THE NATURE OF POLITICAL SPLITS: THE ROSE REVOLUTION

Iury SULABERIDZE


Iury Sulaberidze, Ph.D. (Hist.), Senior research associate, Institute of Political Science, Georgian Academy of Sciences (Tbilisi, Georgia)


Introduction

All revolutionsincluding those described by political scientists as Color Revolutionsshare certain regularities and development cycles; all of them resolve contradictions in systems that have fallen behind the times; and all of them create new contradictions as the revolutionary wave moves onward. The Rose Revolution in Georgia was spearheaded against Eduard Shevardnadzes regime, which political scientists described as a crossbreed of democratic bureaucracy and oligarchy. The system built by the father of Georgian democracy turned out to be the worst example of a Soviet successor state: it was ineffective, lacked self-sufficiency, and failed to meet the basic needs of post-Soviet society.

Today the Rose Revolution, which ushered in an era of Color Revolutions across the post-Soviet expanse, has become a target of scholarly studies. It can be scrutinized from different angles; I have posed myself the task of identifying the crucial features that created the genotype of power obvious at a certain development stage. I have undertaken to outline the psychological field in which the Georgian power culture was born.

Did the revolution reflect the cultural-political needs of Georgian society? Whose interests did it promote? What is preventing and what is assisting the


Please fill subscription form to obtain full text of this jounal

SCImago Journal & Country Rank
 - Advertorial UP - E-MAIL