Professional Documents
Culture Documents
30 Years
30 Years
30 Years
1
improved welfare for political legitimacy. That came to the end with the dramatic change in the
costs of borrowing brought about by the Mr. Volcker in 1979. As the consequence, the socialist
countries, including Yugoslavia, went into prolonged stagnation for the whole decade throughout
the 1980s. The political consequences of economic dead-end were dealt with differently in
Poland, Romania, Yugoslavia, or the Soviet Union. And, though for different reasons, in China.
Yugoslavia, sceptical of liberalism and of democratisation, disintegrated. By contrast,
naïve liberalism of the other socialist countries led to the support for the approach which can be
summarised by – first, take the Wall down and demand democracy, then reform to become
normal countries.
2
inter-ethnic conflicts, which broke up in Yugoslavia, were avoided in Central Europe and even in
the pro-EU Balkans, though from the historical point of view those were highly likely. EU
integration trumped nationalism as democracy proved sustainable even during an unprecedented
economic slump.
By contrast, in Yugoslavia, nationalism won over liberalism and democratisation. Indeed,
for a decade or so, until early 2000s, protectionism was the preferred economic policy and the
ethnic state-building the main political ends.
Building Walls
Naïve liberalism can get you only so far. Eventually, the advantages of nationalism of one
kind or another will be discovered by the coalition of those from various classes of people in
need of protection. The idea of Capitalism in One Country runs into the European Union as the
obstacle. However, security concerns of one kind or another can prove useful for the
undermining of the rule of law and of democracy. So, illiberal democracy rears its head.
In the days of the Wall, naïve liberals from behind the Wall used to be greeted with
criticism from the other side of the Wall for being unrealistic. The free world is not all that free,
and your world is not as all that unfree. That debate liberals lost in Yugoslavia. And it is now
very much the issue throughout Europe. And in particular in Europe that was behind the Wall
thirty years ago.
It is perhaps interesting to compare the past thirty years in Europe with those of China at
the end. In 1989, China chose to liberalise in a big way and then gradually ever since in order not
to democratise. And the policy has proved successful. Though, eventually, democratisation will
prove to be an issue, as one can see in Hong Kong today. European socialist countries chose
democracy as the instrument of liberalisation in 1989.
The challenges now are again different. How to continue to liberalise to sustain
authoritarianism in China and how to increase protectionism, to erect Walls, to sustain rising
authoritarianism in Europe. Or, rather, how not to go for new Walls.