Illusory corporatism in Eastern Europe: neoliberal tripartism and postcommunist class identities

• Autorzy: David Ost
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The plethora of tripartite bodies in postcommunist countries seems to suggest the emergence of an East European corporatism. Analysis of arrangements in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland indicates instead the prevalence of illusory corporatism. Token negotiations, non-binding agreements, and exclusion of the private sector demonstrate that tripartite procedures are deployed to introduce neoliberal, not social democratic, outcomes. A path-dependent argument stressing labour's weak class identity best explains these outcomes. East European labour, unlike historic western counterparts, is marked by a weak sense of class interests, disinclination to organize the private sector, and declining support from the workforce, making it unable to emerge as a strong force. It is not labour but the new elites that seek tripartism, hoping thereby to share burdens, conform to European norms, and demonstrate responsiveness to society. Formal tripartism also follows from the legacy of state socialism, giving symbolic voice to the formerly included now headed for exclusion. In the end, tripartism helps secure labour's acceptance of its own marginalization. (original abstract)

The plethora of tripartite bodies in postcommunist countries seems to suggest the emergence of an East European corporatism. Analysis of arrangements in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, and Poland indicates instead the prevalence of illusory corporatism. Token negotiations, non-binding agreements, and exclusion of the private sector demonstrate that tripartite procedures are deployed to introduce neoliberal, not social democratic, outcomes. A path-dependent argument stressing labour's weak class identity best explains these outcomes. East European labour, unlike historic western counterparts, is marked by a weak sense of class interests, disinclination to organize the private sector, and declining support from the workforce, making it unable to emerge as a strong force. It is not labour but the new elites that seek tripartism, hoping thereby to share burdens, conform to European norms, and demonstrate responsiveness to society. Formal tripartism also follows from the legacy of state socialism, giving symbolic voice to the formerly included now headed for exclusion. In the end, tripartism helps secure labour's acceptance of its own marginalization. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Political corporatism; Neoliberalism; Post-communist countries

PL

Korporacjonizm polityczny; Neoliberalizm; Kraje postkomunistyczne

• Czasopismo: Warsaw Forum of Economic Sociology
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: 1
• Numer: nr 2 (2)
• Strony: 91--122

Twórcy

autor

David Ost

• Hobart and William Smith Colleges, New York

Bibliografia

• Balcerowicz, L. (1996), Capitalism, Socialism, Transformation. Budapest: Central European University Press.
• Baldwin, P. (1990), The Politics of Social Solidarity: Class Bases of the European Welfare State 1875-1975. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bourdieu, P. (1984), Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Crawford, B. (1995), Markets, States, and Democracy: The Political Economy of Post-Communist Transformation (introduction). Boulder: Westview Press.
• Hausner, J., Jessop, B. and Nielsen, K. (1995), Strategic Choice and Path-Dependency in Post-Socialism. Hants, UK: Edward Elgar.
• Crowley S. and Ost D. (red.) (2001), Workers After Workers States: Unions and Politics in Eastern Europe Since the Fall of Communism. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Cziria, L. (1995), The Czech and Slovak Republics, in: J. Thirkell, R. Scase , S. Vickerstaff , Labour Relations and Political Change in Eastern Europe. Ithaca: ILR Press. Donosy, December 17, 1999, website, now defunct.
• Dow, G., Clegg, S. and Boreham, P. (1984), From the Politics of Production to the Production of Politics. Thesis Eleven 9, July.
• Edelman, M. (1964), Symbolic Uses of Politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
• Edelman, M. (1995), Art as Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Frege, C.M. (2000), Post-Communist Workplace Relations in Hungary: Case Studies from the Clothing Industry, Work, Employment, and Society, 14:3.
• Gradev, G. (2001), Bulgarian Trade Unions in Transition: Between a Free-Range Hedgehog and a TV Tiger, in: S. Crowley, D. Ost, (red.), Workers After Workers States: Unions and Politics in Eastern Europe Since the Fall of Communism. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefi eld.
• Greskovits, B. (1996), Political Economy of Protest and Patience. Budapest: Central University Press.
• Greskovits, B. (1996), comments in: D. Ost(red.) Eastern Europe After the Social Democratic Collapse: A Symposium. Telos, No. 107, Spring.
• Iankova, E.A. (1997), Social Partnership After the Cold War: The Transformative Corporatism on Post-Communist Europe. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University.
• Iankova, E.A. (1998), The Transformative Corporatism of Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Society 12:2, Spring: 222-64.
• Katzenstein, P. (1984), Corporatism and Change: Austria, Switzerland, and the Politics of Industry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• Kloc, K. (1992), Polish Labour in Transition. Telos 92, Summer.
• Lado, M. (1997), The Changing Role of Tripartism in Hungary. Paper presented to workshop on Institution Building in the Transformation of Central and Eastern European Societies, Budapest, Central European University, December.
• Mandel, D. (1994), Rabotyagi: Perestroika and After Viewed from Below. New York: Monthly Review.
• Martin, A., Ross, G. (red.)(1999). The Brave New World of European Labour: European Trade Unions at the Millennium. New York: Berghahn Books.
• Nelson, J.M. (1992), Poverty, Equity, and the Politics of Adjustment, in: S. Haggard and R. Kaufman (red.), The Politics of Economic Adjustment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Orenstein, M. (2000), Out of the Red: Building Capitalism and Democracy in Post-Communist Europe. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
• Orenstein, M. (1998), Vaclav Klaus: Revolutionary and Parliamentarian, East European Constitutional Review 7:1, Winter.
• Orenstein, M. (1995), The Czech Tripartite Council and its Contribution to Social Peace, in: J. Hausner, O.K., Pedersen and K. Ronit, Evolution of Interest Representation and Development of the Labour Market in Post-Socialist Countries, Cracow: Cracow Academy of Sciences.
• Ost, D. (1997), Can Unions Survive Communism?. Dissent, Winter.
• Ost, D. (1996), Polish Labour Before and After Solidarity. International Labour and Working-Class History 50, Fall.
• Ost, D. (1993), The Politics of Interest in Post-Communist East Europe, Theory and Society 22, August.
• Ost, D., Weinstein M. (1999), Unionists Against Unions: Towards Hierarchical Management in Post-Communist Poland. East European Politics and Societies, 13:1, Winter.
• Panitch, L. (1977), Social Democracy and Industrial Militancy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Panitch, L. (1979), The Development of Corporatism in Liberal Democracies, in: P.C. Schmitter and G. Lehmbruch(red.), Trends Toward Corporatist Intermediation. London: Sage.
• Pliszkiewicz, M. (1996), Trójstronność w krajach Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej, in: H. Lewandowski (red.), Syndykalizm współczesny i jego przyszłość. Łódź: Wyd. Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.
• Pollert, A. (2001), Labour and Trade Unions in the Czech Republic, in: S. Crowley and D. Ost (red.), Workers After Workers States: Unions and Politics in Eastern Europe Since the Fall of Communism. Boulder: Rowman & Littlefi eld.
• Przeworski, A. (1991), Democracy and the Market. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rifkin, J. (1996), The End of Work. New York: Putnam.
• Schmitter, P.C. (1983), Democratic Theory and Neocorporatist Practice. Social Research 50:4, Winter.
• Schmitter, P.C. (1982), Refl ections on Where the Theory of Neo-Corporatism has Gone and Where the Praxis of Noe-Corporatism May Be Going, in: G. Lehmbruch and P.C. Schmitter, Patterns of Corporatist Policy-Making. London: Sage.
• Scott, J.C. (1976), The Moral Economy of the Peasant. New Haven: Yale University Press.
• Scott, J.C. (1977), Protest and Profanation: Agrarian Revolt and the Little Tradition. Theory and Society 4:1, Spring.
• Seleny, A. (1999), Old Political Rationalities and New Democracies: Compromise and Confrontation in Hungary and Poland. World Politics 51, July.
• Sil, R. (1996), Workers, Managers, and Privatization in Russian Industry: The Soviet Legacy and Post-Soviet Economic Institutions. Paper presented at national conference of American Political Science Association, San Francisco, September.
• Stark, D., Bruszt, L. (1998), Postsocialist Pathways: Transforming Politics and Property in East Central Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Stykow, P. (1996), Organized Interests in the Transformation Processes of Eastern Europe and Russia: Towards Corporatism?. Working Paper No. 96/11 of Max-Planck-Gesellschafts Working Group on Transformation Process, Berlin.
• Szelenyi, I. (1983), Urban Inequalities Under State Socialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Tatur, M. (1994), Corporatism As a Paradigm of Transformation, in: J. Staniszkis (red.), W poszukiwaniu paradygmatu transformacji, Warszawa: Instytut Studiów Politycznych.
• Teeple, G. (1995), Globalization and the Decline of Social Reform, Atlantic Highlands. NJ: Humanities Press
• Tygodnik Solidarność, September 29, 1989, p. 2.
• Wallerstein, I. (1995), Liberalism and the Legitimation of Nation-States, in: After Liberalism. New York: New Press.
• Visser, J., Hemerijck, A. (1997). A Dutch Miracle: Job Growth, Welfare Reform and Corporatism in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.