TAMÁS CSILLAG AND IVÁN SZELÉNYI Drifting from Liberal Democracy: Traditionalist/Neo- conservative Ideology of Managed Illiberal Democratic Capitalism in Post-communist Europe (original) (raw)
Related papers
Most European post-communist societies after 1989-1991 appeared to be on the road to liberal democratic capitalism. However, a quarter of century after the change of the system, at least some of the countries - Russia and Hungary in particular (arguably setting trend for many other nations) - began to drift sharply away from liberal democracy. We treat liberalism and democracy as two distinct dimensions of “good governance”. We interpret liberalism as separation of powers and security of private property rights. We interpret democracy as majoritarian rule. As the regimes shift to illiberalism, secure private property tends to be converted into “fief” (neo-patrimonialism – like during the rule of Yeltsin), or eventually into “benefice” (neo-prebendalism, this turn happened with the rise of Putin to power). While the principle of majoritarian rule is retained, it is also “managed”. But as long as democratic institutions operate, as long as leaders are elected to office the ruling elites of illiberal democracies need a legitimating ideology which can appeal to a broader electorate. We call this post-communist neo-conservative ideology. Post-communist neo-conservatism emphasizes the value of patriotism, religion and traditional family values much like some of the socially conservative neo-cons in the USA do. On the other hand, unlike their American soul brothers, the post-communist neo-cons attribute the critical role of preserving these values to the state.
Neoliberalism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union
The SAGE Handbook of Neoliberalism, 2018
This chapter explores the evolution of neoliberalism in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. It examines the nature of the transition from ‘communism’, and assesses the degree to which neoliberal ideas and policies were imported ‘from the West’ rather than developing out of a process of East-West interchange. ‘Proto-neoliberal’ ideas and social forces, it shows, were present in Eastern Europe and the former USSR prior to 1989. In the following decades, successive waves of neoliberal reforms were implemented by domestic elites, with the support of Western policymakers, business leaders and think-tanks as well as international organisations. As events since the 2008 crisis have demonstrated, the logic of the transformation was to open up the economies of the region to the exigencies of global capital, while restructuring and bolstering the power of domestic elites. The outcome has been growing disillusionment and public discontent with simplistic attempts to install a market economy and Western-style liberal democracy, as well as with the political forces, at home and abroad, that have pushed this process along. The capitalist triumphalism of the early 1990s has everywhere given way to the dystopian realities of an authoritarian, restrictive and reactionary mode of neoliberal capitalism.
After Neoliberal Transformation . Authoritarian Tendencies in Central and Eastern Europe 1
2018
is a Czech historian and political analyst currently living in Finland. She holds a Ph.D. in historical anthropology by the Faculty of Humanities of Charles University. Her specialisation is Central European and Russian history and politics in the 19th and 20th century. She regularly comments contemporary Czech and Russian politics and international affairs in several Czech newspapers. Her new book about contemporary politics of Putin's Russia has been published in November 2015. IMPRINT 2018 transform! european network for alternative thinking and political dialogue Square de Meeûs 25 1000 Brussels, Belgium transform! europe is partially financed through a subsidy from the European Parliament. This work by transform! is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at office (at) transform-network.net.
Disenchantment (?) with Liberalism in Post-Soviet Societies
In post-Soviet societies, liberalism has come to be perceived as contradictory to the rule of law and norms of decency, even as the antithesis of order and associated with chaos. However, it may be accurate to talk about disenchantment with misperceived liberalism and a defensive reflex by societies that are struggling with their post-totalitarian burdens in the face of misrepresented liberal ideas. It is important to analyze the reasons for, implications of, and ways to overcome this awkward phenomenon, since the major problems of the region cannot be solved without recourse to liberal ideas. The paper argues that the methods used to bring liberalism to a number of post-Soviet societies, particularly Russia, proved to be wrong. Nonetheless, we have to be optimistic about the prospects for developing liberal ideas in the region. For one thing, contrary to what is usually stated, the seeming disenchantment with liberalism does not follow from the civilizational underpinnings of contemporary post-Soviet societies. The basic ideas of liberal philosophy are not something unwanted by or alien to the great majority of post- Soviet people. Their disenchantment with liberalism is not a matter of general principles, but rather a collateral result of abuses of liberalism and systematic disinformation. It seems proper to assert that, after the collapse of the totalitarian system, post-Soviet societies have returned to their natural path of developing liberal values, which had been seriously interrupted by the Soviet system. A liberal outlook is indispensable to finding durable solutions to most problems and difficulties that have befallen post-Soviet societies. In the examples of Russia and Kazakhstan, it can be argued that a post-Soviet society will inevitably transition to a society with a more liberal outlook, if the internal demands for achieving this goal can be maintained. However, robust internal demands for liberalization can emerge only through promoting a kind of liberalism that is acceptable to the minds and hearts of the people and elites of post-Soviet countries, which takes into account the peculiarities of their economic and social structures.