Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Why did Czechoslovakia divorced ?

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 149
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Dec 2009, 15:41
Pioneer
Post 17 Jan 2010, 05:14
Even after the Velvet Revolution in 1989, Czechoslovakia remained a federal state, and the link between Czech and Slovakia was so strong then. I read some of the Czech's ideas, and they said that "Everything was better if Czech and Slovakia remained one". So why should they divorce ?
The Big Three in the 22nd century :
Image

An East-Asian must be patriotic, don't you think ?
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 17 Jan 2010, 11:30
Read some history,it would answer you the best
It was a federal state of 2 countries and each had the constitutional right to separate.
2 states,2 peoples,2 languages etc.
In short,Czechia had too much influence over Slovakia
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9816
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 19 Apr 2008, 03:25
Embalmed
Post 17 Jan 2010, 19:55
Yeah the Czechs and the Slovaks were two different people. In fact from what I understand it was a clean mutual split.
Once capitalists know we can release the Kraken, they'll back down and obey our demands for sure.
_Comrade Gulper
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 18 Jan 2010, 04:25
the nation of czechoslovakia was a mixture of two extremely nationalist ethnicities who disliked each other. The nation was put together after WWI when they declared independence from Austria-Hungary. They peacefully split in 1993
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 341
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Mar 2003, 02:29
Komsomol
Post 17 Mar 2010, 19:49
It was an act of political maneuvering by the political elite of both sides. If you look at any poll of either side at the time of the split, the majority of people (Czechs and Slovaks) wanted to remain one unified country. But the leaders of their respective countries had different plans.

Quote:
the nation of czechoslovakia was a mixture of two extremely nationalist ethnicities who disliked each other.


This is just nationalist bullshit right here.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 31
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Mar 2010, 23:25
Pioneer
Post 31 Mar 2010, 00:26
Another dangerous fact was the economical difference of Czech and Slovakia, were Slovakia was become nearly completly dependent from gifts of Czech. In Belgium there is a simular situation between Flanders and Wallonia. With 7 gouvernements in one country to organize three communities and three regions, they try to prevent it from splitting. But the economical difference between the rich Flanders and the poor Wallonia is by far the most important argument to split. But as far as I know today the situation between Czech and Slovakia has swapped, so splitting because of economical motives isn't always that safe.
Learn, Learn, Learn - Vladimir Lenin
Soviet cogitations: 59
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Oct 2008, 06:42
Pioneer
Post 01 Apr 2010, 05:47
Quote:
This is just nationalist bullshit right here


While the guy that you replied is obviously wrong, his message has a grain of truth.

Nationalism still plays a significant role in Central and Eastern Europe in a way or another.
Playground for various empires, this area shaped and reshaped frequently her national borders and national identities, especially
in the last 200 years.

Breaking up of Czechoslovakia was just another chapter in this saga.
Soviet cogitations: 31
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Mar 2010, 23:25
Pioneer
Post 01 Apr 2010, 18:02
As far as I know nationalism never has broke up countries. It's an argument most of the politicians use to get the people behind them, but all the countries I've seen that have been split up, had big economical differences.
Learn, Learn, Learn - Vladimir Lenin
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 02 Apr 2010, 21:32
CommuSoft wrote:
As far as I know nationalism never has broke up countries.

What about Serbia from Austria-Hungary?

KurtFF8 wrote:
This is just nationalist bullshit right here.

OH REARYYYY?

To say that nationalism didn't play a role in the separation of the SSR's is stupid. Nationalism obviously exists, and it obviously causes separation
Image
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 02 Apr 2010, 21:52
Quote:
What about Serbia from Austria-Hungary?


Are you saying that Serbia was a part of Austro-Hungarian monarchy?
It newer was.
If that is not what you've meant,than sry.
Soviet cogitations: 1533
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Oct 2007, 15:55
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Member
Post 02 Apr 2010, 23:09
proletarian wrote:
What about Serbia from Austria-Hungary?

Not Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire.
CommuSoft wrote:
know nationalism never has broke up countries. It's an argument most of the politicians use to get the people behind them, but all the countries I've seen that have been split up, had big economical differences.

Russian Empire, Soviet Union, Austria-Hungary, Yugoslavia, British Empire, French Empire, Spanish Empire. It happens all the time.
We have beaten you to the moon, but you have beaten us in sausage making.- Nikita Khrushchev
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 03 Apr 2010, 17:04
Loz wrote:
Are you saying that Serbia was a part of Austro-Hungarian monarchy?
It newer was.
If that is not what you've meant,than sry.


No that's not what I meant. But Serbian nationalists were behind the assassination of Franz Ferndinad, because of the Austria-Hungarian claim over Bosnia-Herzegovina. If that isn't a country's destruction over nationalism, I don't know what is.
Image
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 04 Apr 2010, 00:33
Austro-Hungary did indeed collapse because of nationalism.But is because of the fact that 2 nations enslaved numerous Slavic nations,not because of Serbian pretensions on Bosnia

Bosnia was never "original" A-U land,it was annexed by Austro-Hungary after the Berlin congress
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 04 Apr 2010, 15:44
Loz wrote:
Austro-Hungary did indeed collapse because of nationalism.But is because of the fact that 2 nations enslaved numerous Slavic nations,not because of Serbian pretensions on Bosnia


I don't know. That did start WWI and WWI did help to break up A-H
Image
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 04 Apr 2010, 16:11
WW1 did indeed start because of assassination of throne-heir of A-U,but it was just an excuse,not the real reason.
Countries were preparing for a war,and only a spark was necessary to start it.
And,A-U was held by force(remember 1948 and Hungarian revolution),it was already "rotten inside" before WW1.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 04 Apr 2010, 19:21
Loz wrote:
And,A-U was held by force(remember 1948 and Hungarian revolution),it was already "rotten inside" before WW1.


Which has obvious nationalist roots. Nationalism definately contributed to Austria-Hungary's dissolution. Just like nationalism contributed to Czech's dissolution
Image
Soviet cogitations: 31
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Mar 2010, 23:25
Pioneer
Post 05 Apr 2010, 22:35
Not really national forces, but more ethic and cultural forces are the root of those divorces I think. But in my opinion there still needs to be an economical factor. Look at Spain. A country where in the middle ages, islam and catholic belief lived together without conflicts. But the greed of the catholic church, made an end to this collaboration.
Learn, Learn, Learn - Vladimir Lenin
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 5167
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 08 Nov 2007, 06:31
Embalmed
Post 05 Apr 2010, 22:48
I think it's more of the greed of proclaimed catholic princes then the greed of the church. religion was a tool of feudalism and an excuse to make war and expand.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3765
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Nov 2009, 07:13
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 05 Apr 2010, 23:04
CommuSoft wrote:
Not really national forces, but more ethic and cultural forces are the root of those divorces I think.

nationalism is derived from a common history, ethnicity, religion, and/or cultural background. So the root of the forces were nationalism.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3873
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jun 2006, 02:14
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 06 Apr 2010, 00:57
Quote:
Look at Spain. A country where in the middle ages, islam and catholic belief lived together without conflicts. But the greed of the catholic church, made an end to this collaboration.

I think you should brush up your spanish history. It wasn't without conflict. And the greed didn't come only from the church, but also from the spanish kings.


"Where Argentina goes, Latin America will go".
Leonid Brezhnev

Forum Rules
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron