Question: How did Communism affect the Population of Eastern Europe?

Anyone have an estimate of how much Communism affected the demographics of eastern Europe?

Had communism not occurred, by what percentage do you think the populations of the average Soviet and Eastern European country might have changed (up or down)?

I'm trying to gauge what Eastern Europe would look like without the World Wars (or by shortening them).

You have many factors:

1. Men killed in combat and related demographic decline.
2. Additional communicable diseases like the Spanish flu
3. Communist purges and ethnic slaughters (Ukraine, 1930's).
4. Incompetant management of resources (Ukraine, 1930's).
5. Repression of religion (I'm not sure how much this affected the birthrate but emphirical evidence of Eastern demographics implies it did).

For example, Bulgaria and Poland's population today is largely the same as in 1939.
The Ukraine's expanded 30%. Both have plunging birthrates.

However, Great Britain, France and Germany's didn't expand much either (20-50% based on the country).

Did communismn really have a major demographic impact?

Thanks.
 
OTL Central/White Russian (European) birth rates are lower than the rest of Europe because of the 3 As: alcoholism, AIDS and abortion. Large numbers of Russian men are alcoholics, which causes "brewers' droop."
Abortion is still popular for birth-control.

Moscow is also having difficulty importing enough non-Europeans to do manual labour because White Russians are so xenophobic.
Russia is one of the few European nations that is reluctant to allow non-whites to immigrate from
Asia or Africa. Yes .... I know many readers do not consider most of Russia to be "European"......

Now we wonder how Russian attitudes affected birth-rates in Eastern Europe???
 
Last edited:
Communism industrialized and urbanized their populations while stifling religious faith (less fecundity) and natural economic prosperity (less extra money to spend on children, both parents must work full time jobs in many cases), so it's no surprise that they had slower population growth. Industrialization and urbanization does the same to Japan and Western Europe, with immigration balancing things out in the United States.

I think the main issue with communist states in in particular is that they simply aren't known for providing good working environments for immigrants, or for fostering childbirth.
 
A huge subject. It would help to know more about this timeline's wars and borders. I'll mention another factor: emigration. Reducing pressure from the more active and frustrated citizens by making them go away is a great safety valve for a decaying regime. And once communist regimes collapse leading to poverty, there is an obvious incentive for even more emigration, as we have seen in OTL during the past 2 decades.

And another matter, even more important than the size of the populations, is how they would develop if they were not subjected to communist social engineering.
 
Last edited:
Not directly related, but without the forced migrations in 1945-1946, ethnic borders would still be a big problem.
 
Compared to the effect of WW2, the effects of the Communist decades are in most places probably rather small.

By the way, an exception to the rule of low population growth should be Romania, which frantically tried to increase its population in the Ceaucescu-era.
 
Compared to the effect of WW2, the effects of the Communist decades are in most places probably rather small.
WW2 was definitely more physically destructive but happened within a rather short time. Neither did Nazi rule have the same empty utopian promises, at least not for the local inhabitants, whose role was simply to be servants. Nazism was thus fairly easy to cast off once physically driven out. On the other hand, Communism had four decades to inculcate the population with poor economic and social habits.
 
WW2 was definitely more physically destructive but happened within a rather short time. Neither did Nazi rule have the same empty utopian promises, at least not for the local inhabitants, whose role was simply to be servants. Nazism was thus fairly easy to cast off once physically driven out. On the other hand, Communism had four decades to inculcate the population with poor economic and social habits.

A rather short time which saw the death of 20 million Soviets, 6 million Poles, etc. It's really extremely hard for "poor economic and social habits" to top a country being turned into a warzone, and large sections being turned into mass graves.
 

Angrybird

Banned
Anyone have an estimate of how much Communism affected the demographics of eastern Europe?
Had communism not occurred, by what percentage do you think the populations of the average Soviet and Eastern European country might have changed (up or down)?

The census of 1926 projected an increase of the population of the Soviet Union to 178 million by 1937 - the actual number turned out to be just 162 million.

Some 16 million people had either been killed or prevented from beeing born in just a decade.

Total demographic loss caused by Communism from 1917-1953 in the USSR was roughly 50 million people - in the rest of Eastern Europe perhaps 5 million.
 
WW2 was definitely more physically destructive but happened within a rather short time. Neither did Nazi rule have the same empty utopian promises, at least not for the local inhabitants, whose role was simply to be servants. Nazism was thus fairly easy to cast off once physically driven out. On the other hand, Communism had four decades to inculcate the population with poor economic and social habits.

I take it we talk about Eastern Europe and not the former USSR which had fared far worse due to what happened already before the war and 70 years of self-destruction.

Let us have a look at OTL numbers from ca. 1946/47-1990:

Poland 23.9million-> 38.1 Million, +59%
Czechoslovakia 12.0 -> 15.6 Million, +30%
Hungary 9.0 -> 10.4 Million, +15%
Romania 15.8 -> 23.2 Million, +47%
Bulgaria 7.0 -> 8.7 Million, +24%

compared to a few random Capitalist European nations
Sweden 6.6 -> 8.7 Million, +32%
Netherlands 9 -> 15 Million, +66%
France 40.5 -> 56.6 Million, +41%
Italy 45.2 -> 56.7 Million, +25%
Belgium 8.3 -> 10.0 Million, +20%
Denmark 4.1 -> 5.0 Million, +22%

I am consciously not including the Germanies as the inter-German demographics are a special case.

However, we can see here that some Western countries like Belgium and Denmark (Italy is a bit hard to compare due to emigration) don't display a much stronger growth than Hungary. Also, the only Western Nation which displays a stronger growth than Poland is Netherlands. However, the Netherlands have experienced massive Immigration from its former colonies, Turkey and North Africa.

I daresay that urbanization, industrialization, changed gender roles and modernisation (developments which have both been fostered by Capitalist as well as Communist societies, just in different shapes) have had more of an effect on later 20th century demographics than the difference between Capitalism and Communism.

The difference would probably be that an Eastern Europe which had never been Communist would have many more immigrants having made these prosperous states their homes (at least concerning Czechoslovakia and Hungary, perhaps also Poland).
 
The census of 1926 projected an increase of the population of the Soviet Union to 178 million by 1937 - the actual number turned out to be just 162 million.

You quote a Communist projection into the future and call it realistic? :D

Though this decade had actually been atrocious on the Soviet Union, I said before that the effects on Eastern Europe have hardly been as tough.

Another factor which hadn't been mentioned yet is the expulsion of the Germans. But I would count that as an effect of WW2, not of Communism.
 
The difference would probably be that an Eastern Europe which had never been Communist would have many more immigrants having made these prosperous states their homes (at least concerning Czechoslovakia and Hungary, perhaps also Poland).

I think one should also expect more emigration from the poorer nations/poorer parts of nations to the more prosperous parts of Eastern Europe, to Western Europe and to the Americas if people were a lot more free to leave than IOTL. Then again, say the Baltic states saw a lot of people escape Soviet rule during and immediately after WWII - without the war and annexation by the USSR, these states would have had more people than IOTL circa 1950, and even if there still was emigration due West, it would have affected these areas less.

One thing to remember is that due to the effects of the world wars and under the Soviet system, especially during the Stalin era, a lot of people were moved about in Eastern Europe. A Eastern Europe that didn't see Communism or WWI and WWII would not only have more people, and the nations would not only have different borders, but also the national populations would have different ethnic, linguistic and cultural compositions, sometimes dramatically so. Take again the Baltic states - assuming they would still be independent ITTL, it would be highly unlikely they would have as big Russian minorities than they have had IOTL as a result of the Soviet era - instead of 25-30% Russians, we might expect that Estonia and Latvia would have, at most, a Russian minority of 10-15%. This all would also have an effect on population growth and economic development in various countries - sometimes positive, sometimes negative.
 
A rather short time which saw the death of 20 million Soviets, 6 million Poles, etc. It's really extremely hard for "poor economic and social habits" to top a country being turned into a warzone, and large sections being turned into mass graves.
The thread is entitled "How did Communism affect the Population of Eastern Europe?" and not "what caused Eastern Europe to have a low population," in which case one of the biggest "whats" would, of course, be "Nazi hordes came and murdered about 30 million people."
Nazis win the brutality contest over the Soviets, obviously. But Communism has a more lasting influence simply due to the length of time it had to do its work.

I daresay that urbanization, industrialization, changed gender roles and modernisation (developments which have both been fostered by Capitalist as well as Communist societies, just in different shapes) have had more of an effect on later 20th century demographics than the difference between Capitalism and Communism.

The difference would probably be that an Eastern Europe which had never been Communist would have many more immigrants having made these prosperous states their homes (at least concerning Czechoslovakia and Hungary, perhaps also Poland).
Right. My point was that the result of the system under communism, rather than Nazi policy, is the driving force behind modern demographic trends. Whether these are comparable to western ones is interesting but not relevant to that immediate question. In any case the main visible difference between the west and Warsaw Pact nations seems to be that of post-Communist emigration.
 
Last edited:
Before the 1980s, population trends in Communist Europe were very similar to those in Western Europe and North America. So while the system worked, it seems to have worked just as well in terms of allowing people to multiply. However, where Communism has collapsed, birth rates have generally also collapsed and death rates have soared. I think this has more to do with the economic collapses these countries experienced though, rather than any inherent flaw of Communism.

So the short answer is: without Communism, populations would be much the same. Without the collapse of Communism (or similar region-wide economic collapse), populations would me significantly higher since those countries would have another 30 years or so growing at the same rates as the rest of the industrial world.

fasquardon
 
Right. My point was that the result of the system under communism, rather than Nazi policy, is the driving force behind modern demographic trends. Whether these are comparable to western ones is interesting but not relevant to that immediate question. In any case the main visible difference between the west and Warsaw Pact nations seems to be that of post-Communist emigration.

Why is it not relevant? If you remove Communism (and along with it the exclusion from the Western European market) out of the equasion, the Eastern European nations are as societies comparable to Western European nations, some rather to Germany and Austria, some rather to Italy or Portugal, deeply Catholic and rural Poland perhaps most likely to Ireland. All the trends I enumerated were/are present in Communist as well as in Capitalist developed nations.

And I would say one should be careful with the post-Communist Emigration. You might have said numbers of migrants anyways, just earlier - as a less noticeable, slower flow which nevertheless adds up over the decades.


I think one should also expect more emigration from the poorer nations/poorer parts of nations to the more prosperous parts of Eastern Europe, to Western Europe and to the Americas if people were a lot more free to leave than IOTL.

I agree very much so. But that makes things very complicated. For example, the industrial areas of Germany (and likewise Vienna) attracted mainly Eastern European migrants prior to World War II. If this source is not cut off- would post-WW2 Germany and Poland still look for "guest workers" from Southern Europe instead as per OTL?

And an interesting question would be: I am quite certain that we can assume the Eastern European nations to be far more economically successful than in OTL.
So it would be very different to foretell at which Point of time either of them turns from a society issuing emigrants into one which rather attracts immigrants.

What I'd like to say: whoever uses such thoughts for a timeline should mark the general tendencies, but actually still enjoys a lot of leeway.
 
Last edited:
The census of 1926 projected an increase of the population of the Soviet Union to 178 million by 1937 - the actual number turned out to be just 162 million.

Some 16 million people had either been killed or prevented from beeing born in just a decade.

Total demographic loss caused by Communism from 1917-1953 in the USSR was roughly 50 million people - in the rest of Eastern Europe perhaps 5 million.

this is ridiculous, just because some future prognose turned out wrong doesnt mean the extra expected people got killed, pure propaganda...:mad:
 
Top