The East European Revolution of 1989: Is it surprising that we were surprised?

Abstract

Many aspects of the East European Revolution are controversial, but on one point everyone agrees: it caught the world by surprise. Even local dissidents were stunned by the sudden turn of events. We will never know how many East Europeans did foresee the explosion of 1989. But at each step, accounts painted a picture of nations united in amazement. To my knowledge, only one study addresses the issue systematically. Four months after the breaching of the Berlin Wall, the Allensbach Institute asked a broad sample of East Germans: A year ago did you expect such a peaceful revolution? Only 5 percent answered though 18 percent responded yes, but not that fast. Fully 76 percent admitted to being totally surprised. These figures are all the more remarkable given the I-knew-it-would-happen fallacy-the human tendency to exaggerate foreknowledge (Baruch Fischhoff and Ruth Beyth, 1975). Yet in hindsight the revolution appears as inevitable. In each of the six countries the leadership was despised, economic promises remained unfulfilled, and basic freedoms existed only on paper. More importantly, winds of change in the Soviet Union were making Soviet intervention increasingly unlikely. But if the revolution was indeed inevitable, why was it not foreseen? What kept us from noticing signs that now, after the fact, are so plainly visible? I. Preference Falsification and Revolutionary Bandwagons

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 179 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.