Name every nation from the United States' Public Law 86-90, passed in 1959 to raise awareness of countries, peoples, and nations under undemocratic rule.
Take note of the law's passage in 1959, and the views and biases of the people making the law. Some of these nations were independent, others were puppet states, and others were stateless.
Why? Sixteen of those countries left the Soviet Union as soon as they could. Tibet had been just recently conquered and was undergoing forced sterilization campaigns at the hands of Mao. North Korea, well, was North Korea. The rest of those nations were also subject to oppressive Soviet rule, but they're non-European, so nobody cared.
I appreciate the concern for sovereignty, but saying the Baltics, et al, were rearing to secede seems much more political than historical.
There was a referendum mere months before the illegal dissolution of the USSR, one of the most externally observed elections in history due to glasnost policies, and the overwhelming majority of voters chose to stay in the union. The sovereign states who seceded earliest refused to put independence to popular vote until the USSR was already mostly dissolved, the significance of which is shown by 20+% shifts in pre-election polling.
Working class people of the former USSR, people of all ages, genders, and nations, suffered the greatest and quickest drop in life expectancy and quality of life in modern history, and possibly all time. Their nations became the playgrounds of Western oil barons and mineral tycoons, and the country was looted so voraciously that several NUKES straight up disappeared.
The USSR wasn't a utopia, but it wasn't hell either.
I do want to be helpful and not preachy. Here's an academic article on the Tibet situation written by American sociologists for an American journal: https://imgur.com/a/ZsVNZAp
You can find tons more articles for free if you're willing to give an academic aggregator your email but I understand if that sketches you out lol. Good if you're like me and curious yet not an academic though!!
I don't want to say "you're wrong" but I will say that the claim doesn't stand to academic rigor. In real talk, the headlines don't match what can actually be proven when a well-trained researcher actually goes and conducts their own study in Tibet without influence from the CPC *or* the diaspora like this study did.
As for the North Korea thing, I'm not sure what you're trying to get at specifically lol, but I still wanna help. I always recommend the documentary Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang in Seoul, it interviews DPRK defectors in the ROK. Super concise, no frills!
I'll argue from a different angle: I would agree that all of these were "captive nations". (I can't bother to fact-check all of Confabulously's claims right now, so I won't say any were fabricated, but let's just say I'm hesitant to believe them.)
Given how many nations "held captive" by the US or US allies are absent from the list, this was obviously just for propaganda and diplomacy. Iran and South Vietnam were under dictatorships with US backing. Algeria was fighting an independence war against French terror so bad it even appalled the French. Kenyans were forced into concentration camps.
Omitting those is hardly surprising, but there were completely non-aligned countries in dire straits too. Sudan (by this time independent) was embroiled in a long civil war with many civilian casualties.
This list was just a "communism bad" report, or– as some critics at the time suggested– a "Russians bad" report, given Russia itself was absent from this list despite also being under the USSR.
Have you read your history? I'm amazed at the Russiastans on here. I expected a higher level of education. Their traditions were outlawed, their property was confiscated. The Bolsheviks called it "de-Cossackization."
A prominent Cossack leader literally stated "America should not spend billions supporting the Soviets with trade. We don't have to be afraid of the Russian army because half of it is made up of Captive Nations"
In Russia, even despite the Russian majority in many national republics, it supports languages and traditions. I live in one of these regions, the indigenous peoples are supported in every possible way
I mean I guess, but it's still weird to include those. Like if you already have China on here, why treat Manchuria and Turkestan as separate? Why include all the Soviet Socialist Republics as separate when you could easily just put "Soviet Union" on the list? It doesn't make sense.
Very interesting! I started by guessing colonial possessions but then realized what was up. Very satisfying to guess Turkestan and Manchuria. Would never have gotten Cossackia and Idel-Ural.
Checked the source because I wanted to learn more. It doesn't seem like Manchukuo (or any other name for Manchuria) was mentioned? Maybe it was mentioned somewhere else, but it's not in the long list with the other 22.
You’re right - it looks like I fell for some misinformation. It was on the Wikipedia page when I made the quiz and has since been taken off. My fault for not giving it due diligence and finding a better source. Thank you for bringing this up, I’ll edit the quiz now.
There was a referendum mere months before the illegal dissolution of the USSR, one of the most externally observed elections in history due to glasnost policies, and the overwhelming majority of voters chose to stay in the union. The sovereign states who seceded earliest refused to put independence to popular vote until the USSR was already mostly dissolved, the significance of which is shown by 20+% shifts in pre-election polling.
Working class people of the former USSR, people of all ages, genders, and nations, suffered the greatest and quickest drop in life expectancy and quality of life in modern history, and possibly all time. Their nations became the playgrounds of Western oil barons and mineral tycoons, and the country was looted so voraciously that several NUKES straight up disappeared.
The USSR wasn't a utopia, but it wasn't hell either.
You can find tons more articles for free if you're willing to give an academic aggregator your email but I understand if that sketches you out lol. Good if you're like me and curious yet not an academic though!!
I don't want to say "you're wrong" but I will say that the claim doesn't stand to academic rigor. In real talk, the headlines don't match what can actually be proven when a well-trained researcher actually goes and conducts their own study in Tibet without influence from the CPC *or* the diaspora like this study did.
As for the North Korea thing, I'm not sure what you're trying to get at specifically lol, but I still wanna help. I always recommend the documentary Loyal Citizens of Pyongyang in Seoul, it interviews DPRK defectors in the ROK. Super concise, no frills!
https://youtu.be/BkUMZS-ZegM
:)
Given how many nations "held captive" by the US or US allies are absent from the list, this was obviously just for propaganda and diplomacy. Iran and South Vietnam were under dictatorships with US backing. Algeria was fighting an independence war against French terror so bad it even appalled the French. Kenyans were forced into concentration camps.
Omitting those is hardly surprising, but there were completely non-aligned countries in dire straits too. Sudan (by this time independent) was embroiled in a long civil war with many civilian casualties.
This list was just a "communism bad" report, or– as some critics at the time suggested– a "Russians bad" report, given Russia itself was absent from this list despite also being under the USSR.
A prominent Cossack leader literally stated "America should not spend billions supporting the Soviets with trade. We don't have to be afraid of the Russian army because half of it is made up of Captive Nations"