Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
Sorry, not Hungary, I know it's more than 90% Magyar, but I thought Romania and the Baltic states had, at the very least, large minorities of Slavs.hungary and romania?
"Eastern Europe" - why we hate the term
- Thread starter Winner
- Start date
- Status
Ecofarm
Deity
But I compared it to England, and the average income of all of WE.
And I only included EU countries from EE.
30k vs 14k. Relative poverty, by definition.
But you only point out that I threw in the US as a little extra. By the way, what do you think PPP is?? It takes into account the cost of living, etc. Unlike raw GNP, where EE looks like southern hemisphere 3rd world nations. Why do you think their GNP per cap jumps from 10k to 18k when converting to PPP? Because things are expensive there? No, PPP goes up as costs of living go down.
holy king
Deity
the average czech also doesnt live in the uk or in western europe, but in the czech republic. that doesnt change the point. the point is that average purchasing power of a czech is only slightly below that of an austrian. because he doesnt purchase goods in austria, but in the czech republic. (replace austria with england, western europe, france or luxemburg at will.)
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
I know, I know (though I wasn't sure about lithuania). And my post wasn't 100% serious, sorry.
But anyway there is a point of dividing Europe in West and East and having the line drawn with the developing ex-communist countries on one side. A socio-economic divide still exist there, though it may be that it is now disseapering.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Well, sure, but EE is a cold-war term that doesn't really apply anymore.
Say "Eastern EU", if you mean the eastern part of the EU.
Ecofarm
Deity
@holyking: Do you know what PPP is? It is meant to allow comparison between countries by taking into account the cost of living.
So, now I am supposed to prove that EE is relatively poor compared to WE - without using any numbers from WE (even PPP, meant specifically to allow comparison).
Ok, we can't compare anything, and the 14k vs 30k of EE (EU only) and WE is not relative poverty, despite it being quite the definition of such a thing.
Fine.
Everyone in Europe is rich - even when compared to each other - there is no poor. Poland's 10k/year, compared ot WE's 30k, is equivical - even if already in PPP. Case closed, you win.
So, now I am supposed to prove that EE is relatively poor compared to WE - without using any numbers from WE (even PPP, meant specifically to allow comparison).
Ok, we can't compare anything, and the 14k vs 30k of EE (EU only) and WE is not relative poverty, despite it being quite the definition of such a thing.
Fine.
Everyone in Europe is rich - even when compared to each other - there is no poor. Poland's 10k/year, compared ot WE's 30k, is equivical - even if already in PPP. Case closed, you win.
I think it's more about culture than where they are geographically (although they often go hand in hand).
I reckon if I was placed in a random country in Europe, I could say roughly where I was, without looking at things like newspapers.
I reckon if I was placed in a random country in Europe, I could say roughly where I was, without looking at things like newspapers.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Yes, that's correct, but lumping all these countries together also distorts the real situation.
Central European post-communist countries are generally more developed than South-East post-communist countries, for example.
When people want to stress the economic dimension, they should simply use terms like "post-communist countries" or "ex-communist countries" or "countries in transition" etc. That's perfectly politically correct over here, we call ourselves post-communist too and we're usually proud of that
Ecofarm
Deity
Sounds pretty PC to me, but it might happen. Not in this thread though, where I face fierce rebuttal and any concession would surely be seen as a sign of weakness!
Hell, I might even start using "central europe".
mourndraken
King
Steph brought Canada into this silly topic. So I'm going to comment. We no longer refer to Poland, E.Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, et al as The Iron Curtain. As an easy description, these countries are identified as Eastern Eupope. Don't be offended because it's rare that anybody in Canada even has an opinion about what happens in Europe. I sympathize with you but I've been called American when in Europe.
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
Any lumping together of nations distorts the real situation. Sweden and Portugal, or even Greece, in WE for example. Not very much in common. In fact us Swedes would probably identify more with the Baltic states or even your own Czechia.
The point is there is a clear divide here, and the terminology to distinguish between the two already exist, so we use it. I'm sorry if this offends you but tbh I think you are overreacting.
jessiecat
Divine Monarch
I've lived in Europe for 30 years and most people still think I'm an American.
But they always apologise when they realize I'm Canadian. You just get used to it.
holy king
Deity
romania
Romanians 89.5% of the population.
Hungarians 6.6%.
lithuania
Lithuanians 84.6%
Poles (6.3%)
Russians (5.1%)
latvia
Latvians and Livonians, 60%
Russian 28%
Estonia
Estonians 68.6%
Russians 25.6%
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
I would like to support Steph on his claim about Russia.
Indeed, officially, Europe ends at the Urals. However, in the common conception of an average Western European, Europe is lived on a daily basis as a peninsula, and that peninsula ends at the Black sea.
A good example of that is the general idea that Europe is densely populated. This is only true on the peninsula. Everything between the black sea and the Urals is quite sparsely populated, and that part represents THE HALF of the land area of "official Europe" !
All this to say that when we open a book, we indeed learn that the western steppes of Russia are part of Europe, but in everyday life, we don't think about steppes as the most common landscape in Europe, which it actually is, officially speaking.
The fact is that to many people, being European is somehow a sign of superiority, and thus, when we consider any area to not be European, this is automatically assumed to mean we consider these areas as inferior. The fact this thread evolves into something about wealth tend to confirm this idea. I don't believe that being part of a peninsula or not is a sign of superiority. This is only geography.
Europe is not physically a continent, that's a fact. And saying this doesn't mean that we lower the value of it. It's a region which makes a geographic sense because it forms a common space shared and seen as specific by people in their everyday life. It's a peninsula.
Generally speaking, I consider the whole concept of Europe as a continent to be motived by notions which have nothing to do with geography. For instance, the idea that as Europeans are generally white-skinned, thus every people who is white-skinned is European. This is not true ! There are tons of white people living in the Near East, Middle East and in Iran. Should this mean that they are Europeans ? A black French guy is more European to me than a white Iranian guy, and that doesn't mean I consider the Iranians as inferior. It's just that they don't live on the European peninsula.
To tell the truth, I actually even wonder if the whole concept of Europe as a continent, as determined at the end of the 19th century, isn't somewhere a racist concept.
Indeed, officially, Europe ends at the Urals. However, in the common conception of an average Western European, Europe is lived on a daily basis as a peninsula, and that peninsula ends at the Black sea.
A good example of that is the general idea that Europe is densely populated. This is only true on the peninsula. Everything between the black sea and the Urals is quite sparsely populated, and that part represents THE HALF of the land area of "official Europe" !
All this to say that when we open a book, we indeed learn that the western steppes of Russia are part of Europe, but in everyday life, we don't think about steppes as the most common landscape in Europe, which it actually is, officially speaking.
The fact is that to many people, being European is somehow a sign of superiority, and thus, when we consider any area to not be European, this is automatically assumed to mean we consider these areas as inferior. The fact this thread evolves into something about wealth tend to confirm this idea. I don't believe that being part of a peninsula or not is a sign of superiority. This is only geography.
Europe is not physically a continent, that's a fact. And saying this doesn't mean that we lower the value of it. It's a region which makes a geographic sense because it forms a common space shared and seen as specific by people in their everyday life. It's a peninsula.
Generally speaking, I consider the whole concept of Europe as a continent to be motived by notions which have nothing to do with geography. For instance, the idea that as Europeans are generally white-skinned, thus every people who is white-skinned is European. This is not true ! There are tons of white people living in the Near East, Middle East and in Iran. Should this mean that they are Europeans ? A black French guy is more European to me than a white Iranian guy, and that doesn't mean I consider the Iranians as inferior. It's just that they don't live on the European peninsula.
To tell the truth, I actually even wonder if the whole concept of Europe as a continent, as determined at the end of the 19th century, isn't somewhere a racist concept.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
OK, let's try it. See if you spot the cultural differences between former Western and former Eastern Europe (don't look at the pictures names):
http://ase.cs.uni-essen.de/ase/past/ase2004/images/linz_main_square.jpg
They're all in Central Europe, just guess the country...
Winner
Diverse in Unity
No, the terminology was used to describe political/ideological division.
Would you like it if somebody used a term which had been used in the past to describe a group of countries dominated by a totalitarian system, which oppressed millions of people ane killed tens of thousands?
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
And now its used for something else.
Europe? I don't mind really...
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
Come on Winner. The Midwest is actually located in the Eastern half of the United States and people don't make a whole fuss because of it.
The expression "Eastern Europe" is pejorative only to those who want to see it this way.
The expression "Eastern Europe" is pejorative only to those who want to see it this way.
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
Its just a term. Its useful. Get over it. 
- Status
Similar threads
