The Quest for Ownership.

Amazement and surprise were the common reactions of Western political scientists to the fall of communism; they did not foresee, nor could they explain, the collapse of the regime. This paper argues that the reason why Western political scientists could not foretell the fall of the communist system was their overcommitment to artificial models of society and their lack of concern with economics. Western political science, especially, overlooked how the concept of privatizing the economy affected the devolution of the communist order, in contrast, I examine the question of the "sudden revolution" in the historical context and in the context of the privatization of the economy. The privatization of the economy, or rather, the specific ways privatization is conducted, is the main factor that explains the "peaceful collapse" puzzle and the newly emerging tensions as well. The paper consists of two parts. In the first part, "Trismus," I argue against the picture of Central Europe painted by Western political scientists. The question "Why did the communist order, a regime that defended itself stubbornly for a long time, at last collapse peacefully?" concludes the first part and opens the second, "Transformation." The point "Nomenklatura Chrysalis" is crucial for solving the puzzle of the "sudden" and peaceful fall of communism. In the conclusion, I refer to the current, and probably future, economic and political tensions that are likely to emerge in countries undergoing ownership transformations. Eventually this involves me in Fukuyama's proposition of the "end of history." Amazement and surprise were the common reactions of Western political scientists to the fall of communism; they did not foresee, nor could they explain, the collapse of the regime. This paper argues that the reason why Western political scientists could not foretell the fall of the communist system was their overcommitment to artificial models of society and their lack of concern with economics.... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]