Do you mean the Cold War, or something earlier? If the former, you could use the term "former East Bloc". If the latter, I'd love to beg to differ :-)
I certainly don't think that it rises to the level of pejorative terminology.
Don't worry, I didn't meant to imply that it's pejorative, it's simply erroneous, and contrary to local usage and self-understanding, thus annoying. There are a lot of such sensitivities across Europe, I and Migeru listed some of them, and rest assured erroneous usage of each of those already led to complaints by locals from affected countries on EuroTrib. Another I can think of which you may already be familiar with is to call Britain "England". *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
To me there are significant historical distinctions in the divide between Western and Eastern Europe Do you mean the Cold War, or something earlier? If the former, you could use the term "former East Bloc". If the latter, I'd love to beg to differ :-)
I think the whole "Eastern Europe is different" meme is just latent anti-Slav racism. Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
That is precisely what I meant. The original issue was not related to either religion or language.
Again, where do you draw the line between East and West, and why? Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
But the trip back was indeed hardly not made sober. 2 hours before the bus left I was still on a street perpendicular to Piotrovska avenue in Wooooooodj, drinking white vodka straight off the bottle with 3 Poles and a Slovenian girl (who spoke perfect French and wanted to "get to know me better", but I was resilient and chose my bus over getting to know her better). I barely had enough time to get a taxi back to my friend's house, take a shower, and race to the bus station.
Part of the point DoDo is trying to make is that after the fall of the Soviet bloc, the countries of the former Austro-Hungarian empire have been very quick to reclaim their Central European identity. Nothing is 'mere'. — Richard P. Feynman
I can't see where the Ottoman or Austro-Hungarian enpires have much to do with NATO.
If you are so desperate to pick an argument, may I suggest FreeRepublic.
And please don't assume people are trying to pick arguments ...
Also, there is a hill in the countryside where for 200 (or is it 300?) years, people have been laying crosses and various artifacts, with messages, for loved ones.
Hill of Crosses
Statehood day
The Russophobia you rightly noted as a factor goes back at least a century more for a number of former East Bloc countries.
The Austro-Hungarian Empire also has a role in the second motivation I named in my long reply, e.g. leaving behind ethnic tensions after it fell apart. Meanwhile, memory of the Ottoman Empire played a not insignificant role at least in Hungary in relation to the third motivation I named, a reason people think that it is unsafe to stand alone while a big power might be swaggering around. I also note that both Empires played a significant role in the arguentation of the nationalist anti-NATO camp, who feared for sovereignity, of being subjugated by yet another Empire, betraying the heritage of the countless rebels/revolutionaries against these Empires (something in which I now, after Iraq, see more truth than back then...) *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
You probably don't realise how dismissive the above sounded. This DOES matter to people from here. You would find out if you travelled here. But if you find this sub-discussion annoying, I don't want to squabble, let's end it here (and I ask Migeru to stand away too), and please read my other, longer comments about the issue of what motivated people and elites in X Europe to join NATO. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
*Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
