I'd be careful about taking this kind of data and calling it an "egalitarian revolution" in Eastern Europe, as this plays into Margaret Thatcher's condemnation of socialism in her famous "rather the poor were poorer, provided the rich were less rich" argument of 1990. Sure, the governments of Eastern Europe seized the capital and enterprises of the rich, and thus forced egalitarianism on the population, but these policies also stagnated Eastern European policies and left the common folk worse off than their Western European neighbors by the end of the Cold War. In fact the Soviet model of socialism had so drained the economy of Czechoslovakia that by the 1960s, after two decades of socialism, the Communists in Prague looked to reopen their economy to the West--and not in condemnation of Marxism, but simply to fix a problem that was blatantly obvious for all to see.

With that being said, I would argue, given my personal values (and there is the problem: what constitutes a "positive reality" is subjective; perhaps you still see it as a positive reality that the income gap decreased in Czechoslovakia despite the fact that the poor were poorer by the end of the Cold War than they were in Czechoslovakia's Western neighbors), that the forced implementation of the Soviet model did have some positive influences on social development, notably in the general acceptance of the value of socialist policies and in the rejection of religion and other traditional values that can still be seen in the post-Soviet dominated regions of East Germany and the Czech Republic. Others will feel differently about this.