I am from Slovenia. And I asure you. We are a capitalist country. And Slovenia is not *that* rich country to begin with. It's alright. I'm not going to lie I like it here. The quality of life is good. But there are countries that are way more "rich". People that assume our system is not capitalism .... I don't know what to say to them. Just because we have a lot of social safety nets does not mean it's not capitalism. And even that is relative. Because there are countries that are both richer and have more/better social safety nets. You don't have to burry yourself in debt and loans or sale your house if you want to get a basic education for you or your kid .... yes. But is this what makes a country not capitalist? No. We have a market economy. That is open and operates under the same capitalist rules as the rest of EU .... because that's the point of EU. So we are just as capitalist as Germany, or France. But ok Americans think donating 1$ to hungy kids in Afghanistan or giving a free meal to a homeless person = communism I guess .... You could make this argument for Yugoslavia .... but only in later era. When it became increasingly capitalist. So I don't know .... even China - it's capitalist now -a-days. We do not live in 50's anymore.
@@monkeman7743Typical for poor losers to hate on the US, Slovenia has a worse economy than Japan which has been in a 30 year recession, hell even Malta has a better economy than slovenia, you can’t even compare it to the GDP. Slovenia is more equally broke.
Also subsidised as the tech industry was referenced in Slovenia while the others had to wait for their turn. Their products originally were not very good but improved due to support from other Republics. Eg. Macedonian top grapes were bought by Slovenia & their nice packed Fructal juice was more expensive than Macedonian wine :(much more complex to produce). When they improved they stopped to support others & selfishly asked for autonomy. My mother worked in YU -Post-Tel-Telegraph office & their 13th monthly salary was donated for tech advancement of the Slovenian offices. When Macedonian turn came Slovenian suggested to separate :( The chief YU economist suggested that the main problem was the negligence of Macedonia & Kosovo that created disappointment & corruption (started in Kosovo) [& the Western bullying + C/iA bribing].
@@renbe0 i would suggest that, although your statement is technically completely correct, it was an autonomous region instead of federal republic only because of the way yugoslavia worked. It was mainly operated from belgrade (serbia) and army with mandatory service was largely serbian-influenced. Also, country was yugoslavia, not like EU which works as confederation. Much like soviet union, which is known to be operated by moscow. Federal republic/autonomous region is strictly speaking just term used to describe places with different types of autonomy (vojvodina and kosovo had their own autonomy inside federal republic of serbia)
@@valikadilnik4368 You don't have any clue. Slovenia had open borders to the West, private companies, and farms. Its superb school system was on the same level as British private schools. We learned English in school and watched Western films. We worked with Western companies. Serbians learned Russian in schools and they were pro-Russians.
Thanks for this. As a Slovene I might add, that after the return of capitalism in 1991 we conserved parts of the makret socialist system, and we ditched some. One thing that we retained and that still serves us well is free education. The free healthcare system was also mostly retained, but some elements of privatization were introduced and they have caused problems ever since. The public housing system was totally dismantled and today we have one of the worst housing crises in Europe. Another thing is that in the market socialist system we actually did not have a social security system because there was no need for it. After the reintroduction of capitalism we had to build a very robust social security system which is one of the reasons why we're still keeping our inequality levels pretty low. Also privatizations of the economy were carried out very gradually, with the government letting go many important companies after the euro crisis (because of external pressure). Our government was definitely aware that shock therapy would lead to disaster and tried to shield us form it in any way possible (despite the recommendations of some foreign economic advisors). Sadly the result was still that many businesses (even very successful exporters and companies which were doing "high-tech" at the time) were dismantled by novel wanna-be oligarchs, who wanted to re-sell real estate and did not have the minimal intention to re-structure and develop the companies. Thanks god our population is well-educated and the economy rebounded after some time, but the 90's were still very difficult.
this is basically the history of every former socialist country only that your government is not that corrupt as in other countries. regarding high-tech, i used to work with slovenian telco equipment at my former job - iskratel, unfortunately they were losing competition. their solutions looked more outdated over the years. idk what's the situation with iskratel now, maybe they found some sollutions in the meantime.
@@RauriKwan because it is, its just czechia is still improving while we are not, internal politics conflicting every year the population more and more divided, one side calling the other fascist and the other calling communists like we are in ww2, disgraceful not a single good political party that wants to do good for the people, except the fucking pirates but they get like 1-2% of votes so yeah
@@zarzavattzarzavatt9309 Iskratel is basically just a name now. Iskra itself was fractured in to multiple companies, and Iskra emeco for example is owned by egypt now. Another example would be Peko. The shoe company with over 2000 employees was dismantled after 1991. Basically there was a run of privatization of Peko. And every new CEO just took as much money as possible, then fled with the workers suffering losses because of that. After 3 or 4 such runs the entire company pretty much imploded with workers layed off without any compensation and those CEOs making big bucks due to it.
11:50 It's interesting to note that this form of "Reformed" socialism (Workers managing their own production in their own factories) is actually much closer in spirit to original Marxism and other early Communist/Anarchist ideologies than the centrally-planned state economies of the Soviet bloc. The centrally-planned economies ended up disempowering workers and empowering a new bureaucratic/technocratic class, which is the opposite of the proletarian revolution that Marx and Engels envisioned.
Slovenia has generally retained everything good from socialism: free education (even higher), free public healthcare and relative economic security (unemployment benefits, maternal leave etc). But there are tendencies from mainly right political spectrum to privatize everything. But to be fair, people in slovenia is generally hard -working and a lot of them have some means to earn outside regular jobs. in yugoslavia they had a large and protected market, most companies from that time are gone (few remain). Now over-dependance on Germany is visible.
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy. Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge. Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases: The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression. Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany. Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard. While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure. The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances. In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West. The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline. The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing. Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
haha! Nothing in socialism can ever, EVER be described as "good". In fact, in my whole 54 years on this planet, this is the first time I've ever heard the the word "good" and the word :socialism" in the same sentence. Socialism, as a governing format, has failed 100% wherever it's been tried in the world (including Slovenia; if that weren't the case, they'd still have Communist government governing the people like North Korea has). I will always put my capitalist governing and economic system success rate against the communist one any day of the week and, when I gamble on this, I am assured a 100% success rate. It's what we in the gambling world calls "a sure thing". And freedom is the underlying commodity that Communism suppresses. And that's the key to everything.
There is a major flaw in the reasoning behind this false story. The flaw is the use of GDP figures produced by the communist regime of former Yugoslavia. They were totally falsified. A lot of "production of gods and services" was either altogether non-existent or some gods were "produced" but without any sensible customer. They were just left in the "factory" backyards to decay. All of that was booked as production. Furthermore the clearing between parts of former Yugoslavia was unclear at best or just forged to fit some powerful people's wishes. So the GDP figure of 10.000 USD per inhabitant of Slovenia is a pure fiction. In reality Slovenia was better off than some other parts of former Yugoslavia, but the entire former Yugoslavia was a banana republic of African style. The inhabitants of Slovenia were poor people compared to any western country. Now, it is the interesting issue why was Slovenia so much better then other parts of former Yugoslavia. It was not because Slovenes were so much better workers or because they had a better governance in Slovenia then in the rest of former Yugoslavia. Basically Slovenia was as rotten as the rest, but a deliberate policy decisions of the communist government of former Yugoslavia, where several Slovenes were in charge of the economy, gave Slovenia a break and opportunity to provide somewhat more decent standards of living. They were just using the rest of former Yugoslavia to make their part of the country look better. So the entire story here is fake. There are NO RICH PEOPLE IN COMMUNISM.
I think you are discounting how developed Slovenia was when it was part of the AH empire. It was one of the first areas with rail connection going back to 1840s, Ljubljana had textile mills for instance. The region was considered a core part of the empire (Carinthia) and was integrated with the Austrian industrial revolution. It also had the highest literacy rate as part of Yugoslavia in 1920. It was more developed than Greece so it makes sense that it stays relatively rich. All that said, they did very well under every system they've been in.
Long ago I saw a document with some historic economic data about slovenian lands in AH empire. As in time of AH empire Slovenia was not a political unit. So according to that data for 1912 Slovenian Litoral (Oesterreichische Kuestenland) was at level of 92% of the most developed AH region- Lower Austria. In my opinion that's the sole role of the port of Triest as the major Austrian port city. Carniola (Kranjska or Krain) was reaching only the 67% of the most developed Austrain region and was actualy at the same level as hungarian part of the dual monarchy. Styria (Štajerska or Steiremark) was at the level of 84% of the development of Lower Austria. As Styria it is necessary to concider that in the 1912 is observed as a whole,..., after 1918 the Lower Styria is Slovenian (Yugoslav) and Upper Styria is Austrian. But anyway after the WW1 in some figures Slovenian Styria was remaining at the same pre WW1 level regarding Austria. After WW1, my hometown of Maribor was developing at the field of textile industries (even called Yugoslav Manchester) as city authorities offered cheap building plots, cheap electricity from HC Fala on Drava river and skilled workforce, attracting capital from Czechoslovakia. Almost the same story about development faced the town of Kranj in the same period.
Very true. And if you look at any map of the early Yugoslavia you can see the earstwhile imperial border still. If you look at literacy, GDP, industrialisation, any statistic really, the parts that were once part of the Empire were much better developped than the rest of Yugoslavia, so we had a good start.
In the Soviet block Hungary was a little freer country than other. But we In Hungary always adored Yugoslavia how well the people live there. For us Yugoslavia was a kind of half-West.Despite it was a military dictatorship they mixed well the positive sides of the socialism and the capitalism as well. There was social security, cheap housing, nobody was too poor, free health care and education and they produced quality products, there was higher standard of living, the country was open towards the west, the shops were full of western products, but on reasonably prices. There were Yugoslavian products that were competitive with Western companies as well. For example the Slovenian Gorenje brand, even in the Yugoslav era they were the same good quality as western companies, but on a lower price. And now there is the Pipistrel aircraft manufacturer which is Slovenian as well. Slovenia and Yugoslavia was a good mix of the socialism and the capitalism, like the Scandinavian countries.
You're completely right, of course it wasn't paradise but the world should look at Yugoslavia's and Scandinavia's systems and analyze both the benefits and shortcomings, and look for ways to fix them in.
@@Unwebonnn It was still better than what was implemented in Poland during the that period. Nowdays I see the benefits that socialism could insert into the country's system. I have turned to social democracy for such thing
@@gaborbakos7058 yugoslavia was much better place to live than scandinavia... workplace democracy, workers holiday resorts, social housing system for example which scandinavia didnt have and a better climate and food ofc
@@polishstick0609 Yeah, the only real issue social democracies have to tackle right now is their vulnerability to large influxes of population (which will exist as long as there's war in the world) and their way of getting rich, as their international businesses can sometimes exploit workers in the third world.
I travelled to Ljubljana and Lake Bled in 2012 when I was a student and I was blown away by how clean and beautiful the place was. During that trip I'd visited lots of different countries in Europe and Slovenia stood out for me. Ljubljana actually seemed more developed and better looked after than the big Western European cities that I've been to (and there were hardly any tourists, which was a big plus!)
It was always like that, extremally clean and productive, Slovenian people were honest and hard working people, Yugoslavian state didn't block their development in contrary.
It’s so refreshing to see a video that actually explains how a communist country and economy worked instead of just saying “everything was perfect if it wasn’t for evil capitalist countries” or “they were poor and everyone starved because communism bad”
Correction ... they were the "best" communist country. But when you set the bar so low, it's a easy feat to accomplish. Compared with capitalist economies, as the video says, they paled in comparison. Communism, as a governing form, failed 100% of the time it has been tried. The few communists regimes still remaining are failed states. And this illustrates Einstein's quote precisely: "The definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy. Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge. Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases: The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression. Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany. Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard. While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure. The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances. In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West. The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline. The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing. Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
im Slovenian. and corruption here is high. well educated people don't get work......sad country for young people with high education . political system is so corrupt from 1990. older people can't live with pension checks. lots of them need to go to red cross cause they can't afford food. don't always believe videos on UA-cam
@@mayamaya6478 I too am Slovenian, and Slovenia has the largest gap between actual and perceived corruption in the world (at least according to a survey a few years back). Yes, the politics is corrupt, but so is every other politics. Yes, the pensions are bad, but very often people retired after having done very little work (the minimum in Yugoslavia was 20 years of work, now it's 40), and as such the pensions follow proportionately. It is also a reflection of our demographic decline - we just cannot keep up with all these pensions, because we aren't having enough children. As for the educated not being able to get jobs - if you study something useful, you will have a job. The problem is, that free education doesn't incentivise people to think about their career prospects, and as such many go to study useless things, and end up not being very employable. At the same time we lack skilled tradesmen, because we have glorified higher education too much, and disdained the working man. But all in all, it's good here. Yes, we have problems, everyone does, but few have it so good, that they couldn't envy us
@@mayamaya6478its not that hard to find work lol im slovenian and most of ppl i know worked jobs in the summer vacations, ppl can live with pension checks and im pretty sure i havent heard abt red cross since a looooong time ago, im pretty sure there isnt a single homeless shelter and ive seen less than 10 homeless people in my whole life yall just have to complain abt stuff that isnt broken 😭
@@mayamaya6478wtf? Idk which part youre from but wher ei am at none of those are a problem. Maybe for the very well educated. But otherwise everyone can get a job if your tnot picky. People life just fine from pensions. I think u might just like conplaining
@@mayamaya6478 stop spreading bullshit. People who want to work will always get jobs. There's a lot of sectors that need workers. Corruption is no higher than anywhere else in Europe and certainly it's much better here than in other Ex-YU countries. Go live somewhere else for a while and you'll realize how good we have it. It's always the ones who do nothing of note and don't travel or have first hand experience with other countries that are the loudest. Non-Slovenians on here, you have to know that complaining and pessimism is the favorite activity of some of my compatriots.
That is the wrong takeaway. Decentralization was the key takeaway. It matters little if you have capitalism or not. You just need a relatively unregulated free market and decentalized structures.
11:25 actually, that is exactly what "Soviet" means - a direct democracy ruled by councils of workers. That system was intended in USSR as well. The only issue was, it was only formally established but did not have actual power over political decisions it should
That's how communism and centralized ruling always end up - it starts with a noble intention but always gets corrupted. That's why China eventually abandoned hardcore communism while retaining a centralized structure more akin to the millennia-old system of empires, rather than the Soviet model.
@@utkarshg.bharti9714 well, I wouldn't say always, for example, look up Syrian Kurdistan/Rojava. Despite limited resources and being surrounded by enemies, they managed to survive (and even destroy ISIS) while preserving their direct democracy and socialist economy.
@@siyacer quite the opposite, there was tactical collaboration with US exclusively because of ISIS but all ground operations and dirty work was done by SDF (Rojava military). And outside that episode, Syrian kurds are in active conflict with the second army of NATO (Turkey) and their leader, Abdulla Ocalan was caught in 1999 with the assistance of US. At the same time, they have much less support and much less known than, for example, Palestine
@@odkritaslovenija yeah the only place where communism didn’t hold a nation back was Russia but that has less to do with communism and more to do with the fact that their leaders actually wanted to modernise the nation but it doesn’t matter now does it
I've been fascinated by Slovenia for years now but there really is very little information about the country. That being said, thank you for taking the time to research the country and providing yet another great video! It made my day :)
This needs to be a part of the global discussion on economic systems, truly. Finally, a shining example of reasonable socialism that can counteract the false "Capitalism vs Communism" dichotomy.
It is a false dichotomy. The real question is of the proper role of free markets and state regulation. All the ideology is just obscuring the point. As it did in Slovenia - despite what was said, Slovenia did prosper significantly after ditching socialism.
When you have a prosperous industry within a country you can basically have any kind of system and it will work as long as that industry keeps being prosperous, look at Norway today that country has a bunch of social programs that just drain the capital but the only reason it works it's their petroleum industry
@@bambuco2 can you explain more about Norway? I've heard much positive rhetoric about their mixed-economy. If what you say is true, then perhaps they would be wealthier still under a strict capitalism
@@ScorpioIsland Their system is basically exactly the same as everywhere else in EU almost no difference there. People just praise them as this Utopia of social democracy because they're able to fund much greater number of social programs while still maintaining everyone's standard of living but what people forget to mention is their country is rich in petroleum and that's how they fund a large % of their government spending. Imagine if we started looking at Saudi government as something to be copied because their country is wealthy and successful, logic is exactly the same, it's easy to make it work when you have a billion dollar industry behind you.
I am Slovenian and this comment is just silly. We have always been and are a deeply corrupt and capitalist country. The whole video is stupid, actually.
My rather superficial take on Slovenia, is that they just have a good mix of being hard working and relaxed. I had a lot of good time there and met decent people.
If you think Slovenes are hard working you're dreaming. They are a bit more "efficient" than their southern neighbours tho... But then again, even Germans only work 35 hours per week so yeah...
Yeah, we should really stop with judging country wide effects on "what kind of people live there". When something is apparent on a larger scale, that is the compound effect of many different systems that effect the lives of those people and not the other way around. It always exposes essentialist thinking. An obvious example being: Are people from poor countries more lazy?
@@MultiSciGeek I'm not sure whether you're talking from personal experience, or just by looking at general statistics online, but most of the people I know have some kind of business/activity on the side of their regular work. I worked on projects where we ramped 85h/week and people still had the energy to go for a beer after work. I have been hearing a lot of complaints over the newest generation of workers, tho'. If you're only looking at general stats, you won't see a clear picture, because those don't count all the hours people put in after their day job is done. Alternatively, if you only hang out with lazy bums who want to live off sociala, you also can't extrapolate that to *everyone* in the country. In general I would say we *are* hardworking, but we also like to enjoy our leisure time, so we don't get too stressed like some of my American friends who just work, work, work.
Slovenia is objectively one of the best countries in the world, it's not perfect ofc and there are some serious problems, but if you look at stats such as violent crime, global peace index, human development index, wealth inequality, environmental conservation, infant mortality, education, etc. - we're doing very well. A lot of Slovenes don't even know we're consistently in the top 10 of the global peace index. And don't get me started on our ski jumping skills 💪
Nice to see a comment from a Slovene that is not complaining about how bad everything is. We often don't know just how good we have it in our little home, and I've lived in Austria, Spain, and the USA for some years.
@@emma_704 Complaining can be annoying and we treat it like a sport yeah :D but keep in mind that a dissatisfied society always strives for improvements, it's complacency that's dangerous.
@@MarkArandjus agreed, but mindless complaining about things one doesn't even know a lot about (which is true for most internet commenters) also doesn't bring improvements to society.
one of our biggest problems are how expensive everything is and the slow decline in our public transport (My buses are consistently late) and the incising time to get to a doctor.
Without capitalism? I hope this is just an intentional click-bait title. When we were part of Yugoslavia capitalism was the main force pulling us ahead. Sure, nobody dared to call it that and even today you will still find a lot of Slovenes despising capitalism as that's a "bad word" but in reality most of our success rests on the basis of capitalistic values and free market. This was also one of the reasons why Slovenia wanted to separate from the former Yugoslavia as the communist ruling party wanted to control our economy and take a lot of our profits and divert them elsewhere. Our advantage was/is that Slovenians are hard working and business oriented people that found ways to create stuff, trade and make money. But what we also cant deny is the border with Austria and Italy where despite the strict surveillance people traded with the west and smuggled stuff in and out of Yugoslavia on a mass scale. After Slovenia became independent we still had a lot of big state owned companies that started to fail one by one - lack of motivation, bad leadership, poor management of funds and not enough of innovation. Only companies that were privatized managed to adapt and survive. TL;DR: Slovenia used capitalism in to get ahead but nobody wants to call it what it was
Yugoslav way is pretty much what we wanted here in Czechoslovakia in 60s - more freedom, more private bussines, good relation ships with both sides, but soviet tanks in 1968 said NO.
Yeah, that's what the video said. Title is just misleading. Slovenia didn't become rich, it became the least poor in the area. It didn't have 'a thing that is not capitalism in any way', it had a mixed system, just like the USA. The fact that it's a DIFFERENT mixed system isn't an argument.
@@domenstrmsek5625 young Slovenian American here! I’m going to see family there next year! I really need to learn the language, I started attending a Slovenian Mass recently.
Me too. I wanted to make this video ever since I made the breakup of Yugoslavia video about 4 years ago. I was just checking some economic statistics and comparing them to the west... When I noticed it had higher gdp per capita than some developed country. I've been wanting to learn more about it ever since.
@@HistoryScope FYI Austria-Hungarian empire was Catholic. Catholic social teaching would be MISTAKENLY considered by many to be socialist. See Rerum Novarum. Examples of this in application is the family wage and forced hiring.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@@sempersuffragium9951 Up voted. I appreciate the support. A good book related to this is "Economic Compulsion and Christian Ethics." "They" are afraid of the information in this book. I was and still am shadow banned by Disqus possibly for mentioning this book.
Slovenia was not only able to sell to rich west european markets but was also able to tap to the eastern ones as well. In Czechoslovakia the best domesitcally produced skiing equipment in the 80's was made under a licese of Slovenina's ELAN, the company earning commision from each sale. My mother bought Gorenje fridhe with freezer in 1982 and only retired it this year, and not for mallfunction but for its electricity consumption. Czechoslovakia itself tried to follow the path of economical refroms in late 60's but the Soveit union fearing the loss of another important satelite state, with - for east at least - advanced manufacturing capabilitiess. So russians decided to put its boot in and stomp the fire out before it spreaded of to the other states.
Gorenje fridge with freezer in 1982 - I got one of these in my basement, a 1985 year and it still works, my neighbour got a gorenje washing machine year 1980 - guess what, still works, easy to repair, no plastic shit.. nowdays when you buy something in the middle class of pricing, its crap, breaks all the time,...
IN my parents house we still have a Gorenje freezer and fridge in basement working since 1978 24/7 ,off course now we have modern fridge in the house but that 2 are still for other stuff
0:20 The map you showed at the beginning of the video is not a map of 8 Yugoslavia's autonomous regions. Yugoslavia consisted of 6 republics. That's a map of 6 constituent republics, plus Kosovo and Metohija (one of two autonomous provinces in Serbia). Just wanted to clarify this, let's not rewrite the history.
You got beggining extremely wrong Hungary got self governing in mid 19th century. It was called Austria-Hungary. Empire was divided between Vienna and Budapest Meanwhile Austrian part was progressive and capitalistic with a lot of investments into industry (like with Czechia and Slovenia) Hungary and its regions (like part of Croatia,Slovakia and Vojvodina) stayed rural and underdeveloped Slovenia was already the richest part of the kingdom of Yugoslavia as the Communistic Yugoslavia In reality communism has only harmed Slovenia, as it could be now as rich as Austria, but its now in stagnation with no real economic future. Even with that its still miles ahead of other east and south european nations
No, Hungary didn't have real self-governing in Austria-Hungary. After the Compromise of 1867 The Habsburg Empire had become Austria-Hungary but the main power remained in the hands of Austria. It was not an equal governing.
Slovenia stems from oldest slavic country which was bridge between west slavs and south (Slovene language is very archaic and unique among others stil). So greetings to northren, related slavs.
We were fit, healthy and sporty. Life was cool. Our women were stunning. We had a lot of free time. If you wanted more money you just relocated to Austria. But majority preferred life before money.
As a Slovenian born in Yugoslavia, I don't agree with everything presented in the video. We lived well in Yugoslavia. My father was a truck driver, and we had paid holidays. All we needed to buy was food; everything else was free. Money was not a problem in Yugoslavia. Many people earn around €1,000 today, but prices continue to rise while their wages remain unchanged.
''everything else was free'' could you get a good car for free or just the goverment issued lada? could you get a big house for free or just the goverment issued shithole?
I'm also Slovenian and I was born in Slovenia. My parents and grandparents are/were also Slovenian. They also lived in Jugoslavia. They were hard working people. Nothing was given to them for free. They also lost some land due to not being on the right side and with the right people at that time ;) they were not the only ones. I don't like communism eventhought there might been some good things about it. Older people feel nostalgic about it. It was also their youth and some good memories were made. I respect that, they paved the way for us. I believe what made Slovenia better were hard working people willing to do better and educate themself to do even better. We have a beautiful nature, clean waters, mountains, caves and a little bit of sea. We can do better in so many ways and I hope we will but still need to cherish what we already have ❤.
of course im generalizing a bit and not everyone will agree, but this is probably a big reason as to why yugonostalgia is so big over here in ~~femboy country~~ slovenia. Granted, our current economy is still overall pretty okay compared to many other places, but it's definitely been on a decline and problems such as housing prices have begun to rise a lot. with that said, i always hear how, despite technically being a dictatorship (which also comes with random stupid problems like restricted access to western products), slovenia under yugoslavia was a genuinely nice place to live, and why tito was so beloved despite being a dictator. corruption was prevalent back in the day too of course (and its only gotten worse) but it was still probably as close to an equal market socialist society as anyone's ever achieved. also yugo rock did and still does go hard
F3m boy meme originates from Slovenia having westren standards when it comes to health care to moral questions in southren region. No slovene is offended by it. im not sure what the rest of your comment had to do with that meme. It almost feels like you trying to be overly nice. also yugo rock is hard but so is yugo folk, slovene folk, yugo pop, slo pop, gypsy accordeon from balkans in general... redundant addition.
@@THELORDVODKA I beg of you to cease your spread of lies. Slovene folk is the torturous brass howling of drunk lunatics, may your accordion wither to dust.
Sounds like the main reason the economy grew is that it's a strategic location for trade & tourism between the west and the east rather than any particular government policy. Also most of these policys (both governmental & defacto due to citizen entrepreneurism) seem to be more capatalistic leaning in nature.
@@yoshimeier3060 It’s not really a free market as it’s state mandated that each employee functions as a share holder in the business. If it were a free market individuals would be able to personally invest and be able to decide who can become shareholders (Either publicly traded or private businesses). A true free market means the economy has no regulation at all and businesses are held accountable by people choosing to either use or not use their services.
@@S1AR_DUS1 A common misconception people have is thinking that a capitalist free market is unregulated. Private property is a very strong regulation that allows for the concentration of capital on the few's hands, this is the mechanism things such as monopolies, carthels and the stake market is allowed to exist. A Free market doesn't mean free from all regulation, but that you have no limitations in trading, you are free to trade with anyone at whichever price, it says absolutely nothing about corporation processes, rights, duties and ownership.
I appreciate the even-handed and honest look at socialist Slovenia. I'm not a Titoist, but as a communist theorist in America, I do have a special appreciation for the market socialist system they pioneered, and feel that something akin to it is going to be what communism will look like when it comes to America. I'm glad that history has progressed to a point where we can shed the mindless Cold War propaganda and take an honest look at this time period now.
Very interesting! I also like your references to series I enjoy. I was in Slovenia a few days during an USKO concert tour. The place where we stayed at the time, was quite beautiful. And our 2-hour Bach gig was in a monastery on top of a mountain with a view of Italy.
What I already knew is that only Slovenia managed transition from socialism to captitalism without selling out the country to a handful oligarchs. This made them the only country which was better off afterwards. Now I learn they actually had good companies to hand over, yet they didn't. Very nice.
Yeah, although the soft transition had it's downsides... almost all institutions retained continuity from the previous regime, which now manifests itself in a great falling of public trust in them. As well as them constantly logging heads with any right-of-centre government
Slovenia did it well because, due also to Habsbug legacy, they are serious, honest and care for the community. I live in Italy at 10 km from the border, so I can see it quite well.
This video is more about how Yugoslav Titoism works in countries which already have a decent level of development and smart people to run and make use of it. Capitalism existed before WW2 and the afterwar communist expansion across East Europe. Slovenia developed within the capitalist system of Austria and it definitely became developed thanks to that capitalist system, in fact it’s a country, or region, which was capitalist for the better part of the last few centuries. The Yugoslav socialist system, or Titoism as mentioned in the video, was more liberal and had something resembling a free market unlike the USSR and Warsaw Pact countries so the damage done to Slovenia within the relatively closed and planned system in Yugoslavia was small and they even found ways to profit from their position like the tourism mentioned here or access to cheap workforce from the undeveloped regions in Yugoslavia. Czechia in comparison was the most heavily industrialized part of the former Austrian Empire, richer than mostly rural Slovenia back in the day and developed by pre-WW1 West European standards, but became very poor under the communist regime of Czechoslovakia.
Nonsense ... what are you talking about. Czechoslovakia in the 1980s was very developed, it was more developed than southern italy and spain which looked like 3rd world shitholes compared to Brno or Prague
Well, great video. As a Slovenian I would like to add two more PROs for economic growth, that hadn't been mentioned in the video. First - people of Slovenia are hard working, on time, organized... with very germanic-like mentality. Second - as one of YU republic Slovenia has had a constant income of (cheaper) labour force from other republics and that gave it a competative advantage.
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy. Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge. Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases: The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression. Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany. Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard. While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure. The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances. In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West. The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline. The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing. Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
So they left communism to become socialists, which is basically communism with a few elements of capitalism. This didn’t work across all of Yugoslavia, but it did in Slovenia, where things went well. However, with their independence, it became clear that not going straight to capitalism only slowed Slovenia’s development. It's good to know that the Slovenian people have virtues that made them stand out as the best of a socialist country. In the end, the video title is just clickbait; it was capitalism, along with their own societal strengths, that made them prosperous.
15:45 No, it is not true. Not Yugoslavia was the only neutral country that had borders with the western and the Soviet block as well. There was Austria and Finland, they were neutral as well, not NATO countries.
@antunsimic985 6th april 1948 Finland and Soviet Union signed a pact of friendship, cooperation, and mutual help. Under which Soviet Union obliged to defend Finland and Finland Soviet Union. Pact ended when Union collapsed.
16:34 Serbia was investing between 30% and 43% of it's development fund into Kosovo and that's before it became an autonomus province and controlled it's own money. They had free education, free public transport, free healthcare and free electricity, people from the rest of Serbia went there to work on public projects for free. Nowhere in Yugoslavia had more money sunk into it then Kosovo, the problem is that nowhere in Yugoslavia was more corrupt either.
It's worth mentioning that the other richest post-communist country was Czechia, which was one of the most industrially developed regions of central Europe since the days of Austria-Hungary, and retained that status through a relatively well managed economy in the interwar period as the first Czechoslovak republic, so it was kind of set up from the start, and transitioning back to a market based economy after '89 was more so a process of "recovery". Adjusted for inequality, Czechia is now the 18th most developed country in the world (source: inequality adjusted human development index)
Note that it did rich without capitalism itself but it benefited from the proximity with capitalism and the ability to trade with those economies. Without capitalism anywhere else in the world it wouldn't have worked as well. But I agree that the Slovenian experiment is interesting. Note that regarding South Africa it's a specifically stratified country with most of the population (the blacks) excluded from political and economic power by law. Besides those obvious disadvantages, it also suffered from an embargo caused by the international outcry regarding those laws. What I am saying is that South Africa wasn't an economy managed for general economic growth and medians of the entire population will reflect this.
I'm not sure if its that much that it benefited from capitalism being close or if it just benefited from allowing more foreign trade in order to focus on specializing their economy. For the analogy of the steel, at least, it doesn't matter if your neighbours are capitalist, it only matters if they are willing to trade with you.
Czechia have boarded the west by land. Poland and many other Yugoslav countries had see access and the proximity to trade with the west but did not develop as much as we did. The proximity to the west was not the only factor in Slovenian success.
It benefited from access to the resources and assets of capitalist countries. But as demonstrated by Slovenia, those resources and assets could have been produced by other countries operating under the same economic model as Slovenia itself. It just so happened that Slovenia didn't have any other wealthy socialist countries to trade with, so it had to trade with capitalists. Also, Slovenia was only really an "experiment" insofar as it was the first country to mandate all businesses be operated as worker cooperatives. A concept invented almost a century earlier, by the Rochdale Pioneers in England in 1844. Worker cooperatives have been quietly successful ever since, and exist all over the world, in every industry. And you've probably never heard of them, because our capitalist overlords don't like acknowledging that a functional and productive form of socialism has existed for longer than any of us have been alive.
One part of Yugoslavia that had the potential to develop as Slovenia was Vojvodina. It got its start a later, in 1974 when it got larger rights as autonomous region. It had similar methods to develop economy as Slovenia, but it lacked border with a West. Its development was short-lived. After a coup in 1988 by Serbian nationalists, who took power after a panic that it may seek aspirations to separate from the central Serbian government as Kosovo, economy stagnated after they changed people with experience in institutions, banks, companies with loyal inexperienced ones.
26:43 it’s so cool that you added the song “naprej zastava slave” (forward the flag of glory) in your video. Fun fact: today this song is the anthem of Slovenian Army!
As a Slovenian, born in Yugoslavia and actually (although distantly) related to Tito, I admit there were many, many shortcomings in the old system, most of which allowed mass corruption. Slovenians were generally lucky (not just geographically, also in our nature as human beings), the standard we lived in at the time was good, most people stuck together in times of hardship, and could afford to build.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
What you said about Slovenia is basically capitalism, so how was Slovenia not capitalistic if their market was quite free, their businesses free and deregulated?
@@GospodGobar Educate myself about what? Come on, tell me. How about you answer the question instead of dodging the question. Your answer is a non argument. Is is less than usefull. It is a non sequitur.
@@flavius2884 slovenia did not have a capitalist enconomy. They had a bit more free market, and decentralized the enconomy, but the enconomybwas still controlled, but it was more like a moderate socialism or state capitalism, pretty similar to china
7:19 "... why communism failed..." Notice how when a plan fails in a socialist country it's always described as a failure of socialism, but when a plan fails in a capitalist country it always gets blamed on a particular politician/company/individual. Scapegoating rhetoric
Because THE DECIDER OF ECONOMIC POLICY IS USUALLY THE ONE AT FAULT 😭 You think private companies like losing billions of dollars??? NO! They are incentivized and mislead by government policy, such as low interest rates, subsidies, and a rock solid guarantee of being bailed out when the bubble created by this illogical spur of investment finally pops
This would be a good point if communism actually succeeded but it never did. At the very least Capitalism to some extent succeeded so when there are failures the system is given the benefit of the doubt. Communism can only fail so many times before people stop blaming the leaders and start blaming the system itself.
@@AYTM1200 Communism is much more of a broad term as it more so sets the end goal and the theoretical foundation of society throughout history than determines how to achieve the end goal of Communism. Communists blame the system of many communist countries itself, that's why did Sino-Soviet split happened.
More often than not its the corrupt and inefficient state apparatus which hampers development and success, which is mostly what happens in capitalist wannabe countries....and by default in socialist countries where nothing can escape the state's grasp.
6:30 When you talk about farmers with more than 25 acres land being taken, and distributed to others, this was mostly not the case. Land was often taken from said landowners, who knew how to cultivate their land, and was given to the friends to whoever was in charge. At the top being Joseph Tito. These friends of the elites knew nothing about farming, so the farming industry in Slovenia took a massive hit. My grandfather owned a dairy farm and he got a knock on his door one day. He and his family had 1 day to vacate his entire farm. He argued and the communists dragged him out of his house and beat him till he got the message. I will never forgive communists. They destroy and take all while thinking they are righteous.
Slovenia began to industrialize in 1815 after the Congress of Vienna. Belonging to Austria-Hungary was not a Slovenian choice or an advantage, because the monarchy always tried to hinder the development of non-German parts, and reduce them to a raw material base and a market for the products of industrialized parts. The same as the colonial powers with their dominions.
Everything's good under the hood until you have to fight and pay tribute to wars because of foreign interests, with no reward and little recognition. Then your people lives lost will be a footnote in someone else's history books
How to Get Rich Without Capitalism - by creating free trade hub zones where Capitalists could set up their bussinesses and by engaging in intense foreign trade with... guess who? CAPITALIST COUNTRIES - so, not really without Capitalism, but with a decentralized socialism - pretty much what Czechoslovakia wanted but were stopped by the invasion of the Warsaw Pact + USSR. Btw when one company went bankrupt, who bought it, if there were no rich people due to wealth equality? I doubt anyone could afford to buy a bankrupt factory, let alone that a socialist state would allow that - so who would take control of such a bankrupt company? And how did Slovenian government check if the new managers would not just siphon money out of the state?
I'm born in SLovenia in 1962..i played a guitar in rock band and in 1976 i could afford Marshall amp an Fender stratocaster which are still legendary amps and guitars.(Hendrix used both) Many people drove BMW,Volvos,Mercedes..People were building weekend houses at the Croatian coast...Radio was playing western rock music...I was playing in a band during my military service and our repertoir was at least half of western rock/pop....I remember we were playing Cocain of J.J.Cale to army officers...Someting unumaginable to eastern block.....I could go on and on...
An important data point here is that Slovenia was a part of Austria-Hungary for a long time, while the rest of Yugoslavia was mainly under the Ottomans.
Croatia was part of AU just as long as Slovenia but is not as successful. In my opinion the only reason for success in Slovenia is a lot less corruption not only in government but generally people are less corrupt in Slovenia as opposed to many places in Europe.
As a neighbor who has lived in Ljubljana I applaud Slovenia for making us Yugoslavs proud of Slovenia and its achievements with a higher gdp per capita ppp (at 48k$) than Spain (46k$) and Japan (46k$) for example. And Croatia is following at 41k$ on par with Portugal (41k$). (Source trading economics gdp per capita PPP world) That said I always admired Slovenians for not forgetting their Yugoslav past with many streets in Slovenian cities carrying the names of important Yugoslav dates, Partisan brigades or Tito himself like in Maribor, as without it Slovenia would never be what it is today. Slovenia is a positive outlook what can happen when you have generally educated people with generally business oriented minds that throughout their 33 year independent history have only twice chose inflammatory nationalist right wing government. For more than 25 years government has been left wing.
I'm a Kosovar Albanian,born and raised in ex YU.First time I met a Slovene was when I was serving in the ex YU army.He told me that time,that Yugoslavia is a stupid idea.I couldn't believe how freely he was speaking in the communist country.Slovenes have a western mentality.Always they were the most developed republic,in ex YU.Slovenia was the most outspoken about what Serbia was doing to us Albanians.Slovenia should never be considered as a country in the Balkan Peninsula.
@@Polythinker when I was travelling by Interrailkarte forty years ago going from Graz to Ljubljana was more like going from one part of Austria to one other slightly poorer part of it, first when you went further south you realised that you were in the Balkan.
@@THELORDVODKA ok let's then run our shit with 2 mill people incl women kids elderly. Slovenia is and always was a joke. Plz give me other arguments so which D do you prefer
I feel there are 2 important factor here. First, there must a person or a group of people who are smart, vigilant and dare to call out on things to the public. Second, the power to do something about it. If either factor worked without the other, the whole situation will be useless in lessening the corruption, stopping the over-investment on ineffective methods and other things. I think that is the reason why Slovenia was doing better than its neighbours.
I think it’s a bit anachronistic to think of Slovenia as in any way an Austrian “colony.” Most of it was core dynasty Habsburg territory for 500, if not 800, years-not a foreign acquisition won through war with the Ottomans (like Bosnia and parts of Serbia) or even marriage to the Hungarians (like Croatia). Today’s Slovenia was assembled from parts of duchies integral to the Holy Roman Empire, so in that sense German, but the commercial class mostly spoke Italian and peasant majority was Slavic. But it was probably only in the 19th century that ethnolinguistic, as opposed to class or religious or regional, identity predominated over everything else. The 70 years or so in which it spent grouped in a South Slav supra-nation-state are a blip in the centuries of historic (and geographic) forces that tied Slovenia north and west to its neighbors across the Alps, rather than south and east toward the Balkans.
That’s a really thoughtful analysis! The history of Slovenia’s integration with the Habsburg dynasty and its connection to the Holy Roman Empire paints a complex picture. As you mentioned, linguistic and ethnic identity didn’t take center stage until much later, and Slovenia’s ties were historically oriented north and west. It’s fascinating how short-lived the South Slav period is in comparison to those deep historical connections with Central Europe. Thanks for sharing this perspective!
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
I mostly agree. Still, the aristocracy knew Slovenian and used it partly also for their communication. Quite some were of Slovenian ethnicity. Quite some define themselves as Carniolans and still know Slovenian (Windischgraetz, Auersperg). The commercial class maybe used Italian in Carniola in the early 18th c., but mostly spoke 6 foreign languages (already Santonino reports that in the 15th c. about the ladies of Ljubljana. The protestant literary production of the 16th c is a proof of the slovenian identity of the aristocracy and high bourgeoisie.
@@markom1976 Can you be a “traitor” to an entity that you never felt much organic loyalty to any way? Slovenia was included in Yugoslavia in a shotgun marriage that really only made sense in the immediate chaos following WW1. Slovenes lost their Habsburg imperial protector, so sought safety in the new Yugoslav mini-empire, but they didn’t speak the Serbo-Croatian language and were always somewhat aloof from the Serb v Croat/Orthodox v Catholic conflict that defined the composite state till its death. In fact, in many Slovene-speaking districts that held plebiscites in 1919 and 1920, a majority voted to join with German-speaking rump Austria, and they’re still there today. Contra Woodrow Wilson, economic/historic ties are thicker than blood or language…
@@jcliu " Slovenia sought safety in the new Yugoslav mini-empire". Yes, the price for safety is to colaborate in the mission to develop that undeveloped part of Europe. And what Slovenians did? they used the privileged role in YU and left it? Yes, you become a “traitor” by doing that.
Im Slovenian. I have to commend you for this quite exact presentation. I know its hard to cram a lot of data in this format.. Slovenia (and Yugoslavia) is quite a phenomenon in the sense of 'the socialism experiment'. I believe its the closest the system came to success in that regard. Id love a video on other particularities of Yugoslavia, some of them you already mentioned: the 'unaffiliated movement' started by Tito, which gave huge economic boost to Yugoslavia, the acceptance of abortion into law and constitution in the 70's, the country being a behemoth in terms of sports etc. Keep up the good work.
Non-Aligned Movement was a CIA ran operation. And Yugoslavia was a main terrorist country manufacturing and exporting weapons for Africa and middle east dictators. The same regimes made then genocides and wars out there. Tito was made a cult after death so that the people would never turn against communists and they could stay in power after changing to democracy. And that's what happened.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@markom1976 (slow clap)... . aaaand this, Ladies and gents, this comment and the pathologic mix of self-grandiose and victim mentality oozing from it, perfectly encapsulates, in just these few statements, the mentality and psyche of people responsible for the events that resulted in so many tragedies and atrocities that struck the once great country of Yugoslavia. On one hand you have my comment which represents the opinions of the majority of people who once lived in Yugoslavia, where we can point out the good and the bad sides of the yugoslavian socialist experiment, and on the other hand you have the reasoning of minority of people who by labeling their once brothers and sisters as traitors try to justify the power and land grab that happened after the disintegration of the country, masking it in nationalism, ethnic divisions and dehumanization and 'othering' of people. The varied reasons for the country’s breakup ranged from the cultural and religious divisions between the ethnic groups making up the nation, to the memories of WWII atrocities committed by all sides, to centrifugal nationalist forces. However, a series of major political events served as the catalyst for exacerbating inherent tensions in the Yugoslav republic. Following the death of Tito in 1980, provisions of the 1974 constitution provided for the effective devolution of all real power away from the federal government to the republics and autonomous provinces in Serbia by establishing a collective presidency of the eight provincial representatives and a federal government with little control over economic, cultural, and political policy. External factors also had a significant impact. The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe in 1989, the unification of Germany one year later, and the imminent collapse of the Soviet Union all served to erode Yugoslavia’s political stability. As Eastern European states moved away from communist government and toward free elections and market economies, the West’s attention focused away from Yugoslavia and undermined the extensive economic and financial support necessary to preserve a Yugoslav economy already close to collapse. The absence of a Soviet threat to the integrity and unity of Yugoslavia and its constituent parts meant that a powerful incentive for unity and cooperation was removed. Slobodan Milosevic, Serbia’s president from 1989, took advantage of the vacuum created by a progressively weakening central state and brutally deployed the use of Serbian ultra-nationalism to fan the flames of conflict in the other republics and gain legitimacy at home. The ongoing effects of democratization in Eastern Europe were felt throughout Yugoslavia. As Milosevic worked to consolidate power in Serbia, elections in Slovenia and Croatia in 1990 gave non-communist parties control of the state legislatures and governments. Slovenia was the first to declare “sovereignty” in 1990, issuing a parliamentary declaration that Slovenian law took precedence over Yugoslav law. Croatia followed in May, and in August, the Yugoslav republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina also declared itself sovereign. Slovenia and Croatia began a concerted effort to transform Yugoslavia from a federal state to a confederation. Slovenia and Croatia wanted to stay in Yugoslavia as a confederation of independent sovereign states, but that would mean that most of the economic wealth produced in Slovenia would stay in Slovenia and not be distributed to other former republics. But the power hungry politicians in Belgrade, once center of political and economic power of Yugoslavia, thought it would be easier to just take it all and they failed miserably. And what did they accomplish? Nothing. Except total death and destruction of this part of the Balkans. Today Serbia is geographicly the smallest its ever been in history while, at the same time, laggs behind economicaly and politically. Serbia still isn't a European Union member state. And while adopting the capitalist system and entering EU had some huge disadvantages for Slovenia (and Croatia), it is obvious that if Yugoslavia would stay together as confederation, it would today be the power house of Europe in many different ways
@@gaborbakos7058Scandinavia is far from anything socialist. If social safety net that comes with high taxes and mixed economy model that just about every state in the developed world has is considered socialism then I don't even know what to say...
At 13:40. In Slovenia, the government gave the loans to business that were useful to the country. While in capitalist economies, the loans are given to businesses that make the most profits for the billionaires.
Not only Slovenia had learned how to govern themselves before they became independent. Croatia had been the part of the Kingdom of Hungary for 800 years, but they had a very high level autonomy. Hungarians decided in the military and foreign policies only and Croatia had their own parliament, government, leadership. Croatia is much bigger than Slovenia with much much more seaside, but they wasn't so developed and rich within Yugoslavia how Slovenia was.
Slovenia became independent in 1991, it's not so long ago, and it did not govern itself before that. When it comes to Yugoslavia, Slovenia had the headstart of being part of Austria since the middle ages, instead of either Hungary or the Ottoman Empire, and it was placed on the path between Trieste and Vienna, two major hubs during the Habsburg era. Before 1918, there was no Slovenia, only Slovene speakers who lived in the Archduchy of Austria. The idea of a Slovene nation started after Napoleon defeated the HRE.
The idea of our own nation is at least as old as our first printed book! Primož Trubar wrote “Lubi Slovenci” which means Dear Slovenians. Napoleon just noticed that the people in this region wanted autonomy, so to defy Austrian rulers he named this region Illyrian province and put Ljubljana as its capital.
@@hrybar Primož Trubar je sam sebe smatral za Kranjca, kot “Slovence” pa je smatral tiste, ki ne govorijo nemško. Današnji slovenski narod je izmišljotina iz 19. stoletja
Slovenia also allowed small private capitalist companies to exist, but they were limited to 10 employees. They would have to offer competitive wages or the workers would go to a large company.
Slovenian are mostly an alpine folk that is hard-working, frugal, peaceful, honest and modest. None of this is common to the Balkan, and has very little to do with Communism, that had been imposed on them, until the early 90s when Slovenia ceded from Yugoslavia and went its own way as an independent nation.
Yugoslavia’s market socialist system produced sky-high unemployment. That’s why so many Yugoslavs went to Germany as guest workers. They couldn’t find jobs at home.
10 times more are going now ,Slovenia and Montenegro are only who retained same number off people like in 1991 ,all other Croatia ,Bosnia,Serbia,Macedonia lost 20-30% off people who went to west ,and is not slowing down ,it accelerated in 2000s . Also difference is that during Yugoslavia people who went to Germany was uneducated low skill labor ,middle class did not go.ANd now well educated and middle class are leaving
@@dzonikg No question Germany today is still richer than Slovenia. My point was to show how this “without capitalism” schtick was not describing a panacea.
The fact that socialist Slovenia was more developed than certain parts of European capitalist countries like Spain (say Andalusia) or Southern Italy speaks volumes that the idiosyncrasy of humans groups is as important as the ideological model. I'm not saying ideology doesn't matter, you can see that when you compare North and South Korea. But the collective mindset of different peoples can make a huge difference that cannot be measured by Econometrics. And thus Slovenia is a good example of why one region (or maybe two if we include Croatia) was so successful in Yugoslavia, whereas the Southern regions failed. And that's why Yugoslavia was unviable since the Northern Republics didn't want to subsidize the Southern regions.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@@markom1976 i mean, i can see you must be from somewhere south 100% and i guess what youre writing might be true, am slovenian and admitting to it lol .. however it doesnt mean whole fkn country is made up of traitors and backstabbers as you describe it wtf ... its a couple of higher ups pulling all the strings and all we little people get sucked into it for better or for worse
Socialist Slovenia basically did what China's been doing for the last couple of decades: opening up the economy whilst having a centralised political and social system.
0:20 Why is Kosovo shown but Vojvodina not? Also except these two, ALL of them were proper Republics not autonomous regions. 2:00 Again, showing modern borders that were not the case 100 years ago.
My grandfather was from slovenia. He grew up a farmer, became a very young partisan during the war. After the war he worked free labour on highway construction where in the afternoons he could learn a trade. Because he had been a partisan he was able to go to trade school for free. He became a tool and die maker. When he was being “recruited” into the secret police he fled to Canada. It always struck me how he was able to get such state sponsored upward mobility. He also tolerated me how they would take scrap metal and machine it into combs to sell to people. Good quality durable combs were hard to come by at the time there. I didnt think too much about how that would have been black market under soviet style communism but a feature in slovenian market socialism. Thanks for the video. It’s interesting to get more perspective on some of those old stories i heard long ago.
Ah, we are very good at complaining about our country. Slovenia is not the best but it is far from worst. We are doing FINE. We are just always comparing ourselves with Austria and Switzerland
It wasn't as easy and as simple as suggested in the video... But its not compleatly wrong. Slovenia liberated most of its own territory in ww2 and that is also why in later Yugoslavia they had as much autonomy as they had. Before our boomer parents and grandparents took over, the political, economic, industrial and cultural leaders had real liberal mind sets and were visionaries in there fields. We had socialist policies and very liberal and community minded leaders. As well as very hard working and farming class people. Who were very motivated and less corrupt. We owned our own banking, iron&steel production, agriculture and transport and power production. In the 90's to 2000's it was all sold by Tycoons and corrupt polititions and now we are poor again and under the boot of the EU and foreign millioner owners of companies. Also you confused kosovo and bosnia as well as you showed Koper where Triest is, and a few other minor things.
How to become rich without capitalism in 3 simple steps: 1. Create large country full of political tension and chose whatever system you would like that is not capitalism. 2. Funnel all resources into one region. 3. Separate the region from the rest as another country. Congratulations. You have created a rich country without capitalism.
A nice video, but you are being too harsh on the other Yugoslav republics. Much of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia had literacy rates less than 30% in 1930, they had a much longer way to go than Slovenia who was already decently developed and all in all didn't do to bad for themselves considering.
Being on the border between east and West also helped a LOT. My dad worked in a local foundry (in Slovenia) and they used to sell some products to East Germany at 4 Marks per kilogram even though they couldnt sell that same product in West Germany for more than 1,1 Marks per kilogram. The fact that east and west couldnt trade directly helped make great profits despite there being quite a lot of inefficiencies.
Great video, I love the way you did such thorough research on such an underknown topic. I didn't know much about Slovenia either, except for the fact that there is a Lublyana street in the city I live in and a monument dedicated to Soviet-Yugoslav friendship.
Wasn't Yugoslavia "socialist" only on paper? They were independent from the USSR (were not in the Warsaw Pact) and considered theyself neutral during the Cold War. They also allowed for elements of capitalistic market economy and free enterprise. Since they were also a conglomerate of different nationalities (serbs, croats, slovenians) they allowed for a lot of autonomy to regions and Slovenia was the most developed and "capitalistic" of all regions.
Yugoslavia? Mass killings, disappearances, concentration camps, terror, Udba-the terrible murderous secret police, and poverty. It was a horror land, a communist hell, but supported by the West. I'm Slovenian ...
According to the video, decisions in companies were made by a council of worker representatives. Not by shareholders. Decisive power is not granted by ownership of capital, but by simply being a worker. That’s one defining feature of Socialism.
This video could *really* benefit from giving your definition of Capitalism somewhere at the start, from skeeming the video it seems like slovenia relaxed price controls which is a step towards capitalism. every country is on a socialist-capitalist spectrum anyway, so claiming "without capitalism" and not giving your definition of Capitalism kills the point of the video for me.
@@HistoryScope when you say the people owned businesses, this is always the case, even government is composed of people, your ownership is proportional to what autonomy you have to exercise ownership rights. If I own 100% of the business I can run it however I want, I can fire and hire whoever I want, I can sell it, I can even demolish it. Usually there is some contractual shareholders agreement that operates under the rule of the law in that region. Workers being shareholders is not socialism, this is common practice in capitalism, what is distinct in socialism is that some people that belong to party are only ones that can exercise total ownership over everything and rent out businesses to other people.
There was most definitely no capitalism. There was some form of "free market" economy. But no way of getting rich by virtue if "capital". No stocks. No fiduciary responsibility for enshi*ification to make stock prices go up. Very limited private enterprise. You had to work. And get paid for the work you did. That's it.
We are prone to complaining, but too often forget how lucky we are to live in a fairly prosperous (not rich) country that has always strived for peace! ❤ Also, most families today still live in the apartments they bought for very low prices from the government in the time of Yugoslavia. It's a big plus!
GDP per capita is misleading. An average Slovenian was better off than an average Western European. The lower average value is misleading, it's because of the absence of super-rich (a side effect of efficient socialism) .
i’m sure this comments section will be very normal and sane
Definitely no arguments!
I am from Slovenia. And I asure you. We are a capitalist country. And Slovenia is not *that* rich country to begin with. It's alright. I'm not going to lie I like it here. The quality of life is good. But there are countries that are way more "rich". People that assume our system is not capitalism .... I don't know what to say to them. Just because we have a lot of social safety nets does not mean it's not capitalism. And even that is relative. Because there are countries that are both richer and have more/better social safety nets.
You don't have to burry yourself in debt and loans or sale your house if you want to get a basic education for you or your kid .... yes. But is this what makes a country not capitalist? No. We have a market economy. That is open and operates under the same capitalist rules as the rest of EU .... because that's the point of EU. So we are just as capitalist as Germany, or France.
But ok Americans think donating 1$ to hungy kids in Afghanistan or giving a free meal to a homeless person = communism I guess ....
You could make this argument for Yugoslavia .... but only in later era. When it became increasingly capitalist. So I don't know .... even China - it's capitalist now -a-days. We do not live in 50's anymore.
@@Member_zero i dont think the video was saying that Slovenia is **currently** not capitalist, just that it used to be
Balkans are dragging him to the ground
As a Slovenian, I don't see why it wouldn't be? Any controversy about my country I'm missing? xD
There was this phrase I heard about Slovenia in the Yugoslav era mostly from balkan elders:
"10% of the population, 20% of the GDP."
Better than America 😂
@@monkeman7743Typical for poor losers to hate on the US, Slovenia has a worse economy than Japan which has been in a 30 year recession, hell even Malta has a better economy than slovenia, you can’t even compare it to the GDP. Slovenia is more equally broke.
@@playerguy2 Montenegro had 2% population and 60% of nacional heros in jugoslavia
@@playerguy2 Greater London: 13% of the UK population 20% of the UK's GDP
Also subsidised as the tech industry was referenced in Slovenia while the others had to wait for their turn. Their products originally were not very good but improved due to support from other Republics. Eg. Macedonian top grapes were bought by Slovenia & their nice packed Fructal juice was more expensive than Macedonian wine :(much more complex to produce).
When they improved they stopped to support others & selfishly asked for autonomy. My mother worked in YU -Post-Tel-Telegraph office & their 13th monthly salary was donated for tech advancement of the Slovenian offices. When Macedonian turn came Slovenian suggested to separate :(
The chief YU economist suggested that the main problem was the negligence of Macedonia & Kosovo that created disappointment & corruption (started in Kosovo) [& the Western bullying + C/iA bribing].
They were not "autonomous regions" in Yugoslavia, but federal Republics which is more than autonomous regions.
More like a confederation
True. Only Vojvodina and Kosovo were autonomous regions.
@@renbe0 i would suggest that, although your statement is technically completely correct, it was an autonomous region instead of federal republic only because of the way yugoslavia worked. It was mainly operated from belgrade (serbia) and army with mandatory service was largely serbian-influenced. Also, country was yugoslavia, not like EU which works as confederation. Much like soviet union, which is known to be operated by moscow. Federal republic/autonomous region is strictly speaking just term used to describe places with different types of autonomy (vojvodina and kosovo had their own autonomy inside federal republic of serbia)
Exactly. And it shows Kosovo but not Vojvodina.
@@valikadilnik4368 You don't have any clue. Slovenia had open borders to the West, private companies, and farms. Its superb school system was on the same level as British private schools. We learned English in school and watched Western films. We worked with Western companies. Serbians learned Russian in schools and they were pro-Russians.
Thanks for this. As a Slovene I might add, that after the return of capitalism in 1991 we conserved parts of the makret socialist system, and we ditched some. One thing that we retained and that still serves us well is free education. The free healthcare system was also mostly retained, but some elements of privatization were introduced and they have caused problems ever since. The public housing system was totally dismantled and today we have one of the worst housing crises in Europe. Another thing is that in the market socialist system we actually did not have a social security system because there was no need for it. After the reintroduction of capitalism we had to build a very robust social security system which is one of the reasons why we're still keeping our inequality levels pretty low. Also privatizations of the economy were carried out very gradually, with the government letting go many important companies after the euro crisis (because of external pressure). Our government was definitely aware that shock therapy would lead to disaster and tried to shield us form it in any way possible (despite the recommendations of some foreign economic advisors). Sadly the result was still that many businesses (even very successful exporters and companies which were doing "high-tech" at the time) were dismantled by novel wanna-be oligarchs, who wanted to re-sell real estate and did not have the minimal intention to re-structure and develop the companies. Thanks god our population is well-educated and the economy rebounded after some time, but the 90's were still very difficult.
sounds very similar to the development in Czechia
this is basically the history of every former socialist country only that your government is not that corrupt as in other countries. regarding high-tech, i used to work with slovenian telco equipment at my former job - iskratel, unfortunately they were losing competition. their solutions looked more outdated over the years. idk what's the situation with iskratel now, maybe they found some sollutions in the meantime.
@@RauriKwan because it is, its just czechia is still improving while we are not, internal politics conflicting every year the population more and more divided, one side calling the other fascist and the other calling communists like we are in ww2, disgraceful not a single good political party that wants to do good for the people, except the fucking pirates but they get like 1-2% of votes so yeah
@@zarzavattzarzavatt9309 Iskratel is basically just a name now. Iskra itself was fractured in to multiple companies, and Iskra emeco for example is owned by egypt now.
Another example would be Peko. The shoe company with over 2000 employees was dismantled after 1991. Basically there was a run of privatization of Peko. And every new CEO just took as much money as possible, then fled with the workers suffering losses because of that. After 3 or 4 such runs the entire company pretty much imploded with workers layed off without any compensation and those CEOs making big bucks due to it.
@Menelvagorothar
Some parts of the Soviet union would have worked for everyone if the corporate business side would do a few things different
11:50 It's interesting to note that this form of "Reformed" socialism (Workers managing their own production in their own factories) is actually much closer in spirit to original Marxism and other early Communist/Anarchist ideologies than the centrally-planned state economies of the Soviet bloc. The centrally-planned economies ended up disempowering workers and empowering a new bureaucratic/technocratic class, which is the opposite of the proletarian revolution that Marx and Engels envisioned.
In the USSR, they actually only reestablished feudalism.
Yeah, it's just worker cooperatives. A concept that was already proven to work back in 1844, and pre-dated the Soviet Union by about 70 years.
The USSR and people whom follow their idea just want to change Bourgeoisie for Bureaucracy
Yeah, that's obviously not true, if you read Marx for more than five seconds you can clearly see that he's not an anarchist
@@milfredcummings717 No excuses and lets label stuff for what it is: the USSR was authoritarian socialist, and it clearly sucked.
Slovenia has generally retained everything good from socialism: free education (even higher), free public healthcare and relative economic security (unemployment benefits, maternal leave etc). But there are tendencies from mainly right political spectrum to privatize everything.
But to be fair, people in slovenia is generally hard -working and a lot of them have some means to earn outside regular jobs. in yugoslavia they had a large and protected market, most companies from that time are gone (few remain). Now over-dependance on Germany is visible.
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia
I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy.
Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence
Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge.
Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment
The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases:
The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression.
Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany.
Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard.
While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure.
The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness
Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances.
In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West.
The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence
The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline.
The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy
After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing.
Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism
Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
haha! Nothing in socialism can ever, EVER be described as "good". In fact, in my whole 54 years on this planet, this is the first time I've ever heard the the word "good" and the word :socialism" in the same sentence. Socialism, as a governing format, has failed 100% wherever it's been tried in the world (including Slovenia; if that weren't the case, they'd still have Communist government governing the people like North Korea has). I will always put my capitalist governing and economic system success rate against the communist one any day of the week and, when I gamble on this, I am assured a 100% success rate. It's what we in the gambling world calls "a sure thing". And freedom is the underlying commodity that Communism suppresses. And that's the key to everything.
@@ahorn2407 MVP comment. Too bad most ain't ready to hear it.
Very nuanced opinion, well done.
@@realismatitsfinest1yes good. born in Yugoslavia. now living is way harder then in Yugoslavia
Nobody is talking about Slovenia because they think it's Slovakia
yeah they don't have femboys in there, so we aren't interested
I’m at the 4 minute mark and scrolling through the comments and it was only when I saw yours that I realized the video is not about Slovakia.
Same with austria and Australia.
@@ShubhamMishrabro not the same, most people know at least a few things about Austria, mainly because they actually have a history
😂😂😂😂 we are brother's
Step 1: Adopt a dragon. Step 2: Teach it how to hoard gold. Step 3: Retire early as a 'Dragon Treasure Consultant.'
Step 4: Seduce the dragon. Step 5: ? Step 6: divorce the dragon, get half of its hoard.
There is a major flaw in the reasoning behind this false story. The flaw is the use of GDP figures produced by the communist regime of former Yugoslavia. They were totally falsified. A lot of "production of gods and services" was either altogether non-existent or some gods were "produced" but without any sensible customer. They were just left in the "factory" backyards to decay. All of that was booked as production. Furthermore the clearing between parts of former Yugoslavia was unclear at best or just forged to fit some powerful people's wishes. So the GDP figure of 10.000 USD per inhabitant of Slovenia is a pure fiction. In reality Slovenia was better off than some other parts of former Yugoslavia, but the entire former Yugoslavia was a banana republic of African style. The inhabitants of Slovenia were poor people compared to any western country. Now, it is the interesting issue why was Slovenia so much better then other parts of former Yugoslavia. It was not because Slovenes were so much better workers or because they had a better governance in Slovenia then in the rest of former Yugoslavia. Basically Slovenia was as rotten as the rest, but a deliberate policy decisions of the communist government of former Yugoslavia, where several Slovenes were in charge of the economy, gave Slovenia a break and opportunity to provide somewhat more decent standards of living. They were just using the rest of former Yugoslavia to make their part of the country look better. So the entire story here is fake. There are NO RICH PEOPLE IN COMMUNISM.
My dad tried this. Turns out the retirement fund isn't spendable...
It's like you read Vainqueur the Dragon!
Funny that you say that, because the symbol of Ljubljana, the capital of Slovenia is a dragon.
I think you are discounting how developed Slovenia was when it was part of the AH empire. It was one of the first areas with rail connection going back to 1840s, Ljubljana had textile mills for instance. The region was considered a core part of the empire (Carinthia) and was integrated with the Austrian industrial revolution. It also had the highest literacy rate as part of Yugoslavia in 1920. It was more developed than Greece so it makes sense that it stays relatively rich. All that said, they did very well under every system they've been in.
Long ago I saw a document with some historic economic data about slovenian lands in AH empire. As in time of AH empire Slovenia was not a political unit. So according to that data for 1912 Slovenian Litoral (Oesterreichische Kuestenland) was at level of 92% of the most developed AH region- Lower Austria. In my opinion that's the sole role of the port of Triest as the major Austrian port city. Carniola (Kranjska or Krain) was reaching only the 67% of the most developed Austrain region and was actualy at the same level as hungarian part of the dual monarchy. Styria (Štajerska or Steiremark) was at the level of 84% of the development of Lower Austria. As Styria it is necessary to concider that in the 1912 is observed as a whole,..., after 1918 the Lower Styria is Slovenian (Yugoslav) and Upper Styria is Austrian. But anyway after the WW1 in some figures Slovenian Styria was remaining at the same pre WW1 level regarding Austria. After WW1, my hometown of Maribor was developing at the field of textile industries (even called Yugoslav Manchester) as city authorities offered cheap building plots, cheap electricity from HC Fala on Drava river and skilled workforce, attracting capital from Czechoslovakia. Almost the same story about development faced the town of Kranj in the same period.
Very true. And if you look at any map of the early Yugoslavia you can see the earstwhile imperial border still. If you look at literacy, GDP, industrialisation, any statistic really, the parts that were once part of the Empire were much better developped than the rest of Yugoslavia, so we had a good start.
@@darkec71 Indeed, maribor was always known for it's industrial districts, that have unfortunately been eroded significantly in modern times.
In the Soviet block Hungary was a little freer country than other. But we In Hungary always adored Yugoslavia how well the people live there. For us Yugoslavia was a kind of half-West.Despite it was a military dictatorship they mixed well the positive sides of the socialism and the capitalism as well. There was social security, cheap housing, nobody was too poor, free health care and education and they produced quality products, there was higher standard of living, the country was open towards the west, the shops were full of western products, but on reasonably prices.
There were Yugoslavian products that were competitive with Western companies as well. For example the Slovenian Gorenje brand, even in the Yugoslav era they were the same good quality as western companies, but on a lower price. And now there is the Pipistrel aircraft manufacturer which is Slovenian as well.
Slovenia and Yugoslavia was a good mix of the socialism and the capitalism, like the Scandinavian countries.
@@gaborbakos7058 Excellent opinion
You're completely right, of course it wasn't paradise but the world should look at Yugoslavia's and Scandinavia's systems and analyze both the benefits and shortcomings, and look for ways to fix them in.
@@Unwebonnn It was still better than what was implemented in Poland during the that period. Nowdays I see the benefits that socialism could insert into the country's system. I have turned to social democracy for such thing
@@gaborbakos7058 yugoslavia was much better place to live than scandinavia... workplace democracy, workers holiday resorts, social housing system for example which scandinavia didnt have and a better climate and food ofc
@@polishstick0609 Yeah, the only real issue social democracies have to tackle right now is their vulnerability to large influxes of population (which will exist as long as there's war in the world) and their way of getting rich, as their international businesses can sometimes exploit workers in the third world.
I travelled to Ljubljana and Lake Bled in 2012 when I was a student and I was blown away by how clean and beautiful the place was. During that trip I'd visited lots of different countries in Europe and Slovenia stood out for me. Ljubljana actually seemed more developed and better looked after than the big Western European cities that I've been to (and there were hardly any tourists, which was a big plus!)
@@Bille994 😂😂😂i live in slo there is rampant corruption and there is no money
@@mihariznar3792 joa, brezvezen komentar!
@@mihariznar3792 Oh yes very funny how hilarious.
@@mihariznar3792 no there isnt, wtf there are so kuch more opportunities than in some lther countries
It was always like that, extremally clean and productive, Slovenian people were honest and hard working people, Yugoslavian state didn't block their development in contrary.
It’s so refreshing to see a video that actually explains how a communist country and economy worked instead of just saying “everything was perfect if it wasn’t for evil capitalist countries” or “they were poor and everyone starved because communism bad”
it was socialistic not communistic though.
@ that gets into semantics but essentially it was communist since it was ruled by them
@@Monitoring358 how would you differentiate what was happening in Slovenia vs communism?
@@jamestortorella5171 there was no j.e.w. s
Correction ... they were the "best" communist country. But when you set the bar so low, it's a easy feat to accomplish. Compared with capitalist economies, as the video says, they paled in comparison. Communism, as a governing form, failed 100% of the time it has been tried. The few communists regimes still remaining are failed states. And this illustrates Einstein's quote precisely: "The definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
As a Slovene, I applaud this video that you made about my homeland.🇸🇮 Thank you Avery🤩
As another Slovene, i appreciate you didn't come here to complain at HOW BAD we are doing. Very refreshing 😂
Čakam da se usujejo 24ur komentatorji ...
@@flip3198 24ur komentatorji večinoma ne znajo niti svojega jezika, kaj šele angleško.
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia
I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy.
Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence
Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge.
Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment
The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases:
The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression.
Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany.
Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard.
While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure.
The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness
Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances.
In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West.
The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence
The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline.
The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy
After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing.
Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism
Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
Me when Slovenia is mentioned.
You just like it because he mentioned it, if you watched it you'd see he did really really bad research
For some reason, I am starting to feel patriotic of a country I have absolutely nothing to do with🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮
im Slovenian. and corruption here is high. well educated people don't get work......sad country for young people with high education . political system is so corrupt from 1990. older people can't live with pension checks. lots of them need to go to red cross cause they can't afford food. don't always believe videos on UA-cam
@@mayamaya6478 I too am Slovenian, and Slovenia has the largest gap between actual and perceived corruption in the world (at least according to a survey a few years back). Yes, the politics is corrupt, but so is every other politics. Yes, the pensions are bad, but very often people retired after having done very little work (the minimum in Yugoslavia was 20 years of work, now it's 40), and as such the pensions follow proportionately. It is also a reflection of our demographic decline - we just cannot keep up with all these pensions, because we aren't having enough children. As for the educated not being able to get jobs - if you study something useful, you will have a job. The problem is, that free education doesn't incentivise people to think about their career prospects, and as such many go to study useless things, and end up not being very employable. At the same time we lack skilled tradesmen, because we have glorified higher education too much, and disdained the working man.
But all in all, it's good here. Yes, we have problems, everyone does, but few have it so good, that they couldn't envy us
@@mayamaya6478its not that hard to find work lol im slovenian and most of ppl i know worked jobs in the summer vacations, ppl can live with pension checks and im pretty sure i havent heard abt red cross since a looooong time ago, im pretty sure there isnt a single homeless shelter and ive seen less than 10 homeless people in my whole life yall just have to complain abt stuff that isnt broken 😭
@@mayamaya6478wtf? Idk which part youre from but wher ei am at none of those are a problem. Maybe for the very well educated. But otherwise everyone can get a job if your tnot picky. People life just fine from pensions.
I think u might just like conplaining
@@mayamaya6478 stop spreading bullshit. People who want to work will always get jobs. There's a lot of sectors that need workers. Corruption is no higher than anywhere else in Europe and certainly it's much better here than in other Ex-YU countries. Go live somewhere else for a while and you'll realize how good we have it. It's always the ones who do nothing of note and don't travel or have first hand experience with other countries that are the loudest.
Non-Slovenians on here, you have to know that complaining and pessimism is the favorite activity of some of my compatriots.
Who would have guessed that puting competent people in power would bring prosperaty to a country
It's such a shame Slovenia eventually abandoned that idea.
Yup I'm surprised as well
That is the wrong takeaway. Decentralization was the key takeaway. It matters little if you have capitalism or not. You just need a relatively unregulated free market and decentalized structures.
@@IsaacFilipe-y2c the ppl in Belgrade were competent too, but a group of few obviously cannot run an entire country's economy.
@@xXdnerstxleXxno
11:25 actually, that is exactly what "Soviet" means - a direct democracy ruled by councils of workers. That system was intended in USSR as well. The only issue was, it was only formally established but did not have actual power over political decisions it should
That's how communism and centralized ruling always end up - it starts with a noble intention but always gets corrupted. That's why China eventually abandoned hardcore communism while retaining a centralized structure more akin to the millennia-old system of empires, rather than the Soviet model.
@@utkarshg.bharti9714 well, I wouldn't say always, for example, look up Syrian Kurdistan/Rojava. Despite limited resources and being surrounded by enemies, they managed to survive (and even destroy ISIS) while preserving their direct democracy and socialist economy.
@@f-man3274they are also supported by half the world
@@siyacer quite the opposite, there was tactical collaboration with US exclusively because of ISIS but all ground operations and dirty work was done by SDF (Rojava military). And outside that episode, Syrian kurds are in active conflict with the second army of NATO (Turkey) and their leader, Abdulla Ocalan was caught in 1999 with the assistance of US. At the same time, they have much less support and much less known than, for example, Palestine
Lower corruption, shared profits with workers, widespread decentralization.
yeah... if i were you id edit corruption out of that comment
One of the most corrupt country in the EU and in the world.Italian mafia feels home in Slovenia.
Shared profits? Not in Slovenia
lower corruption??🤣🤣
More capitalism, more capitalism, more capitalism*
This video should be shown in all classrooms, all around the world!
All of Yugoslavia did relatively well compared to the Warsaw Pact republics.
@@ares106 Besides the brutal wars.
Even better than east Germany?
Yeah compared to those countries, yet communism held us back so far back otherwise we would be rivaling Switzerland and not Eastern Europe.
@@guycrew3973 even better, they were more open to the west.
@@odkritaslovenija yeah the only place where communism didn’t hold a nation back was Russia but that has less to do with communism and more to do with the fact that their leaders actually wanted to modernise the nation but it doesn’t matter now does it
I've been fascinated by Slovenia for years now but there really is very little information about the country. That being said, thank you for taking the time to research the country and providing yet another great video! It made my day :)
This needs to be a part of the global discussion on economic systems, truly. Finally, a shining example of reasonable socialism that can counteract the false "Capitalism vs Communism" dichotomy.
It is a false dichotomy. The real question is of the proper role of free markets and state regulation. All the ideology is just obscuring the point. As it did in Slovenia - despite what was said, Slovenia did prosper significantly after ditching socialism.
When you have a prosperous industry within a country you can basically have any kind of system and it will work as long as that industry keeps being prosperous, look at Norway today that country has a bunch of social programs that just drain the capital but the only reason it works it's their petroleum industry
@@bambuco2 can you explain more about Norway? I've heard much positive rhetoric about their mixed-economy. If what you say is true, then perhaps they would be wealthier still under a strict capitalism
@@ScorpioIsland Their system is basically exactly the same as everywhere else in EU almost no difference there.
People just praise them as this Utopia of social democracy because they're able to fund much greater number of social programs while still maintaining everyone's standard of living but what people forget to mention is their country is rich in petroleum and that's how they fund a large % of their government spending.
Imagine if we started looking at Saudi government as something to be copied because their country is wealthy and successful, logic is exactly the same, it's easy to make it work when you have a billion dollar industry behind you.
I am Slovenian and this comment is just silly. We have always been and are a deeply corrupt and capitalist country. The whole video is stupid, actually.
My rather superficial take on Slovenia, is that they just have a good mix of being hard working and relaxed. I had a lot of good time there and met decent people.
If you think Slovenes are hard working you're dreaming. They are a bit more "efficient" than their southern neighbours tho... But then again, even Germans only work 35 hours per week so yeah...
@@MultiSciGeek Not true. I WORK 50 hours a week as my coworkers do.
Yeah, we should really stop with judging country wide effects on "what kind of people live there". When something is apparent on a larger scale, that is the compound effect of many different systems that effect the lives of those people and not the other way around. It always exposes essentialist thinking. An obvious example being: Are people from poor countries more lazy?
@@histriamagna1014 thats not a flex...
@@MultiSciGeek I'm not sure whether you're talking from personal experience, or just by looking at general statistics online, but most of the people I know have some kind of business/activity on the side of their regular work. I worked on projects where we ramped 85h/week and people still had the energy to go for a beer after work.
I have been hearing a lot of complaints over the newest generation of workers, tho'.
If you're only looking at general stats, you won't see a clear picture, because those don't count all the hours people put in after their day job is done. Alternatively, if you only hang out with lazy bums who want to live off sociala, you also can't extrapolate that to *everyone* in the country. In general I would say we *are* hardworking, but we also like to enjoy our leisure time, so we don't get too stressed like some of my American friends who just work, work, work.
Boy I sure can't wait to show this to everyone I meet when I go to Bratislava!
@@daithimcnally8212 I think you are confusing Slovenia 🇸🇮 with Slovakia 🇸🇰 bro
@@aksamhuda7 glavno mesto slovenije je bratislava. Glavno mesto slovaške pa celje
The capital of Slovenia 🇸🇮 is Ljubljana. Bratislava is in Slovakia.🇸🇰
@@aksamhuda7 I think you don't see the joke.
@@30dk09
And just what is "the joke" mate?
Slovenia is objectively one of the best countries in the world, it's not perfect ofc and there are some serious problems, but if you look at stats such as violent crime, global peace index, human development index, wealth inequality, environmental conservation, infant mortality, education, etc. - we're doing very well. A lot of Slovenes don't even know we're consistently in the top 10 of the global peace index. And don't get me started on our ski jumping skills 💪
Nice to see a comment from a Slovene that is not complaining about how bad everything is. We often don't know just how good we have it in our little home, and I've lived in Austria, Spain, and the USA for some years.
@@emma_704 Complaining can be annoying and we treat it like a sport yeah :D but keep in mind that a dissatisfied society always strives for improvements, it's complacency that's dangerous.
@@MarkArandjus agreed, but mindless complaining about things one doesn't even know a lot about (which is true for most internet commenters) also doesn't bring improvements to society.
one of our biggest problems are how expensive everything is and the slow decline in our public transport (My buses are consistently late) and the incising time to get to a doctor.
Without capitalism? I hope this is just an intentional click-bait title.
When we were part of Yugoslavia capitalism was the main force pulling us ahead. Sure, nobody dared to call it that and even today you will still find a lot of Slovenes despising capitalism as that's a "bad word" but in reality most of our success rests on the basis of capitalistic values and free market.
This was also one of the reasons why Slovenia wanted to separate from the former Yugoslavia as the communist ruling party wanted to control our economy and take a lot of our profits and divert them elsewhere.
Our advantage was/is that Slovenians are hard working and business oriented people that found ways to create stuff, trade and make money. But what we also cant deny is the border with Austria and Italy where despite the strict surveillance people traded with the west and smuggled stuff in and out of Yugoslavia on a mass scale.
After Slovenia became independent we still had a lot of big state owned companies that started to fail one by one - lack of motivation, bad leadership, poor management of funds and not enough of innovation. Only companies that were privatized managed to adapt and survive.
TL;DR: Slovenia used capitalism in to get ahead but nobody wants to call it what it was
Basically allowing for a lot of free market principles while still holding to some socialist dogmas (which just dragged us down)
Fellow Slovenian here. I agree with everything you said.
Capitalism is a bad word that people hate in principle, despite not knowing the meaning, I guess?
Yugoslav way is pretty much what we wanted here in Czechoslovakia in 60s - more freedom, more private bussines, good relation ships with both sides, but soviet tanks in 1968 said NO.
Yeah, that's what the video said. Title is just misleading. Slovenia didn't become rich, it became the least poor in the area. It didn't have 'a thing that is not capitalism in any way', it had a mixed system, just like the USA. The fact that it's a DIFFERENT mixed system isn't an argument.
Slovenia has hands down been my favorite country to visit, clean with so much to see and do, from caves to lakes to beaches
SLOVENIA MENTIONED:kdor ne skače ni slovenc hej hej hej 🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮 kdor ne skače ni slovenc hej hej hej 🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮
ne ja skača
@@domenstrmsek5625 ti si retardiran
@@domenstrmsek5625 young Slovenian American here! I’m going to see family there next year! I really need to learn the language, I started attending a Slovenian Mass recently.
Kdor ne skače ni slovenc hej hej hej 🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮
@@Thanan548 if you want i cant teach you a lot about alkohol
So glad to see a high profile video about my country thank you or HVALA! 🇸🇮🇸🇮🇸🇮
As a Slovene I was waiting for this for too long. Thanks for shedding a light on this!
Me too. I wanted to make this video ever since I made the breakup of Yugoslavia video about 4 years ago.
I was just checking some economic statistics and comparing them to the west... When I noticed it had higher gdp per capita than some developed country.
I've been wanting to learn more about it ever since.
@@HistoryScope FYI Austria-Hungarian empire was Catholic. Catholic social teaching would be MISTAKENLY considered by many to be socialist. See Rerum Novarum. Examples of this in application is the family wage and forced hiring.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@@truecatholic1 YES! Very important, not discussed enough
@@sempersuffragium9951 Up voted. I appreciate the support. A good book related to this is "Economic Compulsion and Christian Ethics." "They" are afraid of the information in this book. I was and still am shadow banned by Disqus possibly for mentioning this book.
Slovenia was not only able to sell to rich west european markets but was also able to tap to the eastern ones as well. In Czechoslovakia the best domesitcally produced skiing equipment in the 80's was made under a licese of Slovenina's ELAN, the company earning commision from each sale. My mother bought Gorenje fridhe with freezer in 1982 and only retired it this year, and not for mallfunction but for its electricity consumption. Czechoslovakia itself tried to follow the path of economical refroms in late 60's but the Soveit union fearing the loss of another important satelite state, with - for east at least - advanced manufacturing capabilitiess. So russians decided to put its boot in and stomp the fire out before it spreaded of to the other states.
😂
Gorenje fridge with freezer in 1982 - I got one of these in my basement, a 1985 year and it still works, my neighbour got a gorenje washing machine year 1980 - guess what, still works, easy to repair, no plastic shit.. nowdays when you buy something in the middle class of pricing, its crap, breaks all the time,...
IN my parents house we still have a Gorenje freezer and fridge in basement working since 1978 24/7 ,off course now we have modern fridge in the house but that 2 are still for other stuff
0:20 The map you showed at the beginning of the video is not a map of 8 Yugoslavia's autonomous regions. Yugoslavia consisted of 6 republics. That's a map of 6 constituent republics, plus Kosovo and Metohija (one of two autonomous provinces in Serbia). Just wanted to clarify this, let's not rewrite the history.
@@SlobodanKunst their map doesn't even show 8 republics, it shows 7
@@francy3643 exactly
You got beggining extremely wrong
Hungary got self governing in mid 19th century. It was called Austria-Hungary.
Empire was divided between Vienna and Budapest
Meanwhile Austrian part was progressive and capitalistic with a lot of investments into industry (like with Czechia and Slovenia) Hungary and its regions (like part of Croatia,Slovakia and Vojvodina) stayed rural and underdeveloped
Slovenia was already the richest part of the kingdom of Yugoslavia as the Communistic Yugoslavia
In reality communism has only harmed Slovenia, as it could be now as rich as Austria, but its now in stagnation with no real economic future. Even with that its still miles ahead of other east and south european nations
The claim was that regions in the Empire had local administrations
He does know that, ik from his video about Austria-Hungary, idk why he didn't say that in this video
1 more, Hungary never really recovered their former might during the Imperial era, Trianon did them dirty
No, Hungary didn't have real self-governing in Austria-Hungary. After the Compromise of 1867 The Habsburg Empire had become Austria-Hungary but the main power remained in the hands of Austria. It was not an equal governing.
Thank you!!!
Great video, but one small criticism: at 14:19, Trieste and Koper are both shifted to the north
Slovenia is the best slavic country, Greetings from Poland
NO, Poland is the best Slavic country ❤
I'm slovenian but my kid is Polish lol Poland is the best I swear your people r better 😂
Slovenia stems from oldest slavic country which was bridge between west slavs and south (Slovene language is very archaic and unique among others stil). So greetings to northren, related slavs.
@@arekcielec1177 you are probably that kid lol
@@THELORDVODKA greetings back and love your name my sla v brother.
We were fit, healthy and sporty. Life was cool. Our women were stunning. We had a lot of free time. If you wanted more money you just relocated to Austria. But majority preferred life before money.
As a Slovenian born in Yugoslavia, I don't agree with everything presented in the video. We lived well in Yugoslavia. My father was a truck driver, and we had paid holidays. All we needed to buy was food; everything else was free. Money was not a problem in Yugoslavia. Many people earn around €1,000 today, but prices continue to rise while their wages remain unchanged.
''everything else was free''
could you get a good car for free or just the goverment issued lada?
could you get a big house for free or just the goverment issued shithole?
@bolek-trolek Damn dude, relax. There's no need to be so aggressive.
He's just respectfully giving his opinion
Although it tries to seem impartial, the ideology behind the video is visible
@@bolek-trolekand when it happens you can say goodbye to your country. Why? None of you young lazy effers wan't to work hard
I'm also Slovenian and I was born in Slovenia. My parents and grandparents are/were also Slovenian. They also lived in Jugoslavia. They were hard working people. Nothing was given to them for free. They also lost some land due to not being on the right side and with the right people at that time ;) they were not the only ones. I don't like communism eventhought there might been some good things about it. Older people feel nostalgic about it. It was also their youth and some good memories were made. I respect that, they paved the way for us.
I believe what made Slovenia better were hard working people willing to do better and educate themself to do even better. We have a beautiful nature, clean waters, mountains, caves and a little bit of sea. We can do better in so many ways and I hope we will but still need to cherish what we already have ❤.
of course im generalizing a bit and not everyone will agree, but this is probably a big reason as to why yugonostalgia is so big over here in ~~femboy country~~ slovenia. Granted, our current economy is still overall pretty okay compared to many other places, but it's definitely been on a decline and problems such as housing prices have begun to rise a lot. with that said, i always hear how, despite technically being a dictatorship (which also comes with random stupid problems like restricted access to western products), slovenia under yugoslavia was a genuinely nice place to live, and why tito was so beloved despite being a dictator. corruption was prevalent back in the day too of course (and its only gotten worse) but it was still probably as close to an equal market socialist society as anyone's ever achieved.
also yugo rock did and still does go hard
F3m boy meme originates from Slovenia having westren standards when it comes to health care to moral questions in southren region. No slovene is offended by it. im not sure what the rest of your comment had to do with that meme. It almost feels like you trying to be overly nice.
also yugo rock is hard but so is yugo folk, slovene folk, yugo pop, slo pop, gypsy accordeon from balkans in general... redundant addition.
@@THELORDVODKA I beg of you to cease your spread of lies. Slovene folk is the torturous brass howling of drunk lunatics, may your accordion wither to dust.
Sounds like the main reason the economy grew is that it's a strategic location for trade & tourism between the west and the east rather than any particular government policy. Also most of these policys (both governmental & defacto due to citizen entrepreneurism) seem to be more capatalistic leaning in nature.
@@S1AR_DUS1 add cheep workforce and country secret service running the biggest import-export companies.
@@S1AR_DUS1 Except maybe for the government control of investment. That's an interesting concept.
Id argue that having democratic companies instead of monarchist companies is quite the change to the system.
Its not capitalist but a free market.
@@yoshimeier3060 It’s not really a free market as it’s state mandated that each employee functions as a share holder in the business. If it were a free market individuals would be able to personally invest and be able to decide who can become shareholders (Either publicly traded or private businesses).
A true free market means the economy has no regulation at all and businesses are held accountable by people choosing to either use or not use their services.
@@S1AR_DUS1 A common misconception people have is thinking that a capitalist free market is unregulated. Private property is a very strong regulation that allows for the concentration of capital on the few's hands, this is the mechanism things such as monopolies, carthels and the stake market is allowed to exist. A Free market doesn't mean free from all regulation, but that you have no limitations in trading, you are free to trade with anyone at whichever price, it says absolutely nothing about corporation processes, rights, duties and ownership.
I appreciate the even-handed and honest look at socialist Slovenia. I'm not a Titoist, but as a communist theorist in America, I do have a special appreciation for the market socialist system they pioneered, and feel that something akin to it is going to be what communism will look like when it comes to America. I'm glad that history has progressed to a point where we can shed the mindless Cold War propaganda and take an honest look at this time period now.
Very interesting!
I also like your references to series I enjoy. I was in Slovenia a few days during an USKO concert tour. The place where we stayed at the time, was quite beautiful. And our 2-hour Bach gig was in a monastery on top of a mountain with a view of Italy.
Love the nuanced analysis and the great sum up of factors. I need to visit Slovenia at some point now.
Youre very much welcome. We are quite hospitable, love to show foreigners around and know how to throw a good party 😅❤
Ok but then leave alright buddy
What I already knew is that only Slovenia managed transition from socialism to captitalism without selling out the country to a handful oligarchs. This made them the only country which was better off afterwards. Now I learn they actually had good companies to hand over, yet they didn't. Very nice.
Yeah, although the soft transition had it's downsides... almost all institutions retained continuity from the previous regime, which now manifests itself in a great falling of public trust in them. As well as them constantly logging heads with any right-of-centre government
@@GThu1 Poland is usually the example of a good transition
Slovenia did it well because, due also to Habsbug legacy, they are serious, honest and care for the community. I live in Italy at 10 km from the border, so I can see it quite well.
The Habsburgs empoverished the country
You said it! That Empire gave so much to it's peoples
@sempersuffragium9951 too many forget it. It was not the empire of evil...
This video is more about how Yugoslav Titoism works in countries which already have a decent level of development and smart people to run and make use of it.
Capitalism existed before WW2 and the afterwar communist expansion across East Europe. Slovenia developed within the capitalist system of Austria and it definitely became developed thanks to that capitalist system, in fact it’s a country, or region, which was capitalist for the better part of the last few centuries. The Yugoslav socialist system, or Titoism as mentioned in the video, was more liberal and had something resembling a free market unlike the USSR and Warsaw Pact countries so the damage done to Slovenia within the relatively closed and planned system in Yugoslavia was small and they even found ways to profit from their position like the tourism mentioned here or access to cheap workforce from the undeveloped regions in Yugoslavia.
Czechia in comparison was the most heavily industrialized part of the former Austrian Empire, richer than mostly rural Slovenia back in the day and developed by pre-WW1 West European standards, but became very poor under the communist regime of Czechoslovakia.
Nonsense ... what are you talking about. Czechoslovakia in the 1980s was very developed, it was more developed than southern italy and spain which looked like 3rd world shitholes compared to Brno or Prague
Well, great video. As a Slovenian I would like to add two more PROs for economic growth, that hadn't been mentioned in the video. First - people of Slovenia are hard working, on time, organized... with very germanic-like mentality. Second - as one of YU republic Slovenia has had a constant income of (cheaper) labour force from other republics and that gave it a competative advantage.
Unveiling the Myth of Slovenian Socialism: The Reality Behind Economic Decline in Socialist Slovenia
I am a Slovenian who knows this period of our country's history very well. The socialist era in Slovenia is often portrayed as a successful story of progress and prosperity, especially by those who carry on the legacy of the former Communist Party. However, beneath the surface of this so-called "success story" lies a far more complex reality. In this article, we take a fact-based look at the history of Socialist Slovenia, debunking myths in favor of historical accuracy.
Pre-War Slovenia: Economic Strength and Influence
Even during the Austro-Hungarian era, Slovenia had a developed industrial sector and a living standard comparable to Austria's, with the coastal region of western Slovenia (Trieste) even surpassing Austria and Czechia in economic terms. After 1918, when most of Slovenia became part of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, Slovenian industry reached about 80% of Austria's economic power, though high central taxes from Belgrade constrained its development. After World War II, however, Slovenia began to lag under socialism, losing its competitive edge.
Three Periods of the Socialist Experiment
The socialist period in Slovenia can be divided into three distinct phases:
The Stalinist Era (1945-1952): During this time, the regime brutally repressed opponents and killed over 12,000 Slovenians who resisted communism and Tito's Stalinist militias . Thousands more fled abroad permanently due to political persecution and repression.
Real Socialism (1953-1974): Socialist Slovenia continued to use the machines inherited from its capitalist past, which were aligned with the second industrial revolution, comparable to those used in factories in America and Germany.
Self-Management Socialism (1975-1990): With increasing centralization and economic stagnation, Slovenia continued to fall behind the Western industrial standard.
While Slovenia achieved around 80% of Austria’s economic power before socialism, by the end of the 1980s, just before Yugoslavia’s collapse, it was down to a mere 25%. This demonstrates that socialism was not a success for Slovenia, but rather a severe economic failure.
The Economic Decline of Socialism and the Loss of Competitiveness
Slovenia was one of the few industrialized nations that transitioned to socialism, along with East Germany and Czechia, though these countries suffered greatly under Soviet exploitation. Karl Marx himself warned that socialism could only succeed in an industrialized society, not in agrarian regions like Russia and China. The initial momentum in Slovenia was maintained by the use of capitalist-era machinery, comparable to those in Germany and the United States, but over the ensuing decades, it failed to keep up with rapid technological advances.
In the 1970s, Slovenia did not invest in transitioning to the third industrial revolution, which meant that critical industrial sectors were completely unprepared for automation, robotics, and computerization, which were creating competitive advantages in the West.
The Struggle Against Technocrats: Political Suppression of Competence
The peak of Slovenian socialist industry occurred during the administration of Stane Kavčič, a politician with more capitalist tendencies than most socialist leaders of the time. This success posed a direct threat to the Communist Party, as employees, under the direction of capable managers, successfully ran factories and demonstrated that the Party was becoming obsolete. This sparked the so-called "struggle against technocrats" - staunch communists systematically removed competent managers and replaced them with politically loyal but less capable individuals. These changes led to decreased efficiency and innovation and, ultimately, economic decline.
The Legacy of Failure: Lasting Impacts on the Slovenian Economy
After Slovenia’s independence in 1991, members of the former hardline Communist elite retained influence in the new state, hindering the much-needed reforms and innovation. Even in a democratic setting, Slovenia remained economically subordinate to Austria, a stark contrast to its pre-socialist standing.
Conclusion: The Reality of Slovenian Socialism
Socialism in Slovenia was not a success story but rather a failed experiment that hindered the nation’s economic and social progress. In reality, Slovenia's economic power, in comparison to Austria, drastically decreased. These historical facts demand sober reflection and critical analysis, as the myth of "successful socialism" persists in Slovenian political discourse today, presenting a distorted view of historical reality.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
So they left communism to become socialists, which is basically communism with a few elements of capitalism. This didn’t work across all of Yugoslavia, but it did in Slovenia, where things went well. However, with their independence, it became clear that not going straight to capitalism only slowed Slovenia’s development. It's good to know that the Slovenian people have virtues that made them stand out as the best of a socialist country. In the end, the video title is just clickbait; it was capitalism, along with their own societal strengths, that made them prosperous.
15:45 No, it is not true. Not Yugoslavia was the only neutral country that had borders with the western and the Soviet block as well. There was Austria and Finland, they were neutral as well, not NATO countries.
That's a smallest issue with this movie. I feel like someone is desperately trying to find any tiny example that at least smells like a commie success
Finland had defensive pact with USSR it wasn't neutral.
Man the whole video is a bunch of misconceptions. It's like he heard about Yugoslavia for the first time and decided to make a video on it ffs.
@@manekrit2417 Finland was neutral, actually. Do more research.
@antunsimic985 6th april 1948 Finland and Soviet Union signed a pact of friendship, cooperation, and mutual help. Under which Soviet Union obliged to defend Finland and Finland Soviet Union. Pact ended when Union collapsed.
16:34 Serbia was investing between 30% and 43% of it's development fund into Kosovo and that's before it became an autonomus province and controlled it's own money. They had free education, free public transport, free healthcare and free electricity, people from the rest of Serbia went there to work on public projects for free. Nowhere in Yugoslavia had more money sunk into it then Kosovo, the problem is that nowhere in Yugoslavia was more corrupt either.
True that.
Kosovo in Yugoslavia == Ukr today, at least for corruption.
It's worth mentioning that the other richest post-communist country was Czechia, which was one of the most industrially developed regions of central Europe since the days of Austria-Hungary, and retained that status through a relatively well managed economy in the interwar period as the first Czechoslovak republic, so it was kind of set up from the start, and transitioning back to a market based economy after '89 was more so a process of "recovery". Adjusted for inequality, Czechia is now the 18th most developed country in the world (source: inequality adjusted human development index)
Note that it did rich without capitalism itself but it benefited from the proximity with capitalism and the ability to trade with those economies. Without capitalism anywhere else in the world it wouldn't have worked as well. But I agree that the Slovenian experiment is interesting.
Note that regarding South Africa it's a specifically stratified country with most of the population (the blacks) excluded from political and economic power by law. Besides those obvious disadvantages, it also suffered from an embargo caused by the international outcry regarding those laws. What I am saying is that South Africa wasn't an economy managed for general economic growth and medians of the entire population will reflect this.
I'm not sure if its that much that it benefited from capitalism being close or if it just benefited from allowing more foreign trade in order to focus on specializing their economy. For the analogy of the steel, at least, it doesn't matter if your neighbours are capitalist, it only matters if they are willing to trade with you.
I would say that the importance of geography in Slovenia's case is pretty well mentioned in the video
Czechia have boarded the west by land. Poland and many other Yugoslav countries had see access and the proximity to trade with the west but did not develop as much as we did. The proximity to the west was not the only factor in Slovenian success.
That's quite an assumption, considering that every kind of economy heavily depends on its surroundings and current socio-economic development
It benefited from access to the resources and assets of capitalist countries. But as demonstrated by Slovenia, those resources and assets could have been produced by other countries operating under the same economic model as Slovenia itself. It just so happened that Slovenia didn't have any other wealthy socialist countries to trade with, so it had to trade with capitalists.
Also, Slovenia was only really an "experiment" insofar as it was the first country to mandate all businesses be operated as worker cooperatives. A concept invented almost a century earlier, by the Rochdale Pioneers in England in 1844. Worker cooperatives have been quietly successful ever since, and exist all over the world, in every industry.
And you've probably never heard of them, because our capitalist overlords don't like acknowledging that a functional and productive form of socialism has existed for longer than any of us have been alive.
One part of Yugoslavia that had the potential to develop as Slovenia was Vojvodina. It got its start a later, in 1974 when it got larger rights as autonomous region. It had similar methods to develop economy as Slovenia, but it lacked border with a West. Its development was short-lived. After a coup in 1988 by Serbian nationalists, who took power after a panic that it may seek aspirations to separate from the central Serbian government as Kosovo, economy stagnated after they changed people with experience in institutions, banks, companies with loyal inexperienced ones.
26:43 it’s so cool that you added the song “naprej zastava slave” (forward the flag of glory) in your video. Fun fact: today this song is the anthem of Slovenian Army!
Good finding, i watched the whole video and didn't catch this.
As a Slovenian, born in Yugoslavia and actually (although distantly) related to Tito, I admit there were many, many shortcomings in the old system, most of which allowed mass corruption.
Slovenians were generally lucky (not just geographically, also in our nature as human beings), the standard we lived in at the time was good, most people stuck together in times of hardship, and could afford to build.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
What you said about Slovenia is basically capitalism, so how was Slovenia not capitalistic if their market was quite free, their businesses free and deregulated?
@@flavius2884 dont be stupid, educate yourself
@@GospodGobar This is why I asked the question. If I didn't want to be educated, why would I ask a question?
@@GospodGobar Educate myself about what? Come on, tell me.
How about you answer the question instead of dodging the question. Your answer is a non argument. Is is less than usefull. It is a non sequitur.
@@GospodGobar AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHHAHAH
@@flavius2884 slovenia did not have a capitalist enconomy. They had a bit more free market, and decentralized the enconomy, but the enconomybwas still controlled, but it was more like a moderate socialism or state capitalism, pretty similar to china
7:19 "... why communism failed..." Notice how when a plan fails in a socialist country it's always described as a failure of socialism, but when a plan fails in a capitalist country it always gets blamed on a particular politician/company/individual. Scapegoating rhetoric
@@tristan1833 thankfully this is changing
Because THE DECIDER OF ECONOMIC POLICY IS USUALLY THE ONE AT FAULT 😭 You think private companies like losing billions of dollars??? NO! They are incentivized and mislead by government policy, such as low interest rates, subsidies, and a rock solid guarantee of being bailed out when the bubble created by this illogical spur of investment finally pops
This would be a good point if communism actually succeeded but it never did.
At the very least Capitalism to some extent succeeded so when there are failures the system is given the benefit of the doubt.
Communism can only fail so many times before people stop blaming the leaders and start blaming the system itself.
@@AYTM1200 Communism is much more of a broad term as it more so sets the end goal and the theoretical foundation of society throughout history than determines how to achieve the end goal of Communism. Communists blame the system of many communist countries itself, that's why did Sino-Soviet split happened.
More often than not its the corrupt and inefficient state apparatus which hampers development and success, which is mostly what happens in capitalist wannabe countries....and by default in socialist countries where nothing can escape the state's grasp.
so basically dont be greedy and put money in to stuff that pay off/ are worth it
6:30 When you talk about farmers with more than 25 acres land being taken, and distributed to others, this was mostly not the case. Land was often taken from said landowners, who knew how to cultivate their land, and was given to the friends to whoever was in charge. At the top being Joseph Tito. These friends of the elites knew nothing about farming, so the farming industry in Slovenia took a massive hit. My grandfather owned a dairy farm and he got a knock on his door one day. He and his family had 1 day to vacate his entire farm. He argued and the communists dragged him out of his house and beat him till he got the message. I will never forgive communists. They destroy and take all while thinking they are righteous.
Slovenia began to industrialize in 1815 after the Congress of Vienna.
Belonging to Austria-Hungary was not a Slovenian choice or an advantage, because the monarchy always tried to hinder the development of non-German parts, and reduce them to a raw material base and a market for the products of industrialized parts. The same as the colonial powers with their dominions.
Not true. You repeat the Karagyorgyevich and communist propaganda
Everything's good under the hood until you have to fight and pay tribute to wars because of foreign interests, with no reward and little recognition. Then your people lives lost will be a footnote in someone else's history books
How to Get Rich Without Capitalism - by creating free trade hub zones where Capitalists could set up their bussinesses and by engaging in intense foreign trade with... guess who? CAPITALIST COUNTRIES - so, not really without Capitalism, but with a decentralized socialism - pretty much what Czechoslovakia wanted but were stopped by the invasion of the Warsaw Pact + USSR.
Btw when one company went bankrupt, who bought it, if there were no rich people due to wealth equality? I doubt anyone could afford to buy a bankrupt factory, let alone that a socialist state would allow that - so who would take control of such a bankrupt company? And how did Slovenian government check if the new managers would not just siphon money out of the state?
I'm born in SLovenia in 1962..i played a guitar in rock band and in 1976 i could afford Marshall amp an Fender stratocaster which are still legendary amps and guitars.(Hendrix used both) Many people drove BMW,Volvos,Mercedes..People were building weekend houses at the Croatian coast...Radio was playing western rock music...I was playing in a band during my military service and our repertoir was at least half of western rock/pop....I remember we were playing Cocain of J.J.Cale to army officers...Someting unumaginable to eastern block.....I could go on and on...
Yugoslavia was the best ❤
@@intel386DX I can also add the Elan skis with which Ingemar Stenmark won..legend...made in Slovenia
@@jackspeed650 Jugoslavijo, Jugoslavijo 🤩😍
9:05 Meanwhile, the GOST (state quality standards): *had better quality standards than NOW in CAPITALISM in EASTERN EUROPE*
An important data point here is that Slovenia was a part of Austria-Hungary for a long time, while the rest of Yugoslavia was mainly under the Ottomans.
Croatia was part of AU just as long as Slovenia but is not as successful. In my opinion the only reason for success in Slovenia is a lot less corruption not only in government but generally people are less corrupt in Slovenia as opposed to many places in Europe.
@@mlynto The parts of Yugoslavia which were under Ottoman rule even today have higher corruption levels and lower education levels.
@@mlynto But Croatain economy is healthy too.
maš prav, smo se v šoli tko učil, pa še železnco smo dobil
It is ill as hell.
As a neighbor who has lived in Ljubljana I applaud Slovenia for making us Yugoslavs proud of Slovenia and its achievements with a higher gdp per capita ppp (at 48k$) than Spain (46k$) and Japan (46k$) for example. And Croatia is following at 41k$ on par with Portugal (41k$). (Source trading economics gdp per capita PPP world)
That said I always admired Slovenians for not forgetting their Yugoslav past with many streets in Slovenian cities carrying the names of important Yugoslav dates, Partisan brigades or Tito himself like in Maribor, as without it Slovenia would never be what it is today. Slovenia is a positive outlook what can happen when you have generally educated people with generally business oriented minds that throughout their 33 year independent history have only twice chose inflammatory nationalist right wing government. For more than 25 years government has been left wing.
It's 32k per capita
@ I was talking about per capita ppp standing currently at 48.109$/per capita
I'm a Kosovar Albanian,born and raised in ex YU.First time I met a Slovene was when I was serving in the ex YU army.He told me that time,that Yugoslavia is a stupid idea.I couldn't believe how freely he was speaking in the communist country.Slovenes have a western mentality.Always they were the most developed republic,in ex YU.Slovenia was the most outspoken about what Serbia was doing to us Albanians.Slovenia should never be considered as a country in the Balkan Peninsula.
@@Polythinker when I was travelling by Interrailkarte forty years ago going from Graz to Ljubljana was more like going from one part of Austria to one other slightly poorer part of it, first when you went further south you realised that you were in the Balkan.
They were ahead of time always. In Serbia just nowadays we are realising how stupid was to build Yugoslavia in 1918.
@@ivancertic5197 Or what Slovenia would be taken by Germans otherwise...so that guy not smart... we in Slovenia love our brothers in Serbia.
@@arekcielec1177 thats not facts lol. standar transitional comi3 arguement. yugoslavia was good idea, commi3 one not...
@@THELORDVODKA ok let's then run our shit with 2 mill people incl women kids elderly. Slovenia is and always was a joke. Plz give me other arguments so which D do you prefer
I feel there are 2 important factor here. First, there must a person or a group of people who are smart, vigilant and dare to call out on things to the public. Second, the power to do something about it. If either factor worked without the other, the whole situation will be useless in lessening the corruption, stopping the over-investment on ineffective methods and other things. I think that is the reason why Slovenia was doing better than its neighbours.
I think it’s a bit anachronistic to think of Slovenia as in any way an Austrian “colony.” Most of it was core dynasty Habsburg territory for 500, if not 800, years-not a foreign acquisition won through war with the Ottomans (like Bosnia and parts of Serbia) or even marriage to the Hungarians (like Croatia). Today’s Slovenia was assembled from parts of duchies integral to the Holy Roman Empire, so in that sense German, but the commercial class mostly spoke Italian and peasant majority was Slavic. But it was probably only in the 19th century that ethnolinguistic, as opposed to class or religious or regional, identity predominated over everything else. The 70 years or so in which it spent grouped in a South Slav supra-nation-state are a blip in the centuries of historic (and geographic) forces that tied Slovenia north and west to its neighbors across the Alps, rather than south and east toward the Balkans.
That’s a really thoughtful analysis! The history of Slovenia’s integration with the Habsburg dynasty and its connection to the Holy Roman Empire paints a complex picture. As you mentioned, linguistic and ethnic identity didn’t take center stage until much later, and Slovenia’s ties were historically oriented north and west. It’s fascinating how short-lived the South Slav period is in comparison to those deep historical connections with Central Europe. Thanks for sharing this perspective!
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
I mostly agree. Still, the aristocracy knew Slovenian and used it partly also for their communication. Quite some were of Slovenian ethnicity. Quite some define themselves as Carniolans and still know Slovenian (Windischgraetz, Auersperg). The commercial class maybe used Italian in Carniola in the early 18th c., but mostly spoke 6 foreign languages (already Santonino reports that in the 15th c. about the ladies of Ljubljana. The protestant literary production of the 16th c is a proof of the slovenian identity of the aristocracy and high bourgeoisie.
@@markom1976 Can you be a “traitor” to an entity that you never felt much organic loyalty to any way? Slovenia was included in Yugoslavia in a shotgun marriage that really only made sense in the immediate chaos following WW1. Slovenes lost their Habsburg imperial protector, so sought safety in the new Yugoslav mini-empire, but they didn’t speak the Serbo-Croatian language and were always somewhat aloof from the Serb v Croat/Orthodox v Catholic conflict that defined the composite state till its death.
In fact, in many Slovene-speaking districts that held plebiscites in 1919 and 1920, a majority voted to join with German-speaking rump Austria, and they’re still there today. Contra Woodrow Wilson, economic/historic ties are thicker than blood or language…
@@jcliu " Slovenia sought safety in the new Yugoslav mini-empire". Yes, the price for safety is to colaborate in the mission to develop that undeveloped part of Europe. And what Slovenians did? they used the privileged role in YU and left it? Yes, you become a “traitor” by doing that.
Im Slovenian. I have to commend you for this quite exact presentation. I know its hard to cram a lot of data in this format.. Slovenia (and Yugoslavia) is quite a phenomenon in the sense of 'the socialism experiment'. I believe its the closest the system came to success in that regard. Id love a video on other particularities of Yugoslavia, some of them you already mentioned: the 'unaffiliated movement' started by Tito, which gave huge economic boost to Yugoslavia, the acceptance of abortion into law and constitution in the 70's, the country being a behemoth in terms of sports etc. Keep up the good work.
Non-Aligned Movement was a CIA ran operation. And Yugoslavia was a main terrorist country manufacturing and exporting weapons for Africa and middle east dictators. The same regimes made then genocides and wars out there. Tito was made a cult after death so that the people would never turn against communists and they could stay in power after changing to democracy. And that's what happened.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@markom1976 (slow clap)... . aaaand this, Ladies and gents, this comment and the pathologic mix of self-grandiose and victim mentality oozing from it, perfectly encapsulates, in just these few statements, the mentality and psyche of people responsible for the events that resulted in so many tragedies and atrocities that struck the once great country of Yugoslavia. On one hand you have my comment which represents the opinions of the majority of people who once lived in Yugoslavia, where we can point out the good and the bad sides of the yugoslavian socialist experiment, and on the other hand you have the reasoning of minority of people who by labeling their once brothers and sisters as traitors try to justify the power and land grab that happened after the disintegration of the country, masking it in nationalism, ethnic divisions and dehumanization and 'othering' of people.
The varied reasons for the country’s breakup ranged from the cultural and religious divisions between the ethnic groups making up the nation, to the memories of WWII atrocities committed by all sides, to centrifugal nationalist forces. However, a series of major political events served as the catalyst for exacerbating inherent tensions in the Yugoslav republic. Following the death of Tito in 1980, provisions of the 1974 constitution provided for the effective devolution of all real power away from the federal government to the republics and autonomous provinces in Serbia by establishing a collective presidency of the eight provincial representatives and a federal government with little control over economic, cultural, and political policy. External factors also had a significant impact. The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe in 1989, the unification of Germany one year later, and the imminent collapse of the Soviet Union all served to erode Yugoslavia’s political stability. As Eastern European states moved away from communist government and toward free elections and market economies, the West’s attention focused away from Yugoslavia and undermined the extensive economic and financial support necessary to preserve a Yugoslav economy already close to collapse. The absence of a Soviet threat to the integrity and unity of Yugoslavia and its constituent parts meant that a powerful incentive for unity and cooperation was removed.
Slobodan Milosevic, Serbia’s president from 1989, took advantage of the vacuum created by a progressively weakening central state and brutally deployed the use of Serbian ultra-nationalism to fan the flames of conflict in the other republics and gain legitimacy at home.
The ongoing effects of democratization in Eastern Europe were felt throughout Yugoslavia. As Milosevic worked to consolidate power in Serbia, elections in Slovenia and Croatia in 1990 gave non-communist parties control of the state legislatures and governments. Slovenia was the first to declare “sovereignty” in 1990, issuing a parliamentary declaration that Slovenian law took precedence over Yugoslav law. Croatia followed in May, and in August, the Yugoslav republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina also declared itself sovereign. Slovenia and Croatia began a concerted effort to transform Yugoslavia from a federal state to a confederation.
Slovenia and Croatia wanted to stay in Yugoslavia as a confederation of independent sovereign states, but that would mean that most of the economic wealth produced in Slovenia would stay in Slovenia and not be distributed to other former republics. But the power hungry politicians in Belgrade, once center of political and economic power of Yugoslavia, thought it would be easier to just take it all and they failed miserably. And what did they accomplish? Nothing. Except total death and destruction of this part of the Balkans. Today Serbia is geographicly the smallest its ever been in history while, at the same time, laggs behind economicaly and politically. Serbia still isn't a European Union member state. And while adopting the capitalist system and entering EU had some huge disadvantages for Slovenia (and Croatia), it is obvious that if Yugoslavia would stay together as confederation, it would today be the power house of Europe in many different ways
@@spurezurko Long, confusing , undefined explanation. My is better. Once traitors, always traitors.
So, shockingly, a Socialist system that heard "proliteriat dictatorship" and actually knew what that meant. And it worked. Who knew?
I HAVE AN AUTOMOBILE THAT WAS MANUFACTURED IN SLOVENIA. I HAVE TO EXPLAIN TO EVERYBODY THAT IT IS NOT SLOVAKIA...
Socialism in the front, capitalism in the back?
Its always the same
A good mixture of the positive sides of the socialism and the capitalism.(but not so good like the Scandinavian countries) And a lucky geolocation.
@you can say the same things about the US
@@gaborbakos7058Scandinavia is far from anything socialist. If social safety net that comes with high taxes and mixed economy model that just about every state in the developed world has is considered socialism then I don't even know what to say...
@@SmellYaLatter for that matter with high freedom of conducting business.
I am now a nationalist Slovenian (I’m from the us)
@@WorldlyJack geez...
Soyuj nerushimyj respublik...
Umm.
@@WildVoltorb leave them be
Well that sucks I guess :/
Do not come, do not come.
16:33 tell me you believe everything you read online without telling me..
At 13:40.
In Slovenia, the government gave the loans to business that were useful to the country.
While in capitalist economies, the loans are given to businesses that make the most profits for the billionaires.
Beautifull Slovakia, Ive enjoyed my time in Bratislava ❤
@@lazzanja123 sorry??
Not only Slovenia had learned how to govern themselves before they became independent. Croatia had been the part of the Kingdom of Hungary for 800 years, but they had a very high level autonomy. Hungarians decided in the military and foreign policies only and Croatia had their own parliament, government, leadership. Croatia is much bigger than Slovenia with much much more seaside, but they wasn't so developed and rich within Yugoslavia how Slovenia was.
Slovenia became independent in 1991, it's not so long ago, and it did not govern itself before that. When it comes to Yugoslavia, Slovenia had the headstart of being part of Austria since the middle ages, instead of either Hungary or the Ottoman Empire, and it was placed on the path between Trieste and Vienna, two major hubs during the Habsburg era. Before 1918, there was no Slovenia, only Slovene speakers who lived in the Archduchy of Austria. The idea of a Slovene nation started after Napoleon defeated the HRE.
The idea of our own nation is at least as old as our first printed book! Primož Trubar wrote “Lubi Slovenci” which means Dear Slovenians. Napoleon just noticed that the people in this region wanted autonomy, so to defy Austrian rulers he named this region Illyrian province and put Ljubljana as its capital.
@@hrybarYou’re taking that quote out of context
@@crsx1861 Well then, enlighten me.
@@hrybar Primož Trubar je sam sebe smatral za Kranjca, kot “Slovence” pa je smatral tiste, ki ne govorijo nemško. Današnji slovenski narod je izmišljotina iz 19. stoletja
Slovenia also allowed small private capitalist companies to exist, but they were limited to 10 employees. They would have to offer competitive wages or the workers would go to a large company.
And they were devilishly taxed
@zalozbaignis2229 it was so "bad", that most of them could afford second homes on the Adriatic coast.
So Avery, you essentially mean good head start prior to communism and embracing free market with modest government intervention.
Great video!
Slovenian are mostly an alpine folk that is hard-working, frugal, peaceful, honest and modest. None of this is common to the Balkan, and has very little to do with Communism, that had been imposed on them, until the early 90s when Slovenia ceded from Yugoslavia and went its own way as an independent nation.
Yugoslavia’s market socialist system produced sky-high unemployment. That’s why so many Yugoslavs went to Germany as guest workers. They couldn’t find jobs at home.
10 times more are going now ,Slovenia and Montenegro are only who retained same number off people like in 1991 ,all other Croatia ,Bosnia,Serbia,Macedonia lost 20-30% off people who went to west ,and is not slowing down ,it accelerated in 2000s .
Also difference is that during Yugoslavia people who went to Germany was uneducated low skill labor ,middle class did not go.ANd now well educated and middle class are leaving
@@dzonikg No question Germany today is still richer than Slovenia. My point was to show how this “without capitalism” schtick was not describing a panacea.
The fact that socialist Slovenia was more developed than certain parts of European capitalist countries like Spain (say Andalusia) or Southern Italy speaks volumes that the idiosyncrasy of humans groups is as important as the ideological model. I'm not saying ideology doesn't matter, you can see that when you compare North and South Korea. But the collective mindset of different peoples can make a huge difference that cannot be measured by Econometrics.
And thus Slovenia is a good example of why one region (or maybe two if we include Croatia) was so successful in Yugoslavia, whereas the Southern regions failed. And that's why Yugoslavia was unviable since the Northern Republics didn't want to subsidize the Southern regions.
As expected, this video reveals nothing of importance. Slovenia's economic success came mainly from receiving funds from the West to help destabilize Yugoslavia. Slovenian companies gained favorable opportunities and access to Western markets as early as the 1960s, specifically to create regional disparities within Yugoslavia. Even today, this seems to be Slovenia's primary role and geopolitical position, to prevent South Slavs to form a huge state, to compete with the establishet great powers. Evidence for this lies in the fact that Slovenia's export to other Yugoslav republics and Europe, remains similar to its level in 1980 when adjusted for dollar inflation. Independence and EU membership have provided no further advantage, as the financial incentives for their role in destabilizing Yugoslavia never increased to give Slovenians Austrian or German living standard. It was a serious mistake for the Yugoslav army to invest resources in preserving Slovenia from being absorbed by Austria or Italy in WW2. Once traitors, always traitors.
@@markom1976 i mean, i can see you must be from somewhere south 100% and i guess what youre writing might be true, am slovenian and admitting to it lol .. however it doesnt mean whole fkn country is made up of traitors and backstabbers as you describe it wtf ... its a couple of higher ups pulling all the strings and all we little people get sucked into it for better or for worse
Socialist Slovenia basically did what China's been doing for the last couple of decades: opening up the economy whilst having a centralised political and social system.
Basically. I second that. This line saves you 30 minutes of watching this bs video
0:20 Why is Kosovo shown but Vojvodina not? Also except these two, ALL of them were proper Republics not autonomous regions.
2:00 Again, showing modern borders that were not the case 100 years ago.
My grandfather was from slovenia. He grew up a farmer, became a very young partisan during the war. After the war he worked free labour on highway construction where in the afternoons he could learn a trade. Because he had been a partisan he was able to go to trade school for free. He became a tool and die maker. When he was being “recruited” into the secret police he fled to Canada.
It always struck me how he was able to get such state sponsored upward mobility. He also tolerated me how they would take scrap metal and machine it into combs to sell to people. Good quality durable combs were hard to come by at the time there. I didnt think too much about how that would have been black market under soviet style communism but a feature in slovenian market socialism.
Thanks for the video. It’s interesting to get more perspective on some of those old stories i heard long ago.
There's a reason Slavoj Zizek comes from there. He's like the only one speaking the kind of sense I grew up with.
As a Slovene, our country should not be used as an example for anything, unless it's how NOT to run things!
hahah res
as a Croatian living near the Slovenian border can confirm for Slovenia and Croatia
The grass is always greener on the other side.
Ah, we are very good at complaining about our country. Slovenia is not the best but it is far from worst. We are doing FINE. We are just always comparing ourselves with Austria and Switzerland
As a Croatian guy, i agree, you can't run anything, and are significantly worse than our beautiful country
It wasn't as easy and as simple as suggested in the video... But its not compleatly wrong. Slovenia liberated most of its own territory in ww2 and that is also why in later Yugoslavia they had as much autonomy as they had. Before our boomer parents and grandparents took over, the political, economic, industrial and cultural leaders had real liberal mind sets and were visionaries in there fields. We had socialist policies and very liberal and community minded leaders. As well as very hard working and farming class people. Who were very motivated and less corrupt. We owned our own banking, iron&steel production, agriculture and transport and power production. In the 90's to 2000's it was all sold by Tycoons and corrupt polititions and now we are poor again and under the boot of the EU and foreign millioner owners of companies. Also you confused kosovo and bosnia as well as you showed Koper where Triest is, and a few other minor things.
Last time I was this early Yugoslavia was still a country
Yugoslavia wasn't communist. No state was determined to be communist. It was labeled socialist, as a stepping stone towards communism.
How to become rich without capitalism in 3 simple steps:
1. Create large country full of political tension and chose whatever system you would like that is not capitalism.
2. Funnel all resources into one region.
3. Separate the region from the rest as another country.
Congratulations. You have created a rich country without capitalism.
A nice video, but you are being too harsh on the other Yugoslav republics. Much of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia had literacy rates less than 30% in 1930, they had a much longer way to go than Slovenia who was already decently developed and all in all didn't do to bad for themselves considering.
What do we have now?
Bad railines, long waiting lines in medicine and slow construction.
Being on the border between east and West also helped a LOT. My dad worked in a local foundry (in Slovenia) and they used to sell some products to East Germany at 4 Marks per kilogram even though they couldnt sell that same product in West Germany for more than 1,1 Marks per kilogram. The fact that east and west couldnt trade directly helped make great profits despite there being quite a lot of inefficiencies.
Great video, I love the way you did such thorough research on such an underknown topic. I didn't know much about Slovenia either, except for the fact that there is a Lublyana street in the city I live in and a monument dedicated to Soviet-Yugoslav friendship.
Wasn't Yugoslavia "socialist" only on paper? They were independent from the USSR (were not in the Warsaw Pact) and considered theyself neutral during the Cold War. They also allowed for elements of capitalistic market economy and free enterprise. Since they were also a conglomerate of different nationalities (serbs, croats, slovenians) they allowed for a lot of autonomy to regions and Slovenia was the most developed and "capitalistic" of all regions.
Yugoslavia? Mass killings, disappearances, concentration camps, terror, Udba-the terrible murderous secret police, and poverty. It was a horror land, a communist hell, but supported by the West. I'm Slovenian ...
According to the video, decisions in companies were made by a council of worker representatives. Not by shareholders. Decisive power is not granted by ownership of capital, but by simply being a worker. That’s one defining feature of Socialism.
This video could *really* benefit from giving your definition of Capitalism somewhere at the start, from skeeming the video it seems like slovenia relaxed price controls which is a step towards capitalism. every country is on a socialist-capitalist spectrum anyway, so claiming "without capitalism" and not giving your definition of Capitalism kills the point of the video for me.
The people owned the businesses. I thought I was clear on that being a big difference. But apparently I should have been clearer.
@@HistoryScope when you say the people owned businesses, this is always the case, even government is composed of people, your ownership is proportional to what autonomy you have to exercise ownership rights. If I own 100% of the business I can run it however I want, I can fire and hire whoever I want, I can sell it, I can even demolish it. Usually there is some contractual shareholders agreement that operates under the rule of the law in that region. Workers being shareholders is not socialism, this is common practice in capitalism, what is distinct in socialism is that some people that belong to party are only ones that can exercise total ownership over everything and rent out businesses to other people.
There was most definitely no capitalism. There was some form of "free market" economy. But no way of getting rich by virtue if "capital". No stocks. No fiduciary responsibility for enshi*ification to make stock prices go up. Very limited private enterprise. You had to work. And get paid for the work you did. That's it.
Throwing in that random Star Trek reference is just hilarious!
Timestamp ?
@@jst8922 7:33 (mentioning the "Rules of Acquisiton")
We are prone to complaining, but too often forget how lucky we are to live in a fairly prosperous (not rich) country that has always strived for peace! ❤ Also, most families today still live in the apartments they bought for very low prices from the government in the time of Yugoslavia. It's a big plus!
GDP per capita is misleading. An average Slovenian was better off than an average Western European. The lower average value is misleading, it's because of the absence of super-rich (a side effect of efficient socialism)
.
❤Great, I have learnt a lot from this video, now I will research on it.❤