The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Eastern Europe is better off under the Russian Sphere of Influence

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 378 times Debate No: 80884
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




So for anyone interested I would like to start off by discussing the Eastern European area. It seems throughout recent history, Poland, Czech Republic,Slovakia,Romania, Hungary , Ukraine, the Baltics and Belarus have never been able to gain some form of their own influence. For hundreds of years these countries have been either under Austrian, Soviet or more recently Western European influence. As far as most people are concerned the European Union is run by Western Europe which wishes to be like the USA but in it's own creepy way.

One of the things that is an issue is the difference in Political Ideologies. While France, UK and Germany believe in Open borders, Racial Equality and LGBT rights, the eastern section of Europe differs greatly on these ideas. Old Christian values thrive greatly in Eastern Europe ever since the great Battle of Vienna, ( Eastern Europe has a very different history from Western Europe. While the UK and France were invading muslim lands, the Ottoman Empire was trying to take Eastern Europe.

Though thanks to the Russian Empire, for centuries, the Ottomans were kept under control and away from even taking Serbia. And thanks to the Russian Empire, Serbia was able to rise into the large communist nation of Yugoslavia. Though ever since the fall of the Soviet Union, the European Union has taken advantage of the hardships of these countries by annexing them to just the "economic" bloc. And now since the Syrian Refugee crisis, these countries have begun to question what exactly Western Europe wants to do. With 4.1 million refugees marching across Hungary, it's almost impossible for Eastern Europe to be able to keep track and stop these people from plowing through.

The Western European Union is now demanding that they have to take in refugees when clearly these areas do not want them. Slovakia is angrily demanding to only accept Christian refugees but their Western rulers demand more from them, they will not accept this kind of disobedience.( With the Austrian Prime Minister calling Orban a nazi,( clearly this will become something a lot worse eventually then just name calling.

Thanks to Merkel and Cameron looking to create a European Union army, it is clear their next tactic would be to forcibly enact their policies on Eastern Europe. ( So I ask anyone who accepts this challenge, what will be the difference between the Western Bully and the Eastern Bully? At very least Russia had allowed these nations to keep their heritage and culture in Post Soviet Russia.


I accept.

As Pro has not specified whether the first round is for 'acceptance' or not, I will now proceed with my opening argument.


While Pro does indeed make some valid points about the European Union, the key fact is that they are arguing that Eastern Europe is 'better off' under the Russian influence; simply highlighting some flaws within the European Union
by does not affirm or even make any suggestion of this.

An assessment of history shows that Eastern European and Baltic states suffered greatly under the former Soviet Union--and to a much larger extent than they are in fact ever will with the E.U. These countries are now fully able to recognize Christianity as a main religion and have the freedom to openly practice their belief[s] in it, while still continuing to hold secular governments. They may be maintaining traditional values, but there is still recognition of Western ideals and many of these countries have financially began to thrive and grow--thus leading to an improved way of life for their inhabitants.

On the contrary to there existing a 'distance' to the West, there is considerable diplomacy with the E.U and Eastern countries do actually have their own form of power *and* say. Pro uses Hungary as an example [in the context of the refugee crisis] and while the E.U did want it to allow refugees and migrants to travel though [in order to reach Germany, Sweden, etc.]. Hungary was still able to refuse and establish a border fence without the E.U taking their authority any further or disallowing them to do this. The same applies to other Eastern European countries such Poland.

As for the history of both the East and the West, once again this largely irrelevant; and not totally accurate from the stance that Pro is arguing from. For example Hungary has always had strong historical and cultural ties with the West and once had an empire [known as the Hapsburg] with Austria, which lasted from 1867 to 1918 [1.]

Poland and the Czech Republic have also historically had significant ties with western Europe. There is also the fact that in the geographical sense, the majority of Eastern Europe is *close* to the west. Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and even Serbia are technically nearer to countries such as Austria and Germany than they are to Russia.

Thus proving that most parts of Eastern Europe and very much part of the West; specifically the ones that directly neighbour Austria/Germany.

As for the West allegedly not allowing Eastern European countries to maintain their heritage and culture, Pro has so far provided no evidence of this. If anything they are more enabled to keep their heritage and culture--and in many cases, make a significant amount of profit from this, which enables further growth. [2.] p://

There are even statistics to show that certain parts of Eastern Europe are richer than areas in the West [3.]

Debate Round No. 1


Please Note: The reason why that I've made it 4 rounds is because this can become a very deep debate that will focus on a broad range of topics.But now for the fun to begin!

Well I would like to begin on replying to the argument that history is irrelevant to this whole debate. The historical timeline of the Eastern Europe is what has shaped their culture and their behavior with each other and towards different cultures. You see most of Eastern Europe have been not only racially but ethnically homogenous for many decades. They have never had colonies in the Middle East or Africa so they tend to be a lot less open to outsiders.

What the European Union has been doing since the early 90s when the Eastern bloc opened up, was try to get them to integrate with the rest of Europe. What Western Europe has done was take advantage of these people for cheap labor, in comparison to Eastern Europe. The average German produces two times more then the average Pol when it comes to GDP per capita ( Although you can say they are a lot more free to express opinions, their unemployment rate is also a lot more free to skyrocket (

Now what also needs to be discussed is the idea that some countries tend to be luckier than others when it comes to integration with the West. While countries like the Czech Republic have fared pretty well, other countries that are further away from the West, geographically speaking, have not done so well. It seems when you allow some people to express their hatreds you get something a lot worse than communism. In 1992-1995, the Bosnian Genocide occurred in which thousands of Muslim Bosnian women were raped by Serbian soldiers as a form of psychological warfare and also genocide that caused the deaths of 200,000 people ( The reason why I bring this up is because I'd like to point out that although some Eastern European countries did well there were many who needed Russian political influence as a way of keeping ethnic tensions at bay ( To this day, there is still tension between Serbians and Bosnians who absolutely despise each other. Although you don't see mass levels of genocide, I assure you there is still hatred towards one another that is quite deep and complicated (

Now when there was Russian influence in Yugoslavia, everything was basically atheist and these ethnic tensions had to stay underground where they belonged and not in the newspapers of 1993. Although the European Union has recognized Bosnia and even Kosovo, there is a lot more hatred in Serbia than you think. You can find the same in Ukraine where Ukrainian Russians are a despised minority. In Ukraine most of the people want to keep it purely Ukrainian and want every Russian to leave, and they will despise you for even speaking Russian. Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union everything in Ukraine has been nothing but a demographic numbers game in order to make it purely Ukrainian (

So my point is that not every country in post-Soviet Russia has done well, and in fact many countries have not succeeded as a prosperous economic entity due to ethnic and religious tensions that the Soviet Empire was able to keep down. Now speaking of ethnic tensions, I will actually return to talking about Slovakia and Poland.

I would like to point out that Poland is a staunchly Roman Catholic country that doesn't even allow abortions. This country proudly shows off its Battle of Vienna in 1683 against the Islamic Invasion of the Ottomans. Poland has already said during the Syrian Refugee crisis that it will only accept Christian refugees because the country does not want Muslims on its land( Roughly half of Poland has negative views about Islam and yet the European Commission still insists that Poland take in more refugees (

In my first argument I explained that at the moment the only thing the EU can do is compare these countries to Nazis, which makes no sense when Germany and Austria were the real Nazis in the first place. I also talked about how they are backing a European Union Army that WILL take the idea of an Economic Union and turn it into a militaristic one. My main question is, why does Angela Merkel want a European Union Army so badly? It makes no sense if the European countries can defend themselves already. It seems as though the European Commission feels powerless when they can only name-call ( Something harsh is bound to happen with this idea of a European Union Army and the results may become a lot worse. You see, the European Union was not flat-out an authoritarian state like the Soviet Union but they are creeping into one. The most Ironic part of all is that Germany is the one leading the pack on trying to make it much more authoritative then ever.

So I ask my opponent this question, what need is there for a European Union Army? Why does Merkel order and expect Cameron to do her bidding? Didn't the Soviet Union have an army that did the exact same thing? And if left wing governments are allowed to express their opinion, why can't right wing governments be left alone to have their ideologies respected? We like to pretend that if gays and liberals are allowed to have their own opinions then everything is fine, but if a conservative European wishes to express an opinion in Sweden this is what happens (

You see there is something a lot deeper then just economic equality, something that wreaks of Authoritarianism and it is rapidly arriving in the European Union.


kirya forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Well I am sorry to see my opponent has forfeited this round, it's a shame and I was hoping for a great rebuttal to my argument.

Now I'd like to extend my argument about this growing authoritarianism in the European Union. The countries that are entrenched in this European Union culture. In fact the best part about the Syrian Refugee crisis is to show just how bad the European Union has gotten to "help" these people. So badly that Germany is literally evicting German Citizens from their homes just to make room for these refugees ( Now this is the point when Germany is going back in time and evicting Jews from their homes, however now they are doing it to their own people. Although this is the second time this has happened there are other signs that show that Germany, the economic leader of the European Union, has been oppressing it's own people. The German government has had the audacity to suggest raising taxes on hard working Germans in order to pay for Syrian refugees to get more benefits ( Although this had been shot down, if this was suggested by Obama you would see near anarchy all over the USA where people would be outraged.

Germany is actually not the only country who is trying to oppress the voice of it's own people. Sweden has followed in a different election where, in the end of 2014, Sweden's center left party had cancelled a snap election due to the fact the right wing parties were more popular then ever ( If the leading countries are so cruel to their own people where they treat them as second class citizens, then what makes you think they will not do the same thing to post Soviet aligned countries like Slovenia and Croatia. Countries who are much smaller then them and could boss around to the point where they can make them take in refugees if they wanted to.

Let's be honest, the only reason why Hungary,Poland and Slovakia were able to say no was because they were much larger countries who could put up a fight. Not only that but it would look very ironic for Germany once again to try and use violence to have Poland. Sounds a little like an event that happened on September 1,1939. The hypocrisy of it all is just horrific, we love to pretend that the European Union is letting people speak their minds but in reality the Germans just can not stop themselves from controlling other people. It's as if it's in their DNA to just have everyone do as they say and if the country refuses then they call them Nazis and racists just because they wish to not have immigrants in their countries.

The only argument you can say that they aren't like Russia is the fact that they aren't enforcing their mother tongue on the people. However the European Union languages are French and English, the European Union also has a language policy and in quotes "One of the objectives of the EU"s language policy is therefore that every European citizen should master two other languages in addition to their mother tongue", this is directly from the European Union language policy page itself ( Another quote I found interesting from the same website, "The Education and Training 2020" strategic framework identifies language learning as a priority". Now the signal word is a "priority" why would it be a priority for a Polish person to learn Dutch and German? What if they can only learn one language? Same exact thing that has happened during the Soviet Era and the Russian empire but they had a different term for it known as Russification (

So my point is this, it is clear that the European Union countries are treating each other like absolute garbage. They pretend to care for other cultures but in reality they do not care, the whole goal for the European Union is to fuse every European culture into one giant culture, stripping the individuality of every country in the European Union. The way they treat one another is absolutely disgusting and it will only get worse. I have made this point about why they pretend to respect Eastern Europe and that is because they don't have a European Union Peacekeeping army. In my opinion that will eventually change when the orders from Angela Merkel have been done. Once the European Union has it's own army then it will be exactly like the Soviet Union. The European Union is growing into the Soviet Union and it won't stop there, they will take the every Eastern European nation down with them unless Eastern Europe stands it's ground and fights them off together as Slavic Brethren.


kirya forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Well it seems my opponent has wasted a very fun debate unfortunately, sort of sad due to the fact he or she first started out arrogantly criticizing my argument and decided not to even back it up with other arguments but still it's time to end this.

Now I want to finally show my argument about how exactly that the European Union is destroying the cultures of Eastern Europe. You see although there wasn't a direct demand for learning a language, like how the Russian language dominated those lands for centuries. But there is definitely a domination of languages based on the countries with the largest economies, also known as UK and Germany. Based on the statistics of Nation Master (, 34% of all of Poland as of 2000 can have a conversation completely in English and the Second largest language,German, was not far much behind at 20%.

For the United Kingdom though only a whopping 0.0% of all the United Kingdom natives can speak Polish as a conversational second language ( The only nation that can actually speak Polish over 10% is Lithuania and Poland economically dominates that area and thus they are within their sphere of influence.

Another thing that should be noted is that there is actually a correlation on which the higher the GDP per capita the lower the percentage of people who would be able to speak English and German conversationally ( While the Czech Republic GDP per Capita is at a large 19,844 US Dollars, Poland has a much lower GDP per capita of 13,647 US Dollars. When it comes to English only 27% of the Czech Republic knows how to speak it but which is lower then Poland where 34% speak English.

The point of this argument is capitalism is not only the same when it comes to language dominance compared to Russia but can even be worse when looking at the complex pecking order that the West has created for itself. Larger nations bully and control the smaller nations. It's not only that but the largest nations in the EU have a much more impactful influence on smaller nations. For example Slovenia, a nation very far away from the United Kingdom, has an English Conversational prevalence rate of 59% (, clearly there is a heavy pecking order here. The situation that is present right now is that there is a blending of languages that is going on throughout all of Europe, the younger generations are abandoning their native tongues to speak English and German out of necessity. Now before people believe that native languages can not die out let's look at these languages ( Although you can say these areas are not sovereign nations, the European Union is on it's way to become one large federation. With only English, French and German as the three main large ones, the smaller of the European Union nations will eventually just blend into the rest of these groups.

As for this round my point proving that the European Union is not letting them keep their heritages, if anything, it is blending them out of existence and turning the natives of these areas into cheap workers who have to work in factories own by British and German Businessmen. Not only that but the Chinese have also been putting their foot into the doors of these areas. 5.4% of all Import partners of Poland are Chinese and with the rapidly growing economy of China that is considered to get much larger ( The other point of this argument is to show that clearly these nations are being exploited and used as pawns in a Global Economic Strategy game that China is playing with the world already. Same goes with Hungary where China has a 7.4% hold on the Imports of Hungarians ( And finally Czech Republic who has a 6.3% import rate with China ( So you see these nations have lost their economic power to extremely huge economic powers.

So now to conclude my argument, I believe the idea that they are much better off with the European Union is only a politically correct statement that people in the West will utter over and over again because that is what they're told. Never forget only the ones who have won the war actually get to write the history books, the other side of the argument is never heard from again.


kirya forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by danonspark21 2 years ago
Please, give my point of view a chance, you may not agree with it but at least consider what I have to say, it may open your eyes to a lot deeper issues within the European Union
Posted by MizuneKurosaki13 2 years ago
I'm gonna have to say I agree with Kirya on this one. I think that the Eastern European nations are better off on their own because they can manage their own governments, economy and laws and express their individuality more openly and freely than in the Soviet Union.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture