art-e-conomy _ reader - marko stamenkovic

104
almost inevitable and requires an interpretation of the whole of the transition as a
combination of various ‘discourses’. As far as rhetoric is concerned, it can be argued
that the absence of an applicable model poses an inextricable problem to political
and social rhetoric. This absence is an ultimate theoretical abstraction, the temporary
conclusion of complex researches, and thus those influencing contemporary rhetoric
stand a small chance of directly articulating it.
The macro-process of the post-socialist transition is, therefore, among others,
a process without a model. Consequently, the analysis of individual ‘discourses’
will also be an analysis of ‘discourses’ of the contemporary ‘model-less’ condition,
while the analysis of individual ‘discourses’ may also reveal why no model seems
applicable.
With respect to the imperalistic ‘discourse’ it is worth noting that the imperialistic
dimension of the post-socialist transition has been its most important and seemingly
unequivocal aspect from the very outset. At the same time, it has always constituted
a covert part of the various reflections on the post-socialist transition as well. Noone
doubted that the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc would radically
reshuffle the traditional imperialistic world order. All the more so as in this old world
order legitimation through the existence of a super power and legitimation through
ideology could almost become synonymous. As it was the case, in certain contexts
the system of feasible socialism was to legitimise the existence of the Soviet empire,
and sometimes conversely, the existence of the Soviet empire was to legitimise the
system of feasible socialism, and even be the most important guarantee to the
survival of the system.
The covert dimension of the imperialistic ‘discourse’ originates precisely in this
imperialistic vacuum, since Western countries were temporarily faced with a genuine
imperialistic void. This period of transition was the time to make a desperate choice
between a manifestly mono-polar world, the filling of the power vacuum with a
nondescript form of Russian democracy, the constant fear of political restoration
and the threat of general chaos in the East. These alternatives have constituted the
‘covert dimension’, always lurking behind the otherwise unambiguous and clearly
enthusiastic rhetoric of the imperialistic ‘discourse’ of the post-socialist transition.
Without going into what consequences the power vacuum left by the collapse of the
Soviet Union in 1989 may have today in terms of global power relations, it seems
clear that the overt and covert aspects of this ‘discourse’ could not be connected
in a constructive fashion. The disappearance of the Soviet Union as an imperialistic
power, as the most important representative of a social order and that of the system
of feasible socialism could not significantly alter attitudes to the imperialistic vacuum.
Let us only point out the slow progress of political, economic and military integration
or the resurfacing of traditional imperialist conflicts. These conflicts are thoroughly
inconsistent with democratic ideals (to cite a most recent example, allegations
have been made in the international press in August this year that Western powers
would abandon the idea of integrating democratic Baltic states in exchange for the
admission of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic to the NATO).
Additional elements of the imperialistic ‘discourse’ can be attributed to the structural
characteristics of today’s new world order in which political developments are informed