World Social Forum

Every now and then I bemoan the lack of journals giving an adequate coverage of European life and policies. Any amount of stuff on Europe as a concept or European Union policies – but virtually nothing which gives us a comparative sense of national policies (in those fields still within the control of member states). Today I came across a French website - Books and Ideas - which does at least seem to offer, in the English language, some non-Anglo-Saxon perspectives.
And one of its contributions offered an answer to something which had been puzzling me since last summer when I wrote an article for a special issue of a Romanian journal which was devoted to the world a decade after 09/11. My piece was entitled "The Dog that didn’t Bark” and focussed on the general failure of radicals to capitalise on the global crisis – and, more specifically, the apparent failure of the World Social Forum which had been so active until 2005. The Forum is apparently right now holding another of its huge meetings - in Brazil (significant that I get the detail only from a German media source) - and Geoffrey Pleyers suggests two things in his article in BooksandIdeas - first that the Forum has been a victim of its own success (with many politicians now using their rhetoric); and, second, that the movement has now fragmented around three distinct trends -

1. A Focus on the Local Level
Rather then getting involved in a global movement and international forums, a wide “cultural trend” of the alter-globalization movement considers that social change may only occur by implementing participatory, convivial and sustainable values in daily practices, personal life and local spaces. In many Italian social centres, critical consumption and local movements have often taken the space previously occupied by the alter-globalization movement. Local “collective purchase groups” have grown and multiplied in Western Europe and North America. Most of them gather a dozen activists who organize collective purchases from local and often organic food producers. Their goal is to make quality food affordable, to bring an alternative to the “anonymous supermarket” and to promote local social relations. The movement for a “convivial degrowth” belongs to a similar tendency and aims to implement a lifestyle that is less of a strain on natural resources and reduces waste.


2. Citizens’ and Experts’ Advocacy Networks
Rather than massive assemblies and demonstrations, another component of the movement believes that concrete outcomes may be achieve through efficient single-issue networks able to develop coherent arguments and efficient advocacy. Issues like food sovereignty, Third World debt and financial transactions are considered both as specific targets and as an introduction to broader questions. Through the protection of water, activists raise for instance the issue of global public goods, oppose global corporations and promote the idea of “the long-term efficiency of the public sector” (“Water network assembly”, European Social Forum 2008). After several years of intense exchanges among citizens and experts focusing on the same issue, the quality of the arguments has considerably increased. In recent years, they have become the core of social forums’ dynamic. Although they get little media attention, these networks have proved efficient in many cases. During the fall of 2008, the European Water Network contributed to the decision by the City of Paris to re-municipalize its water distribution, which had been managed previously by private corporations. Debt cancellation arguments have been adopted by Ecuadorian political commissions, and some alter-globalization experts have joined national delegations in major international meetings, including the 2008 WTO negotiations in Geneva.

3. Supporting Progressive Regimes
A third component of the movement believes that a broad social change will occur through progressive public policies implemented by state leaders and institutions. Alter-globalization activists have struggled to strengthen state agency in social, environmental and economic matters. Now that state intervention has regained legitimacy, this more “political” component of the movement believes that time has come to join progressive political leaders’ efforts. It has notably been the case around President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela as well as President Evo Morales in Bolivia. New regional projects and institutions have been launched on this basis, like the “Bank of the South” that has adopted the main tasks of the IMF in the region. For historical reasons and their political cultures, Latin American and Indian activists are used to proximity with political parties and leaders.

And a German journal gives a frightening insight into the Greek situation -

The Greek economy is not productive enough to generate growth. Aside from olive oil, textiles and a few chemicals, there are hardly any Greek products suitable for export. On the contrary, Greece is dependent on food imports to feed its population.
"Greece has been living beyond its means for years," an unpublished study by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) concludes. "The consumption of goods has exceeded economic output by far."
Especially devastating is the assessment that the DIW experts make about the condition of an industry that is generally seen as a potential engine for growth: tourism. According to the DIW study, the Greek tourism industry concentrates on the summer months, with almost nothing happening throughout the rest of the year. There is almost no tourism in the cities, which translates into low overall capacity utilization and high costs for hotel operators. By contrast, capacity utilization in the hotel sector is much more uniform in other Mediterranean countries.
According to the study, a key cause of the problem is the relatively poor price/performance ratio. In Mediterranean tourism, Greece has to compete with non-euro countries like Croatia, Tunisia, Morocco, Bulgaria and Turkey, which can offer their services at significantly lower prices. The per-hour wage in the hospitality industry was recently measured at €11.39 in Greece, as compared with only €8.49 in Portugal, €4 in Turkey and as little as €1.55 in Bulgaria. The study arrives at grim conclusions, noting that the drastic austerity programs will not only remain ineffective, but will also stigmatize the country as "Europe's problem child" for a long time to come.

The painting is a....Turner, of course!

culture matters

I changed the title of yesterday’s post after inserting some of the argument of the 2nd article on Greece (which tried to explain what might be called the "amoral familism” of the country – and its neighbours such as Romania and Bulgaria (to a lesser extent I feel)
I also added the link to the brilliant paper about Romania written by Ionitsa in 2005 which had used that term -

Leaders are supposed to be promoters of their protégés; and clan-based loyalties take precedence over public duties for salaried public officials. Such behavior can be found not only in the central government but also in local administration, the political opposition, academia and social life in general, i.e. so it permeates most of the country’s elites. Classic studies of Mezzogiorno in Italy call this complex of attitudes “amoral familism”: when extended kin-based associations form close networks of interests and develop a particularistic ethics centered solely upon the group’s survival7. This central objective of perpetuity and enrichment of the in-group supersedes any other general value or norm the society may have, which then become non-applicable to such a group’s members. At best, they may be only used temporarily, as instruments for advancing the family’s goals − as happens sometimes with the anti-corruption measures.
Since Romanian society, like others in the Balkans, still holds onto such pre-modern traits, its members are neither very keen to compete openly nor are they accustomed to the pro-growth dynamics of modernity. Social transactions are regarded as a zero-sum game; a group’s gain must have been brought about at the expense of others. This may be a rational attitude for traditional, static societies, where resources are limited and the only questions of public interest have to do with redistribution.

And I was reminded of a recent discussion I had with an ex-Deputy Minister who was bemoaning the lack in public life here of the soft skills of communications and cooperation operating for the public good. And of my realisation of how rare was the enthusiasm of the lady from Pernik. It takes me back to the early days of my work in Romania when the Head of the European Delegation handed us summaries of Robert Putnam’s Making Democracy work; civic traditions in modern Italy which had recently appeared (I already had a copy of the book). She had quickly sussed out what Putnam called the „lack of social capital” in the country – ie the lack of trust and associations. Thanks to the World Bank, academic writing about Social capital then became a cottage industry. I’m not sure if we are any the wiser as a result!
As I’ve noticed before, "path dependency” is the phrase used by those who feel that it is impossible for a country to shake off its history. And that takes us into the murky areas of cultural studies – and of
Samuel Huntington whoe views are considered so offensive here since he suggests that the line dividing civilised from non-civilised countries puts Balkan countries on the wrong side (mainly for their Orthodoxy). But his stuff is worth reading – particularly Culture Matters which is a marvellous coverage of the proceedings of a conference on the subject which brought together in argument a lot of scholars.

I wrote recently about a new Gallery of Contemporary Art opening in Sofia’s south park – a magnificent renovation of an old mansion. Courtesy of Norway, Iceland and Leichtenstein no less. I paid my 3 levs and ventured in – and was bitterly disappointed. No Bulgarian artists – just a few small Chagall and Picasso etchings – and a large exhibition of Scandinavian ceramics. The second floor was roped off. I ceremoniously tore up my entrance ticket at the reception – and roundly chided them for false pretences. Apparently all the fault of the Prime Minister who wanted it open earlier rather than later to show what his government is capable of (the rehabilitation work only started in October). OK the building is nice – as are the large (Bulgarian) scupltures which surround it. But don’t bother going in!
And an example of the problems of moving around in this part of the world. Next week I will be up on the Bulgarian side of the the Danube just south west of the city of Craiova – as the crow flies it is little more than 90 kilometres from there to Vidin where there is a ferry from Calafin. I thought it would be a good idea if Daniela came down from Bucharest and met up at Vidin – so that we could explore the fascinating mountain area which is the north-west. In fact it will take her about 4 hours to make that 90 kms (much longer if she were to take the train) on the Romanian side. Two hours by bus; waiting time 2 hours; and 15 minutes the ferry which deposits you apparently 5 kilomtres from the town of Vidin- with no onward public transport! A bridge is half built (with European money) – but the Bulgarian side is bogged down in commercial arguments – and it could be another 18 monthe before it is ready (watch this space). I remember a woman from the cabinet Office here telling me that it took her a similar time and 3 changes of transport to move a similar distance within southern Bulgaria.
An interesting post this time last year - on government matters.

Journals worth Reading?

A few weeks back I made a nasty crack about the superficiality of newspaper coverage. Some personal exchanges I’ve had since have raised the question of which (English language) journals would pass a test which included such criteria as –

- Depth of treatment

- Breadth of coverage (not just political)

- Cosmopolitan in taste (not just anglo-saxon)

- clarity of writing

- skeptical in tone

My own regular favourite reading includes The Guardian Long Reads and book reviews, London Review of Books and the New York Review of Books – and the occasional glance at the New Yorker; New Statesman; and Spiked.

This choice betrays a certain “patrician” position – not too “tribal”…….although my initial google search limited itself to such epithets as “left”, “progressive”, “green”;; “radical” and “humanist”. 
It threw up a couple of lists – one with “progressive” titles, the other with “secular” . 
From these, I have extracted the other titles which might lay some claims to satisfying the stringent criteria set above…..

Aeon; an interesting new cultural journal
Book Forum; an amazing daily service which gives you about a dozen links from mainly academic journals –  a good idea but just far too US centred for my taste…..

Brain Pickings; a superb personal endeavour which gives extended excerpts from classic texts about creativity etc. One of the best

Dissent; a US leftist stalwart 

Jacobin; a new leftist E-mag with a poor literary style

Lettre International; a fascinating quarterly published in German, Italian, Spanish, Hungarian and Romanian (where it has just celebrated its 100^th edition), it makes available translated articles with superb etchings..

Literary Hub; a literary site with original selections and frequent posts – ONE OF MY HOT FAVOURITES
Los Angeles Review of Books;great new journal 

Monthly Review; an old US stalwart with good solid analysis

Mother Jones; more journalistic US progressive

N+1; one of the new and smoother leftist mags

New Humanist; an important strand of UK thoughtNew Left Review; THE UK leftist journal - running on a quarterly basis since 1960 

New Republic; solid US monthly

Prospect (UK); rather too smooth UK monthly

The American Prospect (US); ditto US

Public Books – an impressive recent website (2012) to encourage open intellectual debate
Quillette; a "free-thinkng" contrarian and libertarian journal 

Resurgence and Ecologist; ditto UK Greens

Sceptic; celebration of important strand of UK scepticism

Slate; more right wing

Social Europe; a european social democratic E-journal whose short articles are a bit too predictable for my taste

The Atlantic; one of my favourite US mags
The Conversation; a rare venture which uses academics as journalists 

The Nation; America's oldest weekly, for the "progressive" community

The New Yorker; very impressive US writing
Washington Independent Review; a new website borne of the frustration about the disappearance of so many book review columns

World Socialist Website; good on critical global journalism

After due consideration, I would now add Book Forum, Brain Pickings, Literary Hub and Public Books to the small list of my current regular reads – although I wish there were an English version of Lettre International or even Courrier International

Academic journals

I would not normally deign academic journals with a second glance since theirs is an incestuous breed – with arcane language and specialized focus which breaches at least two of the above five tests. But Political Quarterly stands apart with the superbly written (social democratic) analyses which have been briefing us for almost a century.

Parliamentary Affairs; West European Politics and Governance run it close with more global coverage.

Self-styled “Radical“ journals 
seem, curiously, to be gaining strength at precisely the moment the left is collapsing everywhere  and got a not unfair treatment here ….

Beyond the small grove of explicitly revolutionary titles lies a vast forest of critical publications. From “Action Research” to “Anarchist Studies”, from “Race and Class” to “Review of Radical Political Economics”, an impressive array of dissident ventures appears to be thriving. As Western capitalism jabs repeatedly at the auto-destruct button, it may seem only logical that rebel voices are getting louder. But logic has nothing to do it with it. Out in the real world, the Left is moribund. Socialism has become a heritage item. Public institutions, including UK universities, are ever more marketised. Alternatives seem in short supply.

So, far from being obvious, the success of radical journals is a bit of a puzzle. And they have proved they have staying power. The past few years have seen a clutch of titles entering late middle age, including those in the Marxist tradition, such as “New Left Review” (founded 1960), “Critique” (1973) and “Capital and Class” (1977), as well as more broadly critical ventures, such as “Transition” (1961) and “Critical Inquiry” (1974). Numerous other titles have emerged in the intervening years. And they are still coming.
 Recent titles include “Power and Education”, “Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies” and “Human Geography: A New Radical Journal”. Of course, some disciplines provide more fertile soil for such ventures than others. In cultural studies, politics, geography and sociology, radicalism has entered the mainstream. But even the more stony ground of economics nurtures a wide assortment of dissident titles.

A concept with unrealized potential, I feel, is that of the “global roundup” ” with selections of representative writing from around the globe. Courrier international is a good, physical, Francophone example – the others being “virtual” or E-journals eg Arts and Letters Daily a good literary, anglo-saxon exemplar; The Intercept a political one; with Eurozine taking the main award for its selection of the most interesting articles from Europe’s 80 plus cultural journals

I learn one main thing from this review - how tribal most journals are. Most seem to cater for a niche political market. Only N+1 (and the New Yorker) makes an effort to cover the world of ideas from a broader standpoint...The lead articles which Eurozine gives us from different parts of Europe makes it an interesting read; and Political Quarterly is a model for clear writing - even if it is a bit too British in its scope.  

But I give away both my age and agnostic tendencies when I say that my favourite journal remains "Encounter" which was shockingly revealed in the late 80s to have been partially funded by the CIA and which therefore shut up shop in 1990....

The entire set of 1953-1990 issues are archived here – and the range and quality of the authors given space can be admired. European notebooks – new societies and old politics 1954-1985; is a book devoted to one of its most regular writers, the Swiss Francois Bondy (2005) 

A generation of outstanding European thinkers emerged out of the rubble of World War II. It was a group unparalleled in their probing of an age that had produced totalitarianism as a political norm, and the Holocaust as its supreme nightmarish achievement. Figures ranging from George Lichtheim, Ignazio Silone, Raymond Aron, Andrei Amalrik, among many others, found a home in Encounter. None stood taller or saw further than Francois Bondy of Zurich.

European Notebooks contains most of the articles that Bondy (1915-2003) wrote for Encounter under the stewardship of Stephen Spender, Irving Kristol, and then for the thirty years that Melvin Lasky served as editor. Bondy was that rare unattached intellectual, "free of every totalitarian temptation" and, as Lasky notes, unfailing in his devotion to the liberties and civilities of a humane social order. European Notebooks offers a window into a civilization that came to maturity during the period in which these essays were written.

Bondy's essays themselves represent a broad sweep of major figures and events in the second half of the twentieth century. His spatial outreach went from Budapest to Tokyo and Paris. His political essays extended from George Kennan to Benito Mussolini. And his prime metier, the cultural figures of Europe, covered Sartre, Kafka, Heidegger and Milosz. The analysis was uniformly fair minded but unstinting in its insights. Taken together, the variegated themes he raised in his work as a Zurich journalist, a Paris editor, and a European homme de lettres sketch guidelines for an entrancing portrait of the intellectual as cosmopolitan.

Update; Current Affairs is a fairly new American radical journal which looks to be very well-written eg this take-down of The Economist mag

Most of us are Pirates these days!

I am not a great subscriber….I tend to leach off the freebies

Recently, however, I took out digital subs for both LRB and NYRB. And the rates of a slightly more academic journal I have loved since the 70s – "Political Quarterly" – are so reasonable (15 euros for not only 4 quarterly editions but also the entire archives) that I was also seduced by them last year. 

For a few months even I managed to get the full daily edition of "Le Monde" – until they cottoned on to the fact that my payment had not actually gone through…

So it’s not altogether surprising that, these past few days, I’ve been looking again at the list (which was one of several annexes of To Whom it May Concern – the 2019 posts) of the journals I considered worth reading.

And that I actually took out yet another sub.

Have a look at the updated list below and see whether you can guess which new title I succumbed to!!

The list which I had compiled all of three years ago had started with a not altogether unjustified crack about the superficiality of newspaper coverage. That, in turn, raised the question of which (English language) journals would pass a test  with such criteria as –

- Depth of treatment

- Breadth of coverage (not just political)

- Cosmopolitan in taste (not just anglo-saxon)

- clarity of writing

- sceptical in tone

My own regular favourite reading includes The London Review of Books, The New York Review of Books, The Guardian Long Reads and book reviews,  – and the occasional glance at the New Yorker; New Statesman; and Spiked.

Other titles which might lay some claims to satisfying the stringent criteria set above are -

Aeon; an interesting new (since 2012) cultural journal

Arts and Letters Daily; daily internet roundup from books and articles 

Book Forum; a bit too US centred for my taste…..

Brain Pickings; a superb personal internet bi-weekly endeavour which gives extended excerpts from classic texts about creativity etc. One of the best

Current Affairs is a fairly new American radical journal which looks to be very well-written eg this take-down of The Economist mag and this article on development

Dissent; a US leftist stalwart whose recent analyses of ecological issues have been exemplars of typology
Eurozine; terrific stuff from a European network of 70 odd cultural journals
Jacobin; a rather too predictable US leftist mag with a poor literary style

Literary Hub; a literary site with original selections and frequent posts

London Review of Books; couldn’t do without it!

Los Angeles Review of Books; great addition to book reviews from global cites (eg Boston, Dublin) 

Monthly Review; an old leftist US stalwart with well-written and solid analysis

Mother Jones; more journalistic US progressive

N+1; one of the new and smoother leftist mags

New Humanist; an important strand of UK thought

New Left Review; THE rather academic UK bi-monthly journal which I’ve dipped into ever since it started in 1960 

New Republic; solid US monthly

Prospect (UK); rather too smooth UK monthly

The American Prospect (US); ditto US

Public Books – an impressive recent website (2012) to encourage open intellectual debate
Quillette – a very new journal emphasising “free thought” whose pieces are very well-written 

Resurgence ; UK Green mag

Sceptic; celebration of important strand of UK scepticism

Slate; more right wing internet venture

Social Europe; a european social democratic E-journal whose short articles are a bit too predictable for my taste

Spiked; a very strange journal whose staff came from the "Living Marxism" group and adopt counter-intuitive attitudes to issues. See the useful http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=124 for more

The Atlantic; one of my favourite US mags

The Baffler; highly original leftist US bimonthly running for 30 years which I’ve only  noticed recently

The Critic - a new journal (since the end of 2019) opposed to the cosy “left-liberal consensus” it considers disfigures the british chattering classes. A bit parti-pris

The Conversation; a rare venture which has academics writing more journalistically 

The Nation; America's oldest weekly, for the "progressive" community

The New York Review of Books; a fortnightly I’ve been reading avidly for the past 30 years

The New Yorker; very impressive US writing

The Point – a relatively new venture (5 years) which advertises itself as “the magazine of the examined life”

Washington Independent Review; a new website borne of the frustration about the disappearance of so many book review columns

Wired; unpredictable - often has very good material

The answer to the question I posed earlier    is...... most curiously, The Point – as well, after a hiccup, as The New Yorker – the latter offering last week a 4 month internet sub (with archival material) for only 6 dollars. I have to declare, however, that - after a full week - I’ve still not been able to activate access to that delight. Serves me right for succumbing to an offshoot of the Conde mulinational!!!! 
But the digital version of “The Point” is already available - for only 31 dollars a year……..

I confess that I still have fond memories in the 1980s of "The Encounter" mag which was shockingly revealed later in the decade to have been partially funded by the CIA and which as a result shut up shop in 1990....I still have some copies in the glass-covered cabinet in the mountain house study (on the left of the pic).......

The entire set of 1953-1990 issues are archived here – and the range and quality of the authors given space can be admired. European notebooks – new societies and old politics 1954-1985; is a book devoted to one of its most regular writers, the Swiss Francois Bondy (2005) 

A generation of outstanding European thinkers emerged out of the rubble of World War II. It was a group unparalleled in their probing of an age that had produced totalitarianism as a political norm, and the Holocaust as its supreme nightmarish achievement. Figures ranging from George Lichtheim, Ignazio Silone, Raymond Aron, Andrei Amalrik, among many others, found a home in Encounter. None stood taller or saw further than Francois Bondy of Zurich.

European Notebooks contains most of the articles that Bondy (1915-2003) wrote for Encounter under the stewardship of Stephen Spender, Irving Kristol, and then for the thirty years that Melvin Lasky served as editor. Bondy was that rare unattached intellectual, "free of every totalitarian temptation" and, as Lasky notes, unfailing in his devotion to the liberties and civilities of a humane social order. European Notebooks offers a window into a civilization that came to maturity during the period in which these essays were written.

Bondy's essays themselves represent a broad sweep of major figures and events in the second half of the twentieth century. His spatial outreach went from Budapest to Tokyo and Paris. His political essays extended from George Kennan to Benito Mussolini. And his prime metier, the cultural figures of Europe, covered Sartre, Kafka, Heidegger and Milosz. The analysis was uniformly fair minded but unstinting in its insights. Taken together, the variegated themes he raised in his work as a Zurich journalist, a Paris editor, and a European homme de lettres sketch guidelines for an entrancing portrait of the intellectual as cosmopolitan.

Update; https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/april-2020/journal-de-combat-of-the-cold-war/

After thirty Years, how fares the system in Romania?

I'm having format problems with the blog and had to take down a previous post - here it is again

They say a picture is worth a thousand words – and documentaries can have an even more profound effect. I’ve just come across this documentary marking 30 years of democracy in Romania – made apparently 3 years ago. It’s a great introduction – with Romanians explaining the key events from 1988 with subtitles. My best friend (who is Romanian) tells me that it did, however, fail to deal with the continuing power of the security services over the political system.

I lived in Bulgaria and Romania between 2007 and 2017 – since then exclusively in Romania. 

For a decade I enjoyed crossing the Danube, with the last 100 km stretch of the drive on 

the highway through the Balkans and the sight of the Vitosha mountain which dominates Sofia 

always bringing a particular thrill. I wintered in Sofia and summered in my summer house in 

the Carpathian mountains – a picture of which heads this post

In the 1990s there was an interesting body of literature known as “transitology” which was 

effectively a retraining scheme for those in redundant Soviet and Eastern European studies 

University Departments as they tried to adjust to the new reality of “liberal democracy” and 

“free-market capitalism”.
The integration of many of these countries into the European Union seemed to leave the others 

in a state of suspended animation – still “transiting”. Except that the “integration” had not 

gone as planned – some countries (such as Hungary and Poland) had clearly reneged on their 

commitments and were challenging the “rule of law” canons; and others (such as Bulgaria and 

Romania) had been unable to satisfy the monitors that they had even got to the required 

judicial standards. Indeed Philippe Schmitter, one of the doyens of the field, went so far in 

2012 as to talk of “ambidextrous democratisation”
Bulgaria's world-renowned political scientist Ivan Krastev has (with US Stephen Holmes) 

written one of the surprisingly few books which attempt to assess the fortunes since 1989 

of the eastern countries – although its primary concern seems more that of “the crisis of 

modern liberalism”. It’s entitled "The Light that Failed – a Reckoning”. The book starts with 

a chapter on the psychological effects on central European countries of the “imitation game” 

they were forced to play and the demographic shock as millions left the country for a better 

future elsewhere; followed by one on how Putin’s Russia moved on in 2007 from imitation to 

“mirroring” Western hypocrisy; a chapter on Trump’s America; and a final one which takes in China.

The authors argue that part of the nationalist reaction in Hungary and Poland was the shock 

of realising that the European "normality" they had hoped for had been transformed into an 

agenda which included homosexuality, gay weddings and rights for Romas. But their emphasis 

on the “psychology of imitation” totally ignores the brazen way west European countries and 

companies exploited the opening which the collapse of communism gave them to extend their 

markets in both goods and people - with the consequences brilliantly dissected by Alexander 

Clapp in a 2017 New Left Review article “Romania Redivivus”.

Talk of “transitology” disappeared more than a decade ago and was absorbed into the 

Anti-Corruption (or governance integrity) field which grew into a "name and shame" industry 

- complete with league tables and Manuals. But the world seems to have perhaps grown weary 

even of its talk…
Alina Mungiu-Pippid is a Romanian social psychologist - appointed, in 2007, as Professor of 

Democracy studies of the prestigious Hertie School of Governance in Berlin - with a unique 

understanding and knowledge of the issue. This was her blunt assessment in 2009 of the situation

 in Romania

Unfortunately, corruption in Romania is not only related to parties and businesses, but cuts 
 across the most important institutions of society. Romanian media has gradually been captured, 
 after having been largely free and fair at the end of the 1990s. After 2006, 
 concentration in media ownership continued to increase in Romania. Three owners 
 enjoy more than two-thirds of the TV political news market. As long as Romania was a 
supplicant for entry to the EU, it had to jump through the hoops of “conditionality” to 
satisfy Brussels it was behaving itself. When Poland, Hungary et al were let in in 2004, 
the pressures started to relax – but The European Union’s Cooperation and Verification Mechanism 
(CVM) replaced that conditionality in 2007 and Bulgaria and Romania are still subject of an 
annual check of their legal and judicial health. Mungi-Pippidi therefore concluded her 2009 
assessment with a simple observation -

At the end of day, “democracy promotion” succeeds by helping the domestic drivers of change, 
 not by doing their job for them. Only Romanians themselves can do this.


Her latest book "Europe's Burden - promoting good governance across. Borders" (2020) is a must-read for anyone who wants to know why a quarter of a century of trying to build systems of government that people can trust has had so little effect in ex-communist countries. It starts with a sketch of Switzerland’s political development which reminds us that Napoleon was the catalyst for a 50-year period during which the Swiss embedded the basic structures we associate with that country. It is, however, Denmark to which most countries (according to Fukuyama) aspire to – although a study of its history suggests that, contrary to Dahrendorf’s optimism, that was more like a 100 year journey.
Her description of her own country, Romania, is quite damning –

• From 2010-17 there were 600 convictions for corruption EACH YEAR – including 18 

Ministers and one Prime Minister, Generals, half of the Presidents of County Councils

 and the Presidents of all the parliamentary parties

• The Prosecution system became thoroughly politicised through its connection with 

the powerful intelligence system – the infamous Securitate which was never disbanded

• The level of wiretapping used is 16 times the level of that used by the FBI

• Romania heads the league table of cases brought to the European Court of Human Rights 

dismissed for breaching the right to a fair trial – with a half of its cases so failing

• The annual CVM reports on the country are always positive and make no mention of 

any of this – on the basis that “questions about the intelligence services are outside our remit”!!

• TV stations run by those convicted of corruption have provided damning evidence 

of the prosecution service threatening judges and fixing evidence

One of Romania's most famous political analysts gave an extensive interview in 2018 which was important enough for me to summarise as follows –

• the so-called “revolution” of 1989 was nothing of the sort – just a takeover by the 

old-guard masquerading in the costumes of the market economy and democracy

• which, after 30 years, has incubated a new anomie – with the “social” media dominating people’s minds

• “European integration” has destroyed Romanian agriculture and industry - and 

drained the country of 4 million talented young Romanians

• After 30 years, there is not a single part of the system – economic, political, religious, cultural, voluntary – which offers any real prospect of positive change

• Even Brussels seems to have written the country off

• The country is locked into a paralysis of suspicion, distrust, consumerism, apathy, anomie

• No one is calling for a new start – let alone demonstrating the potential for realistic alliances

Dorel Sandor has clearly given up on the politicians and confessed to a hopelessness for the prospect of any sort of change in his country

“The stark reality is now that we do not have political parties any more. The Romanian political 

environment is in fact an ensemble of ordinary gangs that try to survive the process and jail and 

eventually save their wealth in the country or abroad. That's all! Romania has no rulers. 

It has mobsters in buildings with signs that say "The Ministry of Fish that Blooms".
One of the reasons why the EU is not too concerned about us is that it is that they reckon that you can only reform a driver with a car that works. We are a two-wheeled wagon and two horses, a chaotic space, broken into pieces. What's to reform? So it's a big difference.”

But he was least convincing when he tried to offer a way forward

I have a list of what to do – starting with the need for an exploration of what sort of Romania 

we should be aiming for in the next few decades. Such a process would be moderated by professionals using proper diagnostics, scenario thinking and milestones.
It would be managed by a group with a vision emancipated from the toxic present.

I have a lot of sympathy for such approaches – embodied, for example, in the "Future Search"

 method. But effective social change rarely comes from such an elitist approach; any such 

effort would have to demonstrate exactly how it would propose to deal with the astonishing 

level of distrust of others in the country.
In 2014, only 7% of the Romanian population could say that “most people can be trusted” 

(compared with about 20% in Italy and 40% in Germany).
The revelation of the collusion between the infamous Securitate and the Anti-Corruption 

Agency (DNA) has understandably fanned the flames of paranoia for which the Romanians 

can be forgiven - given the scale of the surveillance of the population the Securitate enjoyed

 under Ceausescu. Little wonder half of the population are Covid sceptics

Conclusion
In the 1980s it was Solidarity in Poland; Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia; and reformers in Hungary who were challenging the power structure – I remember taking the opportunity of being in the country to visit the Party’s “White House” in Budapest in 1987 to talk with a spokesman for the latter.
Bulgaria and Romania, on the other hand, were monolithic and frozen societies – with 

the only sign of discord being the odd Romanian poet – and on the Danube where protestors 

against a chemical plant included a few establishment figures such as Svetlin Rusev.
But the street has become much more active in the past decade – even if it is the more 

educated and “entitled” who are prominent there. And it is “the Crowd” that the power 

elite has always feared – particularly in the last century eg the infamous “Revolt of the Masses”

 (1930). And who can ever forget the moment when the massed crowd turned against Ceausescu 

in December 1989 – within minutes, he had been hoisted from his balcony by helicopter and, 

within days, summarily tried and shot.
It’s noticeable that the figures whose words I’ve quoted – Dahrendorf, Canetti, Krastev, 

Mungiu-Pippidi and Sandor – all represent the intelligentsia. I was brought up to take their 

words seriously - but they are not activists!
The sadly-missed David Graeber was one of the very few such people prepared to get his 

hands dirty… to work across the barriers that normally divide people and to try to forge 

new coalitions…The Crowd needs people like Graeber who understand how to bridge such 

barriers…………..particularly between the “downtrodden masses” and the “entitled”
Where is Bulgaria’s Graeber? There are, actually, several eg Vanya Grigorova – the 

economic adviser of the labour union “Podkrepa” (Support) and leading left-wing public 

figure – who has been travelling the country to present her latest book on labour rights 

and how to claim them. A year ago she gave this interview to Jacobin, which positioned 

her on the side of social change in Bulgaria and the region.

Both Covid19 and the greater concern about global warming – as embodied, for example in 

the recent Extinction Rebellion – suggest that the “normality” being sought by the 

entitled is a will o’ the wisp.
The Sofia protestors would therefore be well advised to widen the scope of their agenda. 

After all, smaller countries generally seem better able to “do” change viz Switzerland, 

Iceland, Denmark, Singapore, Estonia, Slovenia – particularly when they have women at 

their helm who have a combination of trustworthiness and strategic vision!!
Especially for them I updated my list of essential reading for activists – adding my own 

“opportunistic” theory of change which emphasises the element of individual responsibility 

as well as the dynamic of the crowd viz

“Most of the time our systems seem impervious to change – but always (and suddenly) an opportunity 

arises. Those who care about the future of their society, prepare for these “windows of opportunity 

– through proper analysis, mobilisation and integrity. It involves–

• speaking out about the need for change

• learning the lessons of previous change efforts

• creating and running networks of change

• which mobilise social forces

• understanding crowd dynamics

• reaching out to forge coalitions

• building credibility

I grant you that the time for preparation is over in Sofia; and appreciate that 

some of this may come across as rather elitist but the process it describes is still 

a crucial one – prepare, analyse, network, speak out, build coalitions, mobilise, 

no hidden games…..It’s a tough combination……