Post-communist system transformation: features, results and prospects

Abstract

This paper is devoted to the analysis of the initial positions, course and results of postcommunist transformations. Postcommunist transformations differed significantly from previous transitions in that, first, their starting point was not authoritarian but totalitarian systems; second, 80% of the postcommunist countries are newly formed states. Therefore, the process of democratization under post-communism was determined by the creation of a market economy and civil society, and in the newly formed states it had a binary character, in which socio-political transformation was combined with creation of a national sovereign statehood. The influence of initial conditions of transformation processes on the results is analyzed. The author believes that the results of transformations, all post-communist countries can be divided into five groups: 1) countries in which the democratic regime has been consolidated; 2) countries in which a democratic regime has been established, but there are problems with its consolidation; 3) countries with hybrid regimes, in which trends of democratization and authoritarianism are constantly alternating; 4) countries with a consolidated authoritarian regime; 5) countries with neo-totalitarian regimes.

The main conclusions of this paper are that despite the different results of different countries, the process of post-communist transformations can be considered complete in the sense that the restoration of communist regimes has become impossible. Over the course of three decades, new, but not communist, models of social relations were established in post-communist countries. The end of post-communism does not mean that there can be no systemic change in the former communist countries in the near future. However, these will be other transitions that will have different starting and ending positions. Although the consequences of the communist era will still affect the development of these countries for a long time, it is not them, but the latest socio-economic, domestic and foreign policy factors that will play a leading role in determining further trajectories of social development.