
>>2426636
I don't know what was situation in Hungary, but I'm pretty sure Poland was devastated after WW1, during which it was a battlefield.
> In 1915 Polish territories were looted and abandoned by the retreating Imperial Russian army, trying to emulate the scorched earth policy of 1812;[3][4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Kalisz
> Certain the crown of Poland was insanely wealthy.
Crown of Poland was insanely poor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege_of_Koszyce

>>2426255
Isn't this board meant to be for people into history?
Did you miss the part where western Europe was just as shit until coal, steam engines and factories popped up there?

This economic east-west divide comes from the Russian and Ottoman empires not embracing industrialization, thinking it a fad.
And the cultural east-west divide comes from the Russian and Ottoman empires not embracing enlightenment, again thinking it a fad.

Its a new development, not the status quo.

>>2426605
When people say popular history is eurocentric, thats not jut political correctness and tumblr trigger queens. It actually is, and its centered in western Europe and the anglosphere.

File: peter-der-grosse.jpg (57KB, 728x424px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 728x424px

>>2426255

>*becomes slightly agitated*

Eastern Europe was on par with the West for quite a while.

In fact;

"What sort of barbaric country have you sent me to! The dwellings here are dark, the churches misshapen, and the customs primitive!" - Anna Yaroslavna in a letter to her father from Paris, 11th century

>>2426255
Yes and no. Some of the time Eastern European countries were behind their Western European counterparts, but not always and not in everything.

Peter the Great is for example remembered as the Tsar that westernized Russia, so clearly at least Russia was at the time lagging behind the rest of Europe.

However, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, for example, was relatively modern and liberal for its time in certain areas.

>>2426577
because we have already found the butthurt pole

>>2426255
"Always" is a big statement, but I'd say the East was definitely behind civilisationally at least as early as sometime in the 15th-16th centuries, when Western Europe abandoned serfdom - the East would cling to it (with various degrees of extent and severity) well into the 19th century.

This kept the peasants poor and limited the expansion of cities and native manufacture. They weren't late to industrialisation because they thought it was a "fad" - there simply wasn't any economic basis for it like labour not being tied up in agriculture, big sources of capital other than landowners, strong urban centres with a demand for consumer products...

Where industrialisation did occur in the East it required a powerful state enacting wide-spread reforms to make it possible like in Prussia.

Note that this definition of "the East" includes the bulk of German states.

ottoman presence is the reason

apart from poland which was devastated by teutonic order, swedes and ruskies instead

>>2427634
>its centered in western Europe and the anglosphere
That depends on where you live. Yes, if you're in the Anglosphere then popular history will focus on the anglosphere. If you live in Germany the focus will be on German history. If you live in Sweden the focus will be on Swedish history. There are people currently living in the world who know WWII as "that war between China and Japan" and know nearly nothing about what went down in Europe at the time.

File: 1385576904388.jpg (47KB, 297x317px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 297x317px

>all these people talking about countries they know nothing about

>>2427862
>history began in 1940

>>2427865
>question is about if east is only shit because of commies
>pic shows that in 1940 eastern countries were on par with West and how it all went to shit because of commies
What exactly is your problem here?

>>2427875
Or, possibly, that massive Earth-shattering war that was mainly fought in Eastern Europe.

File: eastern-front-ww2-maps-001.jpg (200KB, 1210x929px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1210x929px

>>2427879
You mean the one that was fought in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus? Yeah, that sure fucked up Czech economy.

>>2427875
The west became wealthier than the east before communism.
Starting at 1940 is retarded, this was already in place back then.

>>2427883
>Nazis didn't seize all of Czechoslovakia's industry for their war machine

>>2427883
Yeah, bro. WW2 only had devastating effects on Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.

>>2427891
If anything Belarus and Ukraine were blitzed through, and didn't suffer THAT much fighting.

>>2427884
The West was always wealthier, but the difference wasn't as significant as it was after commies.

>>2427890
>using factories somehow makes economy go bad
???

>>2427906
>The West was always wealthier
No, it wasn't always wealthier. It became wealthier with the industrial revolution.
The Russian and the Ottoman empire made the east poor, not communism. It was already a fact before communism was concieved.

>Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to Western Europe
Eastern Europe fell behind when sea trade made land routes from Asia to western Europe worthless and all kinds of social, political and technological developments spawned at the end of renaissance that could out-compete medieval conventions that persisted in eastern Europe.

>>2427906
>using a country's wealth and labour to fund another country's war isn't bad for its economy

>>2427912
I am from Czech republic, i think i know what i'm talking about.

>No, it wasn't always wealthier. It became wealthier with the industrial revolution.
Well okay, this might be true, but it still means West was wealthier for the last 200 years. And point still stands about the difference not being so significant. Czechoslovakia was actually in top 10 richest countries before WW2

>>2427919
Bohemia is west, not east. Check your nationalism at the door when discussing history.

>>2427900
They were occupied for three years, lost like a quarter of their populations and their major cities (e.g. Minsk and Vitebsk in Belarus) were razed to the ground. Fucking Kharkiv had four major battles fought over it.

>>2427921
Nobody except few special snowflakes think that and you know it

>>2427928
Oh my god, it is brainwashed. Nevermind, I won't respond further.

File: 1488109446740.jpg (943KB, 3600x2400px) Image search: [Google]

943KB, 3600x2400px

>>2426255
Feudalism and serfdom

>>2426408
shit since Sigmundus III (aka perfidious swede)

>>2427928
once emperor of the HRE = west

>>2427957
By that logic, east Romania (Banat) is also western, since it was under Habsbourg rule

>>2427958
Hungary is indeed western, and Banat is traditionally Hungary.

>>2427960
it was never a juridical part of the Holy Roman Empire

>>2427963
Neither was Sweden, and its western.

>>2427960
Well i guess 98% of the world is wrong then and you are the true redpilled master race

>>2427970
You are wrong that 98% of the world shares your views.

>>2427967
because it's protestant
which makes the Chech even more western since they had two protestant reformations

File: east-west.jpg (240KB, 1200x1017px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1200x1017px

>>2427919
for example

File: mfw.png (212KB, 389x321px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 389x321px

>>2426408

>>2427548
>Communists stopped progression
By building industry, I guess? Ffs, there were even products manufactured by Poland for USSR, and eventually that decentralization is what killed USSR. Only Russia and Ukraine out of all 15 soviet republics were the only ones making profit. You know what, instead of building schools, roads, industry they should've done what you claim they've done.

File: ussr.jpg (85KB, 669x441px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 669x441px

>>2427548
If the USSR had held for another 5-6 years, to see home computers and the internet show up to patch world economies, it would be around until 2020 at least.

>>2428000
can't say anything for the other staes but Latvia and Estonia both were on about thesame standards as scandinavia before being annexed by the USSR

>>2428017
wrong

>>2428017
I don't know about those, but Lithuania got a lot of investment. Basically, they were almost the only providers of TV sets and other electronics (a huge factory in Riga), all of the Baltic states were basically providers for fish products for USSR. Overall, there were huge investments that didn't pay off.

>>2428020
looks like I were wrong
still better than under the USSR

>>2428038
Wrong again, as all of the USSR experienced growth. No state was better before the USSR than after it.
The growth may have been slower than relative states outside, but it existed non the less.

Also see >>2428007
The USSR grew very, very well. It just started very, very poor, so the growth was not enough to compare it to the west, which was ALREADY MUCH RICHER BEFORE COMMUNISM.
This is what the thread was about, and the premise is wrong. Under communism, the east experienced more growth, it was just already so far behind that the increased growth wasn't good enough to catch up.

>>2428043
maybe for the economy, yes, but Estonia and Latvia did practically get turned into Russian colonies where the Estonian and Latvian languages became second class languages.

>>2428000
Calm down Ivan.
Taking from Poland Uranium, and in exchange also taking coal is not something I would call fair trade.

>>2428052
This doesn't have to do with economy, and it is entirely subjective if its a good or a bad thing.
People will argue that refugees have to assimilate to the state culture, yet complain that the USSR wanted the Baltics to accept russian culture.

Economically speaking, which was the premise, communism was not what created the east-west divide, this had already occurred under the Russian and Ottoman empires, when they delayed or refused enlightenment and industrialization.

>>2428043
>Wrong again, as all of the USSR experienced growth.
>The growth may have been slower than relative states outside, but it existed non the less.
Wow thanks for not killing us on sight.

>>2428064
>invade a sovereign country
>deport and murder hundreds of thousands of inhabitants
>FUCKING BALTICS WHY DON'T YOU ASSIMILATE

>>2428064
>People will argue that refugees have to assimilate to the state culture, yet complain that the USSR wanted the Baltics to accept russian culture.
you aren't serioulsy unironically nonsarcastically comparing a situation where the locals had ben present for hundreds if not thousands of years to one where they are immigrating just now?

>>2428076
>>2428082
Those countries were part of Russia within the same fucking generation as they were "conquered".
They existed between WWI and WWII, not for THOUSANDS OF YEARS WOOOO. I thought this is a history board.

>>2428064
>it is entirely subjective if its a good or a bad thing.
Real talk even subsaharan africans can manage a state better than russians have.

>>2428069
see >>2428007
Only Japan improved more than the USSR.

>>2428098
>the locals had been living there for hundreds if not thousands of years
>nations
are you getting me wrong on purpose

>>2428112
literally anyone can have fast economic growth while they industralize if they start at feudalism, even Krokodil adicted Russians

>>2428123
Even mud eating Baltics, yeah. Yet they complain about it 50 years later.

>>2428118
People living in a place has zero legitimacy, what are you even saying?
People lived in almost any place for thousands of years, it has no inherent value or worth.

>>2428129
now you are moving the goal post, you accused me of saying the nations had been there for thousands of years not the people.
and it can't be said there is a difference in forcing your language on locals who live in their own communities and are largely independent from your help and forcing it on people who move into your settlements and are dependant on help from your society?

>>2428112
That's bullshit, or more likely - it is taken out of context
Even 400% of 1929 GDP doesn't make it automatically better.
Example with GDP (nominal) per capita:
Country A: $10k
Country B: $1k
And then 40 years has passed
Country A GDP increase is 150%
Country B GDP increase is 400%
And here some anon uses this as argument
>muh progression, B beats A !
but
150% of $10k is $15k
400% of $1k is $4k
So not only B is still considerably poorer than A, even the increase of GDP in A is greater.

>>2428126
I admit that was a very petty comment on my side and I regret making it but I do find your response funny considering the state of the Russians both in and outside of Russia compared to that of the Baltics, especially if looking at aids and murder rates. Not that I blame this state on the Russian's themselves.

>>2428155
This only YET AGAIN confirms that the discrepancy came earlier, not during the communist period.
Communist growth was much better, but because the initial state was so bad, it still didn't catch up.

Read the fucking thread. 90% of people who respond to me are posturing like they prove me wrong, while agreeing with parts of what I say and ignoring the rest.

>>2428158
I am neither russian, nor from the baltics. I just notice the objective facts that nationalists arguing on /po... I mean /his/ ignore, for example the humongous economic aid ex USSR states received from NATO to be bribed into eventually joining.
During the communists Baltic state growth was funded by Moscow, and it was rapid.
After the communists Baltic state growth was funded by Washington and it was rapid.

>>2428167
just because your economic growth is faster that don't mean your economic growth is better though. It may just be that you are going through a stage where economic growth naturally occurs faster, like an industralizing stage where factories are built and economic growth is faster than during other later stages.


>>2428173
got any stats on how much money the baltic states have recived from Washington?

>>2428167
>Communist growth was much better, but because the initial state was so bad, it still didn't catch up.
Wrong, because you are ignoring growth of the countries pre communist period. If that growth would be "bad" (so let's say western Europe level of your graph) then you would be right. But you are not, as for example Poland had excellent GDP growth in interwar period.

Also, that graph doesn't check up with>>2427862

If growth made by communism in Easter Europe was indeed better than the one in Western Europe (and it only didn't catch up because of to much starting difference), then it would also work for poorer Western European countries, right?
Then why Austria/Spain/Portugal, initialy on par or even poorer that Czechia/Poland, in 1990 were so fucking ahead of them? They had similar starting point, and in your opinion Eastern Europe had better growth, then what happened?

>>2428173
>>2428126
>Even mud eating Baltics

This side of the 16th century there literally hasn't been a period when what is now called the Baltic states wasn't richer per capita than the Russian average.

File: Cucuteni_Trypillian_culture_boundaries.png (64KB, 385x321px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 385x321px

>>2426255
It wasn't in late bronze age.

>>2428203
*late neolithic

File: yugoslav.jpg (135KB, 500x460px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 500x460px

why did this happen?

File: c86.jpg (34KB, 600x342px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x342px

>>2428187
>just because your economic growth is faster that don't mean your economic growth is better though
>It may just be that you are going through a stage where economic growth naturally occurs faster

>>2428195
>funded by the pope
>later funded by the polish king in colonization effort
>at one point funded by the swedish king?? dont remember
>later funded by the russian tzar and he even moved his capital there

So much money thrown in such a useless area to make it acceptable.
Also lol'd at saying the Baltics are better than Russia, when for half that period the Baltics were in fact in Russia.

>tfw you realize your country is the most hated on earth

>>2428234
Hi, Ivan. You lost the propaganda war and will thus forever be the eternal villain of the world.

>>2426255
Russian here. We are shit, haven't accomplished anything on our own, I'm ashamed to be russian.

>>2428234
Turkey or Russia?

>>2428242
>turks
>hated
Not outside of their former territory.

>>2428242
Lichtenstein

>>2426255
Russian here. we are great,we have accomplished a lot. I'm proud to be Russian.

>>2428229
Not him, but what is so hard to understand?
You have 1000 factories, after building next 100 it will be 10% increase
You have 10 factories, after building next 50 it will be 500% increase
So, who is growing faster?

File: large_b7ca.jpg (59KB, 865x511px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 865x511px

>>2428031
That's where you wrong, Baltics received less then they've given. You're just parroting shitty Russian memes.

>>2426255
Russian here.

>>2428250
t. useful idiot

>>2428229
everyone who industralize will see their economy grow faster than it did before and after industralization. This don't mean their economic policy is better than that of those who already have industralized and are experiencing slower growth than you.

File: gras-003.jpg (436KB, 1200x798px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 1200x798px

>>2428250
>

>>2428253
Procentually the latter, and the change will also be a way more noticeable than in the former case.

>>2426255
yes
Eastern Europe was always shitty.
Socialism made my country not so shitty,so I can't blame it.

>>2428254
>producing šprotes is the most efficient form of economy

>>2428240
t.western spy

File: detroit.jpg (46KB, 495x331px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 495x331px

>>2428261

>>2428234
That's because you never let your AE die down. Stop blobbing and invest your MP in some tech levels instead.

>>2428274
We use all that admin tech to core new provinces instead of developing them

>>2428232
>Also lol'd at saying the Baltics are better than Russia, when for half that period the Baltics were in fact in Russia.

Nothing to lol about.

>conquer more advanced territories than your own
>use them for your own devices
>they decline relative to areas you didn't manage to conquer but still remain more advanced than your other areas
>finally lose them
>claim it's thanks to your overlordship that they're advanced (relative to you, not the rest of the world who has left you and all your hands touched far behind)

>>2428234
relese some worthless provinces to drop AE

File: 2259186_original.jpg (304KB, 1400x932px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1400x932px

>>2428271
That's an abandoned building.
The building in my picture is inhabited; in fact, most Russians live in similar conditions.

>>2428271
Looks to me like russians are the same as black people

>>2428279
>conquer more advanced territories than your own
Guess they weren't more advanced, else they wouldn't fall.

>they decline relative to areas you didn't manage
Growth rate under the USSR was high, you are factually wrong.

>>2428285
>Guess they weren't more advanced, else they wouldn't fall.


Not the guy you replied to, but either you're baiting or have an IQ of 80.

>>2428291
>we are superior, but those inferior people demolished us and enslaved us

????

>>2428285
>Guess they weren't more advanced, else they wouldn't fall.
China fell to the Mongols and I would say the mongols were far less advanced than the Chinese were.

>>2428295
Far less advanced in what, making paper and fireworks?
Because they were more advanced in enough ways to beat them, clearly. This is a fact.
You have an equation, and one side is bigger than the other.

Russian here. We deserve to be nuked, we will never accomplish anything, only bring more destruction and pain to this world.

>>2428298
>what is human waves

>>2428294
>have over 100x times more manpower and population
>means they're more advanced


Going by that logic North Korea is the epitome of advancment because they could steamroll countries like New Zealand or Australia.

>>2428304
The superior ability to produce and manufacture motivated men.
Not that the mongols ever outnumbered the chinese, mind.

>>2428308
>manufacture
Mobilize*

>>2428305
They were more advanced at creating humans, claiming land, mobilizing people, and so on, and so on.

>NK is superior to New Zealand
In some ways they are, and in the most important ways they are not; they don't have the allies required to beat NZ.
You are a very limited person to not be able to think of worth in ways other than GDP PP.

Russian here. We should nuke everyone else. they will stop at nothing to hinder our accompolishments, bringing death,destruction and pain to the rest of the world is justified if they only want to weaken you

>>2428312
>You are a very limited person to not be able to think of worth in ways other than GDP PP.


You're the one who's moving goalposts and making up new definitions of advanced. North Korea is not in any way more advanced or developed than New Zealand.

>>2428317
>North Korea is not in any way more advanced or developed than New Zealand.

Centralization, population, nuclear capabilities, etc etc
If you can't name 20+ ways in which NK is more advanced than NZ, you are a basic brainlet.

>>2426255
Russian here. We need jews and germans to rule us, we can't build a successful state on our own. I wish that all my countrymen accept a western government over the current one.

File: baltlitt.jpg (433KB, 1623x2591px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 1623x2591px

>>2428312
what about thinking in terms of litteracy?
and this wasn't because of foreign investments, this was because of Protestantism.

>>2428318
Ah yes of population, centralization I guess Nigeria is the new power house of world.

>>2426255
>Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to Western Europe

Yes

Western europe being rich stems from historic materialistic infrastructure based on high urbanization densities, with tightly organized populated cities, and generally a better understanding of administration. Compare that to Eastern Europe, which was historically mostly farmland centered around villages miles aways from one another that needed to rely on substinance farming, and you basically have the ingredients for poverty.

This map illustrates this perfectly>>2426636

>>2428318
>nuclear capabilities
kek

>>2428318
>population
how does having a high population make a country more advanced?

>nuclear cabilities
New zealand got those too, they just have decided it's not worth the cost.

>>2428325
Lol I bet it's still the same. Every russian from outside of Moscow/Petersbourg has the mind of a toddler.

File: paper3-9-8.jpg (331KB, 1020x805px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1020x805px

>>2426408
>Commonwealth

Lmao, more like Commonpoverty ammirite

>>2428342
are you saying that as a Non russian or is this inter-russian hate?

>>2428346
Latvian. It's not like muscovites or petersbourghians are that much better, but at least they posess the brain capabilities of a 7 year old.

File: cunt.jpg (57KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x281px

>>2426412
>I read the original Dracula book
>the main dude (Keanu Reeves)

>>2427850
>the East was definitely behind civilisationally at least as early as sometime in the 15th-16th centuries, when Western Europe abandoned serfdom

Western europeans abandoning serfdom was more a consequence from a diverse, cheaper and efficient means to achieve wealth, rather than being some moral principle they abide to, from their respective civilization

File: smug_machiavelli.jpg (43KB, 339x350px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 339x350px

Slavs never came in contact with Roman civilization. That's why they're so irrelevant.

>>2428384
they did on the balkans, didn't help

>>2428384
>what's third Rome?

>>2428390
they also come in contact with Rome's evil brother Ottoman

>>2428318
>get btfo

>stop responding

lmau

>>2428390
There were no Slavs in the Balkans at the time of the Roman Empire..

>>2428414
>the eastern roman empire is not the roman empire

are you a german moron

>>2428413
What? All things mentioned are factual.
Or do you think that being able to draw political cartoons in newspapers or to serve 600 kinds of icecream is more relevant than the population of the state?

In some ways NK is better than NZ, you've done nothing to argue that. And population is one of the most relevant metrics in pretty much any category.

I stopped replying because you don't make any arguments. I've been on 4chan long enough to see when the opposing party is not interested in making sense.

>>2428423
how does having a large population make someone more advanced again?

>>2428421
Slavs were just a pain in the ass for the Byzantines. They were never fully integrated into their culture. There would be constant wars and revolts between Byzantines and Slavs. The Turks had more influence and ruled them longer than they did.

>>2428430
You continue to define "advanced" in ways that suit you.
A state that has superior X is more advanced in ensuring a superior X, else they wouldn't have it.

>>2428452
or maybe it's just because of factors not connected to development such as climate, soil and time?

>>2428384
Romanians did, but that barely helped them in anything

>>2428469
You continue to define terms, this time development, in a way that suits you.
How is population growth not a development of a people in a place?
How are people who can facilitate higher growth not more advanced and better developed that sphere of their civilization compared to people who can't?

>>2428477
advanced so far have been used for how advanced the state is, not how advanced the size of the population or so is.

>How are people who can facilitate higher growth not more advanced and better developed that sphere of their civilization compared to people who can't?
They maybe just happens to have better soil and climate for a large population? Nothing related to the form or shape of government, some people just lives on good soil that may have been worthless the other day due to nondiscovered technology.

>>2428496
>the population of a state isn't part of the state

Nigga... okay, I'm done responding. Do some thinking.

>>2428501
it's not always thanks to the development of state or nation, anyway hope you get your rubbels delivered on time

>>2427548
Hungary essentially went into decline and subjugation after the Battle of Mohács in 1526

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Moh%C3%A1cs

afterwards they spent nearly all of history until the union of Austria Hungary fighting or being ruled by foreign powers, barring Transylvania/Erdely to some extent

>>2428983
Hungary did went down on a major industrial boom in the 19th century, in the early 20th century Budapest was on par with Vienna, both in industrial power and culture.

>>2426402
Because it was a part of Germany, Austria and Ottoman empire.

File: IMG_6112.png (164KB, 403x389px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 403x389px

>>2426636
>Povertugal

>>2426255
East had to stop the brunt of Eastern invasions, which allowed west to flourish.

So yes.

>>2426412
Dracula is 100% horseshit though, Stoker never travelled to Eastern Europe and based his work on reading a single book about Wallachia.

>Dracula mentions how he's a Szekely from Iceland who inherited his fighting spirit from Thor and Odin, and also a boyar who hates Magyars
>Transylvania is packed to the brim with Slovaks and Serbs for some reason
>everybody speaks German

>>2429099
Yeah, the 19th and 20th centuries were very good (i.e. the "boldog békeidők", or the happy peace)

But then the Hapsburgs chimped out with the Serbians and the European dominoes fell

>>2426255
They were always backwards but they were catching up. Then Lenin happened...

>>2429331
Yeah. It also didn't help for Hungary that it lost all its major industrial cities and resources. It basically became a big meadow with one city, Budapest (still mostly true today).

>>2428360
The Plague decimating the serf population probably had most to with it. Eastern Europe wasn't nearly as affected as Western Europe.

>>2427900
>i know literally nothing about the eastern front please rape my face

It's surprising how little knowledge of history the people who visit a history board have.

>>2428000
i fucking hate this 'argument' because it always comes up and makes no sense

schools and industry would have been built under any fucking system, it is a fact that the soviet system was forced on occupied countries and was a dozen times less efficient and more oppresive than capitalism which has been beyond proven

In my opinion, it's all because the Russian empires very, very late abolishment of serfdom.

>>2429764
in my opinion it all comes down to Ivan the third failing to leave behind a strong heir

>>2429764
>Russia is the only country in East Europe
Why do people think like this? If anything Russian empire was completely isolated even from the rest of Eastern Europe, countries like Bohemia or Hungary are historically connected to Germany/Austria far more than they are connected to Russia.

>>2429779
ayy, my bad
I thought of pointing out that I'm talking bout' Poland and with the baltic states exactly, but i'm lazy.

>>2429776
I see your point.

>>2429832
not even the Baltic, but rather Lithuania*

>>2428345
And what fo you know about Poland before it's economy was destroyed, then leeched off for 100years, then it was a major battlefield in 2 wars, followed by a world crisis and another war which destroyed the nation and the infrastructure entirely and opened the door for 50 years of socialism. You should learn from Poles how to build a stable country when literally nobody allows you to.

>>2426255
yes

>>2426255
Through much of the region's history, it was split up between bigger empires that were negligably Southern or Western European (and Russia) or repressed/continuously invaded by those nations. So in a way, I guess it WAS always backwater. There are notable bits of history like Hungary pre-Austria and the Polish-Lithuanian Commenwealth tho.

>>2429779
Eastern Europe = Russian Empire + Ottoman Empire. The two big states that declined enlightenment and industrialization.

File: his right here says that you very possibly might be right.jpg (93KB, 804x743px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 804x743px

>>2426255
>Did Eastern Europe always a backward water compared to...

>>2427862
What is purchase power parity? All the currencies were undervalued as fuck and the inflation was rampant during the transformation period. What it does not show you is that you could buy a loaf of high quality bread (not some factory shit) for 0.2$, 0.5l of vodka for 2.2$ and a kilogramme of beef for 2$. You could very well survived on a monthly salary, and have a comfortable life, but you'd buy 10$ max. for it.

>>2428281
what's wrong with it, lmao? The fact nobody made a decent parking lot or what?

>>2427974
>Hungary is west
>Slovakia is east
Makes no sense, they're literally the same country

>>2433749
I've traveled in Czechia, Slovakia, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. They are not the same place.
The difference is similarly evident between Croatia and Bosnia.

>>2433759
Slovakia is literally just Hungary with mountains and a different language.

>>2433762
And architecture, and food, and wealth, and mood, and everything.
They are as different as Vancouver is to Texas.

>>2426255
>first fucked by mongols
>then fucked by turks
>then fucked by the eternal Habsburg
>then fucked by communism

>>2433809
The ones that got fucked by mongols didn't get fucked by turks, and vice versa.
It was one or the other.

>>2426255

kieven rus was number 1 in its time. western europe BTFO.

>>2428208
The Ottomans used Perso-Arabic script, different from their Serbian and Bosnian subjects while the Austro-Hungarians used Latin script, same as their Croatian and Slovenian subjects.

>>2433814
Say that to Hungary, Romenia and Ukraine

>>2433895
I concede, it appears the mongols got further than I assumed (Hungary and Romania), and so did the turks (Ukraine).

File: 1474784079432.png (180KB, 500x537px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 500x537px

>>2433809
>>2433814
>>2433895
>mfw reading the history of Ukraine
>they got HUN'd, KHAZAR'd, MONGOL'd, TATAR'd, TURK'd, SOVIET'd

Jesus Christ.

>>2433934
Kurgan'd, Greek'd, Slav'd, Bulgar'd, Avar'd, Rus'd.
Its good land, without natural defenses.

File: 18th-century-painting-oil-on-canvas-landscape-with-figures.jpg (1MB, 2304x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2304x1728px

>>2428331
>tightly organized populated cities, and generally a better understanding of administration.
What does this even mean? E.Europe also had
"tightly organized populated cities".

>Eastern Europe, which was historically mostly farmland centered around villages miles away from one another
You mean just like Western Europe for most of its history? I know this might be a shock to some people, but Western Europe wasn't always just highly advanced cities. Most West European were peasants.
Take the Ruhr valley for example. Today it is a huge urbanized area, but before the late 18th century it was mostly rural area with forests.
France was like 80% peasants during those times.

>>2433720
The fact that it's dirty, ugly and depressing as hell.

>>2427900
>Belaruse lost 25% of it's population

>>2434049
It was just an elaborate ruse, they found it after 20 years.

File: Population_of_Ukraine.png (23KB, 887x548px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 887x548px

>>2433934

Ukraine population in 1994
52 million

>Ukraine Population in 2017
<42 million

Then fucked by modern cold war 2.0
It never ends for the ukraine

>>2434085
Thats just because some russians went to live in Russia.
The "ukraine" part of Ukraine is less than half the country.

Britain and Scandinavia used to be backwater shitholes compared to Eastern Europe until around 400 BC.
France was too connected to the Mediterranean world to be a backwater shithole.

>>2434009
Retard, compare the distances between towns in Western Europe and East one (including Russia). Also take a look at the climate and land fertility. Russia/E.Europe always was behind W.Europe that profited from short supply routes (important for trade) and climate (more production). Medieval Russia didn't have a proper source of iron even. You can't experiment with the efficency of farming if the negative results of such experiments will lead to your and your family's death by starvation.

When that was already irrelevant, in the industrialisation era, Nicholas I lost its opportunity to get on par with the West by making the country more liberal and open for investment, coupled with poorly-made serfdom abolishment by Alexander II only worsening the cituation, putting peasants in debts for their "new" land impossible to pay for even their whole life. The latter is also a result of overall bad centralization reforms by Peter the Great, which turned serfdom into one-step-away-from-slavery.

USSR gave more rights to Russian peasants and workers than they had at any moment of history before (which is why it's still loved in Russia), and social mobility was insane even for modern West (Gorbachev went from a farmer's son to president of USSR, Khruschev went from being cobbler's son to gensec etc). Not to mention free healthcare, free education, which skyrocketed literacy rates. Soviet rule has a lot of merits in the eyes of average Russian, even despite the obvious drawbacks.

So, Eastern Europe and especially Russia have deep historical roots lead by:
a) poor climate, thus small production overall
b) larger supply routes, increasing the price of already expensive products
c) reforms, not favouring lower classes of population

>>2434110
>Russia/E.Europe always was behind W.Europe

Nigga before Atlantic sailing all trade moved through Eastern Europe and the Balkans, enriching whoever was ruling there.

>>2434120
That's true, but the profits from the trade weren't
a) in the hands of most pf the population
b) big enough to cover the difference between East and West

If you read Novgorod medieval chronics (I don't know their name in English as by previous post you might've guessed I'm >t. Russian), they state that both Germans in the Baltic Sea tried to sell for the highest possible price ther products (glass, iron) and buy Eastern-made (what you've mentioned) and Novgorod products (honey, fur, wax) for prices as low as possible, and pretty much succeeded as they were basically the only way to West Europe Novgorod had. It allowed though for Novgorod to flourish and sustain a mercenary army, however, it didn't last, new trade routes through Osmans were easier, and Novgorod is considered among historians as a sort of miracle on how it managed to survive in such ungrateful conditions with so much enemies for so long.
And if you track the way Eastern products made, they went either through Volga to Novgorod and then through Baltics, either via Osmans into Mediterranean. So most of Eastern Europe was far away from tge trade routes.

>>2434090
Only 42 million Russians left to go.
Then Ukraine will truly be free.

>>2428007
I don't understand the vertical axis

>>2434332
Just look up "ussr gdp growth" or something, try several sources, compare.

>>2433801
It has Hungarian/Geman architecture, same food, similar traditions.

At minimum, you can't denie that South-Slovakia is literally only populated by Hungarians.

File: slovakia.gif (367KB, 1412x782px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 1412x782px

>>2434389
It has raw concrete affordable housing plus prussian roof 4-5 floor cooperation houses.
Hungary has a lot more of those monarchical BIG STONE buildings, you know the type, the ones governments still use for their official business so they can appear like ancient institutions.

Also hungarian minority pockets are in these areas, I think, as far as I remember looking at maps.

>>2434407
Here is an ethnic map, South-Slovakia is literally Hungary.

Also most buildings in Bratislava/Kassa were built by Hungarian and German nobility. It has no Slovakian history.

File: Slovakia_2011_Ethnic.png (57KB, 300x162px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 300x162px

>>2434430

>>2434434
what is this, ants demographics?

>>2426408
Shit?

File: ethnic_map_slovakia1910-1991.gif (22KB, 670x203px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 670x203px

>>2434445

>>2429243
>everybody speaks German

There was a decent German population in Transylvania before the end of WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvanian_Saxons

Pretty sure the Transylvanian region, or its city, is named "Siebenburgen" in Empire Total War as well.

>>2433801
Architecture is the same, tons of Gothic and Hungarian Baroque, vernacular architecture is pretty much identical and commieblocks are commieblocks. Don't even try arguing with me faggot.

>food
More or less the same central European mix of German, Magyar and Wallachian cuisine.

>wealth
They're of the same wealth, Hungary is just a tiny bit poorer but it's barely noticeable.

File: 1482420823993.gif (827KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

827KB, 320x240px

>>2433934
we had cool pirates at least

>>2428384
Polish tribes were trading with the romans.

File: GDP per capita early 20th century.jpg (39KB, 489x585px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 489x585px

>>2428020

File: the-larger-towns-of-europe-1100-13002.jpg (75KB, 1061x675px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1061x675px

>>2426255
Look at the map and guess.

>>2435059
This map would imply that Spain isn't a shithole.

File: gdp per capita world.png (80KB, 646x619px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 646x619px

>>2435094
It was pretty rich between 1000 and 1300.

The Black Death kinda ruined its economy and new world gold didn't help much.

>>2435126
>trying to calculate GDP per capita in the fucking middle ages
How? What data are they using?

>>2426255
They were always and will always be ass backwards savages.

>>2435132
tax records, wills, surveys etc etc.

You can read the paper if you'd like.

>>2435126
>Ottoman empire was a complete shithouse even after taking the wealth of Constantinople and coastal Anatolia
I somehow find this hard to believe. While Byzantium was declining for centuries, it was still much more developed than western Europe.

File: Christus_carthusian.jpg (176KB, 749x1023px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 749x1023px

>>2435200
>While Byzantium was declining for centuries, it was still much more developed than western Europe.

haha oh wow.

No it got fucked pretty bad and besides the rest of the Ottoman empire was piss poor too. Unlike Western Europe which was becoming the richest part of the world by that time.

>>2435277
>Western Europe which was becoming the richest part of the world by the time
The 1500s? Italy maybe, but fucking England was still a craphole during that time. It was only colonization that really kickstarted them into wealth.

>>2433934
Ukraine is another word for uterus, it's meant to be dominated by other powers

File: gdp per capita.png (23KB, 615x406px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 615x406px

>>2435285
Well England was kicking itself in the balls during the War of the Roses. Italy, The low Countries, Southern Germany/Austria and the Rhine valley did quite okay. High degree or urbanization, high degree of mechanical labor input, increasing literacy etc.

>>2435318
shit china, get it together

File: 1415505079553.png (22KB, 530x444px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 530x444px

>>2435318
They dun goof'd after the Song Dynasty

>>2433801
So not that different at all?

>>2426255
Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was quite prosperous, and many Eastern European regions in the Austro-Hungarian Empire were also. Generally they were fucked up too often by extra-European neighbors to stay ahead of Western neighbors for any lengthy period of time, and Russia, although powerful, was extremely backward compared to other Slavic countries and quite often fucked up any progress the others made. When the Americas were discovered, that was the end of the game, and there was really no catching up for any of these countries to the colonial wealth that any of Western Europe was amassing.

The use of this Eastern-Western Europe dichtonomy for anything before the 20th century is super fucking retarded, though, and is still kind of retarded today.

File: europe.png (1MB, 1280x1022px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x1022px

>>2435436
This division is better I think

File: Regions_of_Europe_based_on_CIA_world_factbook.png (331KB, 1377x1293px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1377x1293px

>>2435446
Oops wrong one

>>2435318
Got Byzantium for comparison?

>>2433801
Didn't know Texas and Vancouver were the same country for 1000 years. Matter of fact not only was Slovakia a part of Hungary, it WAS Hungary. It was never a separate administrative/political unit after WW1.

>>2435461
if we're talking modern day it's not too bad. If we're talking pre-20th century it's not too bad either but I'd make some small adjustments like making Albania purple, and the Croatia and the Netherlands yellow.

>>2426255
East Europe is inland, West Euros have connection to the Atlantic ocean and more livable climates in general. East Europe could hardly expand due to it being far inland.

>>2435461
Eastern Europe really has three distinct civilizational spheres:

Germanosphere (Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, Croatia)
Russosphere (Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia)
Turkosphere (Bosnia, Serbia, Romania, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia etc)

The Baltics are kind of an oddball because they've been heavily culturally influenced by Germans and Scandinavians but at the same time they've been under Russian administration for a long time.

File: from baghdad to london.png (641KB, 1439x778px) Image search: [Google]

641KB, 1439x778px

>>2435473
No I haven't but there is a problem with Byzantium, its territory changed quite a bit prior to Ottoman takeover. I am actually not sure if the Balkans or Anatolia was the richest province but I am hinging toward the Balkans.

>>2435488
Throughout most of the past six or seven centuries the Netherlands was both culturally and politically involved with France and England rather than Germany.

Even in terms of economic ties they only recently became Germany's best buddy.

>>2435515
> I am actually not sure if the Balkans or Anatolia was the richest province but I am hinging toward the Balkans.
Neither the Balkans nor Anatolia were ever a province.

>>2435514
That's a pretty good distinction I'd say.

But didn't the Ostsiedlung also affect the Russosphere?

>>2435519
Didn't they call the region something like Rum as if it was Rome?

>>2435530
*Rumelia was the word I was looking for.

>>2435534
Rumelia basically means ex-Byzantine Balkans and it was kind of an informal term.

>>2435523
It did in the Baltics as I mentioned, what is now Latvia and Estonia used to have a significant German cultural presence. But for example Volga Germans in Russia proper had only minimal impact, basically all important Germans in the Russian empire were from the Baltics.

>>2426255
Mostly you can thank WW2 and rejection by commies to implement Marshalls plan to repair the postwar destruction. Western Europe is fifty years of post-industrial development ahead of Eastern.

>>2435547
I keep seeing Baltic serfs working for German lords mentioned in various works. Apparently the Germans weren't to kind.

>>2435569
Well, they made sure they were the overlords over the Baltic people but left a gigantic cultural imprint, Latvia and Estonia are very protestant culturally.

>>2435569
Russoman propaganda

>>2435579
>>2435587
The comparison involved something like a serf working for a German landlord and the difference between a field and house negro working as slaves.

I've seen it in what I believe was Voltaire and another writer.

>>2435595
I would disregard pretty much everything Voltaire and Rousseau had to say about anything. Especially Voltaire who was a radical egalitarian and fiercely anti-German.

>>2435603
>fiercely anti-German.

Isn't everyone that?

>>2435606
No, just you.

File: 3123214142143.jpg (556KB, 1391x1600px) Image search: [Google]

556KB, 1391x1600px

>>2435614

>>2435603
wasn't Voltaire Prussia pro?

>>2428384
Really makes ya think

>>2427631
>who is Catherine the Great, a ruler who held enlightenment values

>>2429725
Welcome, newfag.

>>2428043
>world super power
>defeated Axis
>first nation in space
>sphere of influence around the world

why was communist eastern yurope so shit compared to franch?

>>2428360
>consequence from a diverse, cheaper and efficient means to achieve wealth
But the end result was still the same, was it not? In the regard, who cares that they didn't do it out of moral principle?

>>2426636
Kek @Austria soaring after being freed from Balkan leeches.

>>2428345
>Portugal

Every fucking time.

>>2435047
>the same
>nearly half

Also, no source.

>>2435318
No source. Yet people rely on this shit.
Come the fuck on, is this /pol/?

>>2436792
>who was every other person living east of berlin besides her?

She had to vaccinate her children in secret, out of fear that people will call her a sorceress.

Pretty much since the medieval period where the east and west began to diverge. Eastern Europe was more rural and the serfs were generally more oppressed. The point of divergence was the black death. In the West peasants and bourgeois extracted higher wages and more rights. In the east the opposite occurred and peasants found themselves more restricted. There's an interesting chapter in "why nations fail" on this.

>>2427631
Don't forgot Austria Hungary which actively fought against railways as it was seen as dangerous to the autocratic regime.

>>2438512
>Austria Hungary which actively fought against railways
http://www.chocen-litomysl.cz/zeleznice-rakousko-uherska-1903.html

>>2438525
Yes, they did eventually build some. We are all aware that Austrians have train capabilities.
What are you saying?

>>2438544
>actively fought against railways
>but they did build some

>>2438547
You are forgetting one variable here, Newton. Time. Alter your theory and come back later.

>>2438554
Stop backpedalling faggot.

>>2438559
I didn't backpedal at all, you just took 10 minutes to understand what is being said.

>>2426255
>corfu to Albania
yes....

>>2427850
underrated post

hahaha