The objective of the project
The research team decided that the main objective of the project is to discuss the issue of the influence of the state’s politics of memory on the shape of new political identity in the period of transition from an authoritarian regime to democracy.
The project was implemented in the years 2013-2016.
Research problems
The first of the research problems dealt with in the project concerns the question to what degree the new narrations of memory were used in the period of the transition of the system, while the second one refers to models of the politics of memory applied for building political identity during democratisation.
The main hypothesis of the project
What was the main hypothesis of the project was the statement about the universality of the model of transition from the autocratic system to democracy at the level of the state’s use of memory narrations for building the new political identity of the society.
THE CASE OF CHILE
Chile became a case to be studied within the framework of the project as it was an example of political changes from the authoritarian regime established after a military coup d’état (i.e. the putsch by the junta led by General Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, which took place on 11 September 1973) to democracy. The study focused on the issue of the transformation of the Chilean society’s political identity and on the analysis of the state policy of memory against the background of the ongoing political changes. Thus, we first examined the pre-transition identity, built in the times of Pinochet’s authoritarian regime, which provided groundwork for discussing how the Chilean state shaped (with the application of the tools of the politics of memory) the political identity of the transition and post-transition period. Among the proposed foundations of the democratic identity of the society – developing at the stage of changes of the system in Chile - the following issues came to the fore: reconciliation, national unity, forgiveness and compromise. What is important, the conclusions we gathered (along with the results of the other case studies) allowed us to conduct a comparative analysis and to verify the hypotheses posed.
THE CASE OF SPAIN
The case of Spain represents an example of democratic transition from the autocratic system established after a civil war. The fratricidal conflict from the years 1936-1939 ended with General Francisco Franco’s rule, who was the supreme leader of the Spanish state until his death in 1975. For almost 40 years, he had absolute power regarding all fields of the activity of the state and its citizens, including the sphere of the political identity of Spaniards.
The transition of the system after the general’s death led to a series of changes aimed at ensuring stable democracy. What is important, the identity was not free of changes, either. Since then, it has been built on the basis of reconciliation, forgiveness, oblivion and common future. It was that definite break with the past and turn towards future which constituted the core of attitudes inherently present in the politics of memory of the state in the following years – both in the transition period and after it ended.
THE CASE OF POLAND
As the position of the Soviet Union weakened and the authoritarian order in Poland collapsed, the communist party and the opposition were able to reach a historic compromise, which led to the democratisation of the country and the shock transformation of its economy. The establishment of the first non-communist government after World War Two, with Tadeusz Mazowiecki as its head, was a key step towards the freedom of Central and East European nations. The fifteen-year period of changes was crowned with Poland’s accession to the European Union and its permanent integration with the democratic structures of the Western world.
The transformation of Poland was marked with the ideological temporariness of the period of changes. The lack of an orderly vision of a new democratic society, which would be promoted by the new elites, contributed to further social divisions. As a result, conflicts over the vision of the state are still present in Polish politics, and the transitional keywords of the new identity – democracy, the rule of law, free market or modernisation – lost its impact as the transformation came to an end. At the same time, the ongoing disputes have resulted in a fundamental contrast between the Catholic and romanticist tradition and the pursuit of modernisation.
THE CASE OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
The Republic of South Africa is a country of paradoxes, where wealth and modernity mix with extreme poverty and backwardness. These disparities are a lasting remnant of the policy of apartheid, which for over half a century was a tool for implementing the narcissistic visions of white South African nationalists. The fall of the country of racial segregation and the last bastion of colonialism was a credit to the cooperation of Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress with President F. W. de Klerk and the moderate wing of the racist government. This alliance brought about the democratisation of the state and led to the first general election in April 1994, which ended with Mandela’s historic victory of Mandela.
President Mandela – backed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu – wanted to transform the totally divided society, which was on the brink of a civil war, into an inclusive community of the Rainbow Nation. It was to be based on reconciliation resulting from truth and forgiveness that was possible thanks to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The South African leaders aimed at building a nation, which - drawing on its diversity – would become able to overcome the painful legacy of colonialism and apartheid. It was a hope for better future, in which democracy and equality would guarantee the same development opportunities for everyone, was the driving force behind the transformation of the Republic of South Africa.
THE CASE OF GEORGIA
The Republic of Georgia may now be considered to be the most democratic country in the South Caucasus. The transition from the authoritarian system to democracy in Georgia took place in two stages. This process did not mirror the transformation of the political system in the countries of similar historical, political, geographical, social and economic conditions. New social, political, economic and cultural standards were gradually introduced in Georgia during the transition period, which began at the end of the 1980s and ended with the adoption of constitution amendments in 2004.
In the period of governments led by Zviad Gamsakhurdia, Eduard Shevardnadze and Mikheil Saakashvili, despite the gradual attempts to form a civil society in Georgia, transitional justice was not sought. The Georgian transformation, on account of its specific nature and length, may serve as an example of ignoring issues related to historical politics in the public discourse. The process of the construction of a modern democratic state has been laden with a number of difficulties that Georgia is still grappling with. The complications arise not only from problems related to the transition of the system itself and its implications, but also to the political game played by superpowers in the region of the South Caucasus and the Caspian Sea.
THE CASE OF ESTONIA
The transformation of the political system of the Republic of Estonia is a process that is the result of the collapse of the Soviet Union and of independence aspirations, which have shaped the contemporary identity of the Estonian nation since the 2nd half of the 19th century. The transition from the authoritarian system to the democratic one in Estonia was of a stable character. The Estonian democratic and dissident movement shared a lot of similarities with the actions undertaken in the other Baltic Sea or Central and Eastern Europe republics. The roots of the Estonian state as well as its legal and international tradition refer to the twenty years of the existence of the Estonian Republic between the two world wars.
Apart from the most significant transition processes, including the second national regeneration, the singing revolution and the second independence, what was of the key importance was the road that the society of the Republic of Estonia has gone from attitudes typical of homo sovieticus to a modern European community. The fact that accounts with the past had been settled played an important role in the development of the post-transition identity, which shows that the potential of historical politics was exploited in a prudent way. The short time it took to conduct transition from the authoritarian system to democracy was an element of a well-though strategy of joining West European countries.