Where is Poland?
- Thread starter NickyJ
- Start date
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Well I don't think it is arbitrary.
But what are the exact criteria of this division (and why there is no "Southern" and "Northern" parts - only Western and Eastern?). Looks like you are dividing Europe basing only on present day GDP per capita in each country (otherwise I have no idea why Finland is in Western Europe, while Poland in Eastern).
But what are the exact criteria of this division (and why there is no "Southern" and "Northern" parts - only Western and Eastern?). Looks like you are dividing Europe basing only on present day GDP per capita in each country (otherwise I have no idea why Finland is in Western Europe, while Poland in Eastern).
Not wrong but less precise...
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
I tell you, Mechanical - they are either dividing Europe basing on Iron Courtain (which is anachronistic) or basing on GDP per capita (which is plain stupid).
Using Iron Courtain as a line of division is a political criterion - but very anachronistic (we have year 2013, Iron Courtain is long gone).
If they really want to use the political criterion, they should adjust it to modern conditions - i.e. the borders of European Union.
Using Iron Courtain as a line of division is a political criterion - but very anachronistic (we have year 2013, Iron Courtain is long gone).
If they really want to use the political criterion, they should adjust it to modern conditions - i.e. the borders of European Union.
I know, but stupidity and ignorance isnt the answer, right?
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Hungary has similar language to Finland, yet Finland is Western, Hungary Eastern.
Czech Republic has (and historically had) similar culture to Germany, yet Germany is Western, Czech is Eastern.
So no, you are clearly not basing on language and culture...
I tell you - you are basing on Iron Courtain or on GDP per capita (both are related - Iron Courtain hampered economic growth of the eastern part).
In other words, you are stuck deeply in the 1980s with your language terms and definitions (and reasoning perhaps).
That's probably right (and I edited my last post to mention the Iron Curtain too); people's perceptions are of the rich West and the poor East. Not sure how that would make it invalid, even if it does make it silly. Or more to the point, how that's an argument against the fact that in conventional English, Poland is in Eastern Europe (again, that being a term with a specific English meaning). Because I don't really know exactly how this term came about, or what the precise reasons behind it are. I just know that it exists, and has a particular meaning, which places Poland in Eastern Europe. It being a ridiculous term would not change that. It would only change the question you should be asking, which is whether Poland, being a country the falls within the term Eastern Europe, should be a country that falls within that term? Not whether it actually is. Of course, you need to accept that Poland falls within the term 'Eastern Europe' before you can ask that question.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
It all depends on context. If you're talking EuroZone then it makes some sense to talk about Northern and Southern Europe. Though where France falls, who knows?
If you're talking recent history and Iron Curtain, then Poland falls to the East, France to the West, and Germany is split between the two.
If now, you're talking about ex-Soviet bloc countries distancing themselves from the defunct USSR, then it makes some sense to talk about Poland being in Central Europe. If that's what's important to you.
There is no "precision" involved in the terms "Eastern Europe" and "Central Europe". They're regions with apparently fluid definitions.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
So you are using anachronistic stereotypical divisions which are long invalid (since 1990s at least).Camikaze said:
And then you are angry, that some people do not agree with your definitions / divisions.
Interesting...
That was 30 years ago.
(You may have replied before seeing my edits)
It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with the definition, but of accepting what the definition actually is. You can't just change the definition of a term because you don't like it. As I said, even if the term is entirely anachronistic and ridiculous in every conceivable way, that doesn't change the fact of its existence. It means that you need to be asking whether Poland should be in(cluded in the term) Eastern Europe; a question that requires acceptance of the fact that it currently is!
Whether Poland is in Eastern Europe or not is not a question I had ever encountered before joining CFC. I might have thought, "Gee, why is Poland lumped in the same category with Russia and Bulgaria?",* but that wouldn't have changed the fact that it actually is in that category. Noting that Pakistan and South Korea are on the same continent is pretty meaningless too, but it doesn't mean you can just say "nuh-uh, they're not both in Asia!" It means you should push for a better way to categorise countries.
*though I didn't
I don't think you understand what the word "precision" means.
Yes, I accept the fact that English speaking people use anachronisms based on their ignorance. Happy now?
Mise
isle of lucy
Actually, far from anachronism, I'm using an even more modern conception of Europe than the dated, 1990s version you're using. People who still think that Europe extends to the Urals, or that Russia is a part of Europe in any meaningful way, are indeed living in the distant past. Europe extends at best to Romania, Moldova, Latvia & Estonia. Even Ukraine and Belarus are only barely part of Europe in the 21st century -- I would personally exclude them from any meaningful understanding of Europe in this day and age. Looking at the modern conception of Europe, it's clear that Poland and Czech Rep are in the Eastern half, while Germany and France are in the West. Scandinavia is obviously Northern Europe while Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece are clearly Southern Europe.
Yes, if you want to continue using an ancient definition of Europe that extends to the Urals, and merely update this raw geography with 1990s borders, then fine, go ahead. But I'm personally going for a more relevant, 21st century approach, which takes Europe to be a meaningful group of like-minded countries, quite aside from the corruption and authoritarianism of Modern Russia. This Europe indeed has PL and CZ in its East, but it's in the East of something meaningful and forward thinking, not backward and fearful like the old 1990s Europe.
Yes, if you want to continue using an ancient definition of Europe that extends to the Urals, and merely update this raw geography with 1990s borders, then fine, go ahead. But I'm personally going for a more relevant, 21st century approach, which takes Europe to be a meaningful group of like-minded countries, quite aside from the corruption and authoritarianism of Modern Russia. This Europe indeed has PL and CZ in its East, but it's in the East of something meaningful and forward thinking, not backward and fearful like the old 1990s Europe.
.png/250px-Floristic_regions_in_Europe_(english).png)
If we've settled the fact that Poland is indeed in Eastern Europe, then yes, quite so.
We are talking about degree of precision, right? If you check that wiki page you will see that different economist or encyclopedist all put Poland in central Europe....
Similar threads
