Imperative vs. interactive strategy of systemic change in central and Eastern Europe

Abstract

Abstract The negotiated strategy as an alternative to the liberal approach is based on the interactive method of social change. Implementing this strategy is no easy task. It calls for both a fundamental theoretical reassessment of the problem of systemic transformation as well as changes in habitual patterns of behaviour. Under post‐socialist conditions, negotiations take on a double significance: on the one hand, they can create an institutional framework, establish the rules of the market game, and allow particular economic projects to be put into practice (the meso‐ and microstructural level). On the other hand, the resulting arrangements can be used as a basis for defining and implementing a precise strategy to shape the economic system, thus ‘building up’ the state (the macrostructural level). The implementation of the liberal approach based on the imperative method of social change has created an ‘interaction crisis’ in post‐socialist societies. One of the major symptoms of this crisis is the contradiction between political articulation and institutionalization. It seems that the only effective, pro‐transformation way of overcoming this contradiction would be to create structures able to bridge the gap between society and the authorities, and to mediate interests both between various social groups and between these groups and the authorities.