President in Prague rewrites history

  • Context: History 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Phrak
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    History
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around President Obama's speech in Prague, particularly his references to the Velvet Revolution and its historical significance. Participants explore the implications of his statements, the accuracy of his portrayal of events, and the broader context of political change in Eastern Europe during the late 20th century.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Obama's speech highlights the importance of the Velvet Revolution and its role in demonstrating the power of peaceful protest against oppressive regimes.
  • Others question the accuracy of Obama's claims, suggesting that the Velvet Revolution was more symbolic and occurred in a context where significant changes were already underway in the Soviet Union due to Gorbachev's reforms.
  • A participant points out that the Prague Spring of 1968 and the Velvet Revolution of 1989 are distinct events, emphasizing the different outcomes associated with each.
  • Some argue that Solidarity in Poland played a more critical role in the collapse of communism than the Velvet Revolution, suggesting that Obama's framing may overlook this aspect.
  • There is a recognition that political speeches often contain exaggerated or overly flattering language, which may not accurately reflect historical complexities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views regarding the accuracy and implications of Obama's statements, indicating that multiple competing interpretations exist. There is no consensus on the validity of his claims or the significance of the events mentioned.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of understanding the historical context of the Velvet Revolution and the political changes in Eastern Europe, noting that assumptions about the events may vary significantly.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying modern European history, political rhetoric, or the dynamics of social movements and their impact on political change.

Phrak
Messages
4,266
Reaction score
7
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/05/text-of-president-obama-in-prague/"

Obama:
We are here today because of the Prague Spring _ because the simple and principled pursuit of liberty and opportunity shamed those who relied on the power of tanks and arms to put down the will of the people.

We are here today because twenty years ago, the people of this city took to the streets to claim the promise of a new day, and the fundamental human rights that had been denied to them for far too long. Sametova revoluce _ the Velvet Revolution taught us many things. It showed us that peaceful protest could shake the foundation of an empire, and expose the emptiness of an ideology. It showed us that small countries can play a pivotal role in world events, and that young people can lead the way in overcoming old conflicts. And it proved that moral leadership is more powerful than any weapon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
I'm no expert in recent European history, but that sounds more or less right to me (if you set aside some nuances in the political change already stemming from Moscow). What am I missing?
 
Come on Gokul, it's a guessing game.
 
Is this statement true or a bit of exaggeration?

the Velvet Revolution taught us many things. It showed us that peaceful protest could shake the foundation of an empire, and expose the emptiness of an ideology. It showed us that small countries can play a pivotal role in world events, and that young people can lead the way in overcoming old conflicts. And it proved that moral leadership is more powerful than any weapon.

By the time of the Velvet Revolution, the old Soviet Union had essentially collapsed. It's economy was in a shambles, the Military had just lost a war to the Afghans, and Gorbachev's reforms were well underway. Those reforms led to more political and economic openness. The Velvet Revolution was the final straw on that camel's back.
 
Yes, the language is certainly overly flowery and generous, but I guess that's the kind of stuff you say when you are a guest. Especially, since this is the 20th anniversary year of the Velvet Revolution.

Maybe I would have personally preferred a speech with a little less flattery, but I'm not sure there would be too many political advisers or diplomats that would propose a speech that said: "Yeah, we know that Gorby was already making changes and the Velvet Rev was more symbolic of political change than actually a primary instrument of political upheaval, but yeah, goodish job, y'all. You broke an old and tired camel's back. I give you half a thumbs up."

Likewise, no one celebrating say the anniversary of Gandhi's birthday is likely to choose that moment to point out that the Brits were already dismantling their Empire, and that perhaps Gandhi just happened to be at the right place at the right time.

Overall, not a biggie, if you ask me.
 
Prague spring was in 68
not 20 years ago
that was the Velvet Revolution in 89
two very different outcomes in the same place
 
That was my first idea too, but he never said it was the same event. He mentioned both in two consecutive phrases, you may as well read it "we are here because of both events".

As every politician, he speaks in round sentences that doesn't mean much. Professional trait.

Besides, it was Solidarity in Poland not the Velvet Revolution that counts when it comes to "shaking the foundation of an empire" :wink: Obama has his first serious negative mark in my register.
 
Borek said:
Besides, it was Solidarity in Poland not the Velvet Revolution that counts when it comes to "shaking the foundation of an empire" :wink: Obama has his first serious negative mark in my register.

Yes, when thinking of the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, Solidarnosc comes to mind. And even the pope. (the previous one).
 
the Polish factor is certainly there but Prague is no to be ruled out from reforming the world.
 

Similar threads

Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 169 ·
6
Replies
169
Views
21K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
7K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
16K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
8K