While they certainly were dominated and dictated by USSR, neither belonged culturally. Neither was as stiff with sexuality for instance; they didn't have collectivization in the earnest and understandably there was no cult of war in DDR other than in token solidarity with occupying Soviet troops.
> While they certainly were dominated and dictated by USSR, neither belonged culturally.
Hmm... that seems more like a distinction without a difference.
Though dominated by Russians (mostly... Stalin was a Georgian), the USSR was made up of over 100 different nationalities with widely varying languages and cultures.
No, not even close. Those were sovereign countries under communist single party rule and allied with the USSR. Ukraine, for exampke, was a sovereign Soviet Republic as part of the USSR, just as Russia was.
I know its not trendy, but its probably easier to think of the eastern bloc countries as colonies of the USSR, just as india, egypt, and the african nations were to the UK.
Sure, on paper they were sovereign, and they certianly had a government made up of people from that country. But they were a colony.
> Those were sovereign countries under communist single party rule and allied with the USSR.
They were countries conquered and occupied by USSR troops, with USSR military bases in them to guarantee obedience. There were local rulers, sure, but major decisions were consulted with Moscow. Many decisions just were out of question, because it was obvious that Moscow would not approve and it may end in a military intervention (as in happened in Hungary and Czech Republic). So no, I would not describe them as "sovereign countries". The proper term is something like "puppet state".
"Allied" in the sense of having a USSR-installed puppet government propped up by the massive presence of Soviet troops. This was a part of the concessions made by the West to Stalin, not an expression of the will of Polish or German people.
varjag|3 years ago
Turing_Machine|3 years ago
Hmm... that seems more like a distinction without a difference.
Though dominated by Russians (mostly... Stalin was a Georgian), the USSR was made up of over 100 different nationalities with widely varying languages and cultures.
hef19898|3 years ago
Totally different things.
KaiserPro|3 years ago
I know its not trendy, but its probably easier to think of the eastern bloc countries as colonies of the USSR, just as india, egypt, and the african nations were to the UK.
Sure, on paper they were sovereign, and they certianly had a government made up of people from that country. But they were a colony.
badpun|3 years ago
They were countries conquered and occupied by USSR troops, with USSR military bases in them to guarantee obedience. There were local rulers, sure, but major decisions were consulted with Moscow. Many decisions just were out of question, because it was obvious that Moscow would not approve and it may end in a military intervention (as in happened in Hungary and Czech Republic). So no, I would not describe them as "sovereign countries". The proper term is something like "puppet state".
fzzt|3 years ago