The dissident generation of the 1970s and 1980s produced a body of work unprecedented in Czech history, says Martin Simecka. Yet it is precisely the monumentality of this generation’s legacy that prevents the interpretation of the communist past going beyond self-diagnosis.
During communism, metaphoric language was the only way to negotiate censorship, recalls the poet and editor Kornelijus Platelis. Yet this experience left Lithuanians cut off from the common European culture of rationality, tolerance and self-irony. Regaining this “European attitude” is the task of cultural journals today.
One type of censorship comes to an end, but a new is developing, writes cultural theorist Dave Boothroyd. The power that corporations such as Network Solutions or YouTube wield produces a new form of subjectivity characterized by self-censorship.
Globalisation is leading to more belief, not less. “New Humanist” editor Caspar Melville talks to John Micklethwait, the editor of “The Economist” about his new book tracing the rise and rise of religion.
Jaroslaw Kuisz comments on two iconic Polish films that show the brutality, fear and loneliness that have accompanied the new political order. In Wladislaw Pasikowski’s “Psy” (Pigs, 1992) a former security service agent turned respectable post-communist policeman resolves to avenge the death of three colleagues. And in Krzysztof Krauze’s “Dlug” (Debt, 1999), two young businessmen, trapped into life as mobsters, commit murder, then confess.
Europeans, the world’s largest “people in spe”, must develop a pan-European historical awareness if only to be able to deal better with common political problems, argues Claus Leggewie. Yet a definition of European memory cannot be reduced to the Holocaust and the Gulag alone, no matter how central these are. It must also include the experience of expulsion, Europe’s colonial history and the Armenian question, for example, and be able to compare memories without offsetting each against the other.
Nancy Fraser explains how the shift from redistribution to recognition undertaken by political movements during the 1990s forms part of the “post-socialist condition”. The fall of the Soviet Union, she argues, not only brought the end of communism, but also sucked the energy out of most movements with social-egalitarian aspirations. Yet in an era of globalization, the change could also be seen as one of “frame”. Campaigners for redistribution are no longer constrained by the borders of the nation-state, and concentrate their efforts increasingly on inequalities between, rather than within, nations. Transnational activism is where Fraser now hopes challenges to the “post-socialist” common sense will emerge.
The EU has commenced a new, pragmatic stage of relations with Belarus: in February, Javier Solana met Alexander Lukashenka; now, the Belarusian president has been invited to a summit in Prague. Economic factors and the EU’s fear of “losing” Belarus to Moscow are likely to be the foremost reasons for the change of tack.
For those who calmly existed behind the Iron Curtain it was hard to even imagine arts festivals, writes Vaidas Jauniskis. But now, over the past two decades, festivals have flooded Europe as if a new religion. Vaidas Jauniskis compares the many festivals of Europe and wonders what the future of festivals will be like in Lithuania.
A number of recent cases have highlighted how “social dumping” can occur if companies register abroad so as to be exempt from collective labour agreements applicable in the countries in which they are operating. The European Court of Justice, called on to decide between the freedom to establish a business and the employment laws of individual member states, has been hesitant to rule in favour of employees. Disappointment at judgments may derive from the fact that the vocabulary of social protection often cannot be translated at a European level, writes Marc Clément: fundamental concepts are understood in different ways by Europeans, depending on their national culture. Before we ask the question of a social Europe, a legal solution to the co-existence of social Europes (in the plural) must be attempted.
The arrest in 2008 of members of a collective in the French village of Tarnac exemplifies how definitions of terrorism are tailored to penalize ordinary social protest movements, writes Jean-Claude Paye.
“When in opposition, they do not comport themselves as the opposition to a democratically elected government. When they become the governing party, they pursue the same paternalistic, populist political game.” Agnes Heller’s damning indictment of Hungarian politicians twenty years after 1989.
Slavenka Drakulic’s article is “sickly sweet, sentimental, nauseating talk coloured by propaganda”, writes the Serbian painter Ljuba Popovic. She should look for “diligent” and “creative” Serbs so that she can “learn the truth”.
Not all Serbs are the same, writes painter and actor Uros Djuric. Slavenka Drakulic uncritically reduces the problem to one self-explanatory category and is an example of a “culturally racist matrix”.