Answer:
It would be most disingenuous if we were to explore the legacy of Communist rule without understanding how it came about and what it meant to those under it. The Soviet Union, being on the ‘winning side’ in World War II, was able to create ‘political space’ through its liberation of states such asPoland from Nazi rule. This allowed the creation of an ‘Iron Curtain’, surrounding Soviet ‘territory’, in turn enabling the creation of Communist states by 1948-49; states under its hegemony had reforms imposed on them from above which mirrored that which was occurring in theSoviet Union (Batt, 2007:13-14; Pittaway, 2007: 20).
Step-by-step explanation:
The system was however, not just a ‘power-political’ system but one which was an ideological language, functioning through a system of coercion imposed from above (Schöpfiln, 2009); essentially, the Communist ideology ‘guided all political, economic and social activity’ (Guerra, 2011 emphasis added). We must also consider the nature of the ‘revolutions’ (if that is a fair way to term them (Nodia, 1996:19-20)), the profound effects of Glasnost (openness and transparency) and Perestroika (restructuring politics and economics) in enabling periods of relatively peaceful negotiations (Balcerowicz, 1994:77; Offe, 1991:873). Owing to the nature of these negotiations, one would assume that the resulting shift in power would be rather straight-forward. It would be logical to assume that in Romania there would have been unease due to the bloody disposal of Nicolae and Elena Ceaușescu after years of economic decline and oppression (Maxfield, 2008:14) but the peaceful ‘overthrow’ in other states should surely equate to a simple, linear democratisation.