Commentators

Partly Sunny with Showers 3° London Hi 4°C / Lo -2°C

Mark Steel: Come rain or revolution, it's money they all want

In 1989 capitalism bought all communism's best players

Haven't the 20th anniversary celebrations of the overthrow of communism been miserable? In 1989, with historically youthful joy, swarms of demonstrators danced across the Berlin Wall and brought down a collection of tyrannies, so the commemoration starts with the dullest statesmen sat in rows looking as if they're about to say "Well I'd better be off as it's 10 past eight, and I have to be up early tomorrow to put all my gardening equipment in alphabetical order."

Austere figures like Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown embody the very opposite spirit to the one being celebrated. Otherwise the footage of the events would show a few figures in suits saying "Instead of being silly with a hammer, why don't we wait until morning and ask the Stasi to lend us a ladder." These politicians spoilt it by being there at all so you felt grubby if you joined in, like if someone organised a surprise party for your birthday but invited Gary Glitter.

This week it's been the Czech Republic's turn to mark twenty years of freedom, and they've broken records for being subdued. One Czech cabinet minister was quoted as saying "We focused on low-key events, including a small conference of historians." They know how to swing, don't they? When this was announced he probably added "I know what some of you are thinking – that maybe we could let go a little and hold a medium sized conference of historians, but think of all the clearing up."

Or maybe this is traditional, and at a New Year's Eve party in Prague the host says "On the stroke of midnight, to see out the old and bring in the new, Petr here will recite a treatise on the impact of the Protestant Church on trade in 16th-century central Europe."

But there's another reason for the muted celebrations, which is that much of the population in these countries are confused about what they're celebrating. According to a poll, eighty per cent of Czechs are dis-satisfied with the country, and according to Focus magazine, "Many of those attending the anniversary events held anti-corruption placards", aimed at the current government.

Part of this disillusionment might come from the fact that the two systems are more similar than either would admit, to the extent they're often run by exactly the same people. Vaclav Klaus, the Margaret Thatcher-loving president, was a prominent official in the Communist state bank. One of the richest businessmen in the country is Vaclav Junek, who was once a member of the Communist Party central committee.

This must have entailed quite a change of mind on his part, where he suddenly announced "I'm big enough to admit I made a mistake. Up until a few weeks ago I thought it was my duty to uphold the ideals of freedom through communism, which happened to grant me a life of privilege and luxury while most of my country went short. Now it is clear to me I must promote the values of free-market capitalism, which happen to grant me..." (I imagine you can see where this is going).

Jiri Komorous, once a senior spy for the Communist Party is now Chief of the Anti-Drug Squad. Maybe he uses the same techniques, so every week it's announced someone has confessed to "Shamefully sabotaging the glorious nation and its supreme leader by buying an eighth of hash oil off a bloke in a hat in a pub toilet," and they're not seen for ten years when they turn up working at a beetroot farm prison in the Ukraine.

Maybe the explanation is that economic theories operate a transfer system, like football clubs, and in 1989 capitalism bought all communism's best players. Or it could be that both systems were driven by the same ambition, to make as much profit as possible, the detail being that in eastern Europe this was organised by the state instead of private companies. So it was relatively painless for those expert at ensuring a country's wealth went to a small minority, to do a similar job under a different name.

Even so, the freedoms won in 1989 are worth celebrating for what they were. But Western leaders have trouble identifying with a spirit that, if it appeared in their own regimes would terrify them. The proof that the two systems were more similar than they can admit, will come if Tony Blair is invited to the twentieth anniversary of the revolution that overthrew Ceaucescu in Romania. Because, as he hears people tell of a ruthless leader who had palaces across his territory, you'll see him dribbling in admiration, unable to stop himself from muttering "Mind you, he should have bought another one in Bucharest when the market was weak, then made half a million selling it on in 1989."

More from Mark Steel

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

(no subject) - [info] - Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 01:22 am (UTC)
Re: jordan shoes$32,ugg boots$50,Handbags$35,JEANs$30,Free shipping
[info]freethinkin wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:30 am (UTC)
Jog on. No one wants your tat.
[info]jonpaulr wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 07:17 am (UTC)
Angela merkel and Gordon Browns dourness is the opposite to the celebrations after the fall of tyrany? surely left wing fascist oppression is the opposite to the celebrations at the berlin wall 20 years ago.
Is your argument that all those people who died for freedom wasted there time as todays politicans are happy with suburban life.Maybe those who looked back on the fall of the soviet empire are reflecting on thosewho died to bring it down ,surely when the wall fell aswell as reflecting on the people who lost their lives trying to escape ,it was a time of celebration
Disproportionate advantage: an evolutionary quandary?
[info]bobav wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:48 am (UTC)
It IS interesting that many of the same people who were responsible for adjudicating and reinforcing the "left wing tyranny" you describe are now the ones who benefit from capitalist hoarding and widening class-based disenfranchisements. That the soviet system ended up becoming a kind of mirror image of imperial czarist tyranny, with many of the same dire problems directed and facilitated by new faces (and now re-cast but nearly identical in a language of capitalism and a misnomeric "freedom" with the same faces and dinky proportion of the population becoming the hoarding class) is not lost on a "general populace" that has yet to find or invent and then implement with all its faculties intact over the longer term a system of governing that manages to short-circuit the nature of a certain segment of the population to disenfranchise a much larger majority of the population for the smaller segment's own completely disproportionate advantage.
Same People
[info]jamesdar wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 10:53 am (UTC)
To borrow from George Orwell,

Four legs good, two legs better
Re: Same People
[info]contrastcolour wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 11:57 am (UTC)
Can't be put better than that...

Orwell was, simply, a prophet... and a genius political thinker. And an apolitical one at that: all he really cared about was a just society.
I'll be rich? Where do I sign??
[info]rhysjaggar wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 12:14 pm (UTC)
Communism rewards Party Workers - they must promote order and idealism. When they're not taking bribes from drug dealers to turn their eyes away at customs.

Capitalism rewards the CIA - they must ensure order and idealism can thrive in the Land of the Free. When they're not taking bribes from drug dealers to turn their eyes away at customs.

The middle east rewards Mad Mullahs, sometimes. They must promote Islam as a means of promoting order and idealism. And there are no drugs in Islam, just as homosexuals have been airbrushed from history. But the Mullahs do all right somehow.

Pakistan rewards customs officers. Because they can take bribes from the naughty Western boys who want to swig Scotch on their treks. It must be SO difficult not to take the Scotch and sell it on the black market......still, stability of income and all that. The Western Boys would go to Nepal if they couldn't have a daily medicinal in Pakistan, wouldn't they?

And the UK? Well, inside trusties who know which horses have been nobbled don't do so badly. Ditto which shares are going to soar. Ditto which referee's been bunged to 'make football the game that it is. One you can never be sure of the outcome', which is why the ante-post odds were very favourable....or not, once the bookies have bunged the relevant layers enough to allow them to close the book and make more money off the suckers who think it's a fair fight tonight......and often, of course it is!

All this communism and capitalism lark, yer avin' a laugh, mate.

Spondoolies, sex and power. That's what it's all about. Nothing to do with all that nonsense Oxford teaches its PPE students.

You've just got to learn which thespian role you've been assigned to play and learn to lie with the best of them.

Telling the truth? When did that EVER earn you money, eh??


Endeth today's daily sermon from the pot-infested waccy baccy land c/o The Daily Star, News of the World, Daily Mail, somewhere in London with special correspondent in Osama bin Laden's newest hideout in Mali etc etc etc.
People are the problem
[info]bob_idle wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 01:54 pm (UTC)
No matter what grand politico-economic system theorists invent, it always ends in tears. Any system (communism, capitalism, the third way, anarchism, dictatorship, social democracy etc) could work if it was perfectly and honestly implemented by good people for good people. It's corrupt and greedy and flawed people that spoil it every time.

So is there any point in economists, philosophers, sociologists and political think tanks coming up with their models for the perfect society? Probably their use is purely in academia inventing exercises for the mind. To improve the world we don't need them. That is an understatement. What's needed is to make all individual people better, more educated, wiser, more honest, less greedy. I include myself in that. But if God created man as flawed then this might be an impossible task.

When thinkers come up with model systems for running society and try to impose them on the practical world that's when disaster strikes. Massacres and genocides occur and wars start. The latest has been the neo-conservative vision of PNAC. Imposing liberal democracy at the point of the gun. "Let freedom reign". We are still suffering the consequences.





Re: People are the problem
[info]peter_holl wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 03:30 pm (UTC)
Agreed. Plato's ideal society in "Republic" had guardians to "educate" children and slaves and peasants to provide a lifestyle for the citizenry elite: you could see where that was coming from. Every human designed system ends up with a clique in power in it for themselves as power corrupts. The least worst system allows for the removal of that clique periodically.

The issue to be addressed by human beings is how to overcome sinful behaviour, and this question is not asked anymore by anyone in politics as it begs the question - who am I to judge you, the sinful voter whose vote I want? Evil isn't talked about anymore either because of moral relativism. All the seven deadly sins are exhibited to a greater or larger extent in our politicians, and while they are, none of them will do the job of governing in a truly disinterested way that benefits society irrespective of what members of society think. Pride, envy, avarice, wrath, lust, gluttony and sloth - you can see these qualities in our rulers. The seven virtues: humility, love, kindness, patience, chastity, temperance, and diligence are in shorter supply. While nearly all people delude themselves that they are "good" in their own eyes when on any examination they aren't, every form of human governance will be fallible.

To the point, why celebrate 20 years of the fall of communist dictatorship? No one celebrates 20th anniversaries much... you have to wait for 25 years, Mark.
Power
[info]bobnot wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 02:10 pm (UTC)
It is well explained in Chomsky's Understanding Power.
Good on you Mark
[info]sycoohm wrote:
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 at 08:01 pm (UTC)
Mark, I don't care. it made me laugh! Thats whart matters. I agree the systems are the same, theres no democracy here really only the same bland establishment types who stick to the same blamd laws that preserve wealth in the hands that have it.

To think otherwise is a joke. If freedom is that one man earns £5 an hour for he's labour and another earns £500 then freedom isnt what its cracked up to be. How about trying real democracy - get rid of the Queen and the unelected House of Lords, and instill a genuine spirit of 'equal opportunity' to the House of Commmons. There should be a law to limit the number of Public School types in any Government. Nepotism rules ok

Columnist Comments

hamish_mcrae

Hamish McRae: Rescue Greece and we help ourselves

The consequences of a Eurozone member not repaying its debt would be unthinkable

andrew_grice

Andrew Grice: Brown's insurance against defeat

PM's deathbed conversion to electoral reform may look like pure opportunism

mark_steel

Mark Steel: They believed what suited them, and ignored what didn't

Iraq evidence was collected only to back a decision already made


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion