"I learned that global North countries were not enthusiastic about the 2018 mass protests and only supported the movement after its success. Within civil society circles, the explicitly anti-oligarch stance of the movement had reportedly been a major worry for Western embassies in Yerevan, which, during meetings with NGO representatives, expressed fears that a government opposed to the free market would come to power. These fears proved unfounded, much to their relief. After the regime change, the protest leadership who replaced the regime included individuals from civil society and NGO backgrounds."
Sona Baldrian

Read this incredible article, "Interweaving Story and Theory: Confronting Anti-Feminism and Anti-Genderism in the NGOized Women’s Movement in Armenia"

politikon.iapss.org/index.php/poli… "The 2018 regime change shifted this dynamic, as the state welcomed the inpouring development aid and, by extension, work with local NGOs, opening doors for closer cooperation...this article argues that due to their increasingly bureaucratized, professionalized, and institutionalized structures in the post-2018 era, Armenian women’s rights NGOs have become disconnected from grassroots needs and estranged from street-level actors, focusing instead on political agendas shaped by larger geopolitical power structures and shifts"

Here are some thoughts about Georgian protests as "leaderless", the situation is evolving so these are still sketches.

One of the main messages surrounding the protests in Georgia, which began on November 28th following the government’s statement that it would halt EU accession talks (a move already paused by the EU until 2028), is the notion that it is a leaderless movement, with opposition political parties playing a marginal role. Videos show protesters expressing their discontent with the opposition, and numerous social media posts highlight that the protests transcend support for political parties. While the initial protests were sparked by the government's stance on EU accession, they gained further momentum due to police brutality. This escalation led to political narratives framing the government as a repressive state and a police regime.

Before the protests on November 28th, the sentiment that the 2024 elections were rigged was largely marginal. However, after the protests began, it became commonplace to refer to the elections as rigged. The central demand of this leaderless uprising quickly became the call for new elections. Following the police repression, another key demand emerged: the release of all those who had been arrested. While most of the arrested individuals have been released, some still face criminal charges.

The demand for new elections in the context of protests that are allegedly about a wide range of grievances—rather than a specific push for opposition political power—raises important questions about the coherence and long-term impact of the protests. On the surface, it might seem paradoxical for a movement that is critical of the government and its broader repressive tactics to demand new elections, especially if the protesters, who are not aligned with any political party, are not represented in the political process. If opposition parties were to win these elections, and none of the protesters were directly represented, it’s unclear what tangible gains they would achieve from this outcome. In essence, they are advocating for a process that might benefit the very political entities they do not support or trust.

This paradox becomes more pronounced when we consider the role of opposition parties in the protests. While the opposition has largely refrained from taking an overt leadership role—likely aware that doing so could alienate many protesters who are wary of party politics—they have nonetheless managed to capitalize on the protests’ momentum. Just a month ago, it would have been difficult for opposition parties to garner significant public support for such a demand. Yet, the protests’ growing momentum has shifted public discourse to the point where the call for new elections has become a central, unifying demand. This shift in sentiment can be seen as a strategic win for the opposition, even though the protesters themselves may not feel directly represented by them. A similar dynamic was visible during the large protests earlier in the year against the controversial "Russian law" concerning foreign funding transparency. While the protests were largely driven by youth and new political actors who did not align with the existing political establishment, opposition parties ultimately stepped in to use the momentum for their own purposes. The youth protesters, who were at the forefront of the demonstrations and faced police violence such as tear gas and water cannons, did not support the old, unpopular political figures within the opposition. However, after the protests, the opposition moved to revive their old politicians, many of whom had been out of favor for years. This led to a disconnection between the aspirations of the protesters and the political benefits reaped by the opposition, who were able to stand in elections without fully addressing the issues raised by the protesters.

The protests thus find themselves locked in a cycle where they are demanding new elections, but in a manner that ultimately does not directly benefit the protesters themselves. The opposition, while staying out of the direct leadership of the protests to avoid alienating the protest base, is nonetheless positioned to gain politically from the unrest. In this way, the protests are not translating into the political power that the protesters may have hoped for, and their demands are being co-opted by political forces that do not fully represent the broader, leaderless movement. For those involved in the protests, as their grievances and calls for change are being absorbed into a political system that they have long rejected.

Germany is about to pass one of the most odious bills criminalizing speaking out against Israel in schools, universities, in organizations, in art and culture- especially by Middle Eastern people

‘In recent months, the alarming extent of antisemitism based on immigration from the countries of North Africa and the Middle East, where antisemitism and hostility
towards Israel are widespread, partly due to Islamist and anti-Israeli state indoctrination, has become clear.’ ‘The Bundestag reaffirms the budgetary regulations for the allocation of funds on the
basis of the liberal democratic basic order for all recipients of federal funding. The
Bundestag reaffirms its decision to ensure that no funding is provided to
organizations and projects that spread antisemitism, question Israel's right to
exist, call for a boycott of Israel or actively support the BDS movement’

On Saturday, Georgians went to the polls amid a tense atmosphere. A video began circulating of a man attempting to stuff multiple ballots while election observers tried to stop him. Dozens of people and cameras were present, and the footage quickly spread across local, international, and social media platforms. Additional videos of scuffles outside polling stations also gained wide attention, painting a picture of widespread violence and ballot-stuffing. Additional videos of scuffles outside polling stations also gained wide attention, painting a picture of widespread violence and ballot-stuffing.

Today's OSCE briefing about Georgian Elections.

The Full breakdown can actually just be read here.
osce.org/files/f/docume…

The question and answer session is written below.

JUST NOTE: Most of the delegation heads are politicized, I would pay attention to Murphy who actually heads the ODIHR mission.

Journalist from Politico: You have painted a bleak picture of democracy in Georgia. Was this election stolen?

Antonio Lopez -Isturiz White, the head of EU parliament Delegation: We are not here to state if these elections are stolen. The findings, the testimonies before elections, we are not here to comment on validity. Journalist from Radio Freedom Georgia: What you have witnessed and documented, does that help or hinder return to European trajectory which was stated before the elections that the country was derailed from that trajectory.

Pia from OSCE- Parliamentary Assembly: In my opinion, it's too premature to say. It depends on after elections, what kind of government will be constituted and what they will do. The constitution that it is the aim of these people.

‘After all, EU hasn’t paused Georgia’s membership accession over dire working conditions, the absence of minimum wage, or lack of unemployment insurance. Instead, the process was stalled over laws regulating NGOs and LGBT rights — niche issues framed as matters of democracy.’ The stakes are high in Georgia's upcoming election, which is seen as a decisive moment for the country’s future. The pro-European, pro-Western opposition views this vote as critical to keeping Georgia on its path toward EU integration. Meanwhile, the ruling Georgian Dream party claims to share these goals, despite accusations of favoring closer ties with Russia

In 1992, I was in Moscow on the way to fly to the US. My stepfather who was an ardent anti-communist took me to an American opened ice cream shop with ‘hundreds’ of flavors to show me the superiority of capitalism - not just 2 flavors of USSR. I hated the flavors but didn’t

https://twitter.com/picturesussr/status/1828011756427386980

Have the heart or courage to tell him, it was terrible and tasted unnatural. I preferred the 2 flavors and with fresh strawberries - 3 flavors of Soviet Union. He was conditioning me to hate communism. He would take photos of me in grocery stores in USA and I’d happily smile

From Vadym Yakovlev

‘what strikes me in Europe during all this time of being here is the absence of a strong anti-war movement. every month some European official-politician declares that we are on the brink of war, and there is no reaction on it… there are no protests, demonstrations... militarization, propaganda of patriotism and war is becoming the norm in most European countries. people get used to it. i don't understand this.

I'm currently developing the theory that what we, as socialists, recognize as "dual power," is actively emerging in Tbilisi, Georgia, albeit in a counterrevolutionary form. This dynamic involves a scenario where the government operates alongside a specific cluster of NGOs, media platforms, and the individuals supporting them. Essentially, dual power encompasses:

1/ In explaining the living wage in Georgia, I frequently use the example of butter versus vegetable spreads. Butter in Georgia is often imported and very expensive. Most Georgians can’t afford it so they sub it with these spreads. Butter for the rich and margarine for the poor 2/ Almost everything is also made with these vegetable spreads. It’s become a huge luxury to say you cooked something with butter or bought something with butter. I was at Carrefour yesterday and found the butter LOCKED UP. I’ve never seen this on any product before

"The granddaughter of a Lithuanian man accused of collaborating with the Nazis to kill thousands of Jews has called on the nation to stop treating him as a hero."

thetimes.co.uk/article/my-war… According to Yad Vashem, the Holocaust memorial centre in Jerusalem, Lithuania welcomed Nazis, “seeing them as liberators from Soviet occupation”. 141,000 of Lithuania’s 168,000 Jews were murdered in Holocaust, with “a significant part carried out by Lithuanian auxiliary forces”,

"Liberalism Against Itself" by Samuel Moyn has a chapter on Hanna Arendt - who I hate the most. It's aptly titled "White Freedom."

Here are some good passages from it:

"But even as she crafted her own idiosyncratic canon in the history of political thought, her very attempt to strike out on her own in developing a new vision of freedom proved hostage to many Cold War liberal premises—far beyond her obvious contribution to the concept of totalitarianism."

Once you start interrogating stories and understanding the dynamics within USSR, it’s so easy to start seeing how much people really never pay attention to the authenticity of stories they tell/or hear on behalf of others, usually ‘family members.’ Usually if there isn’t much detail it’s a red flag. Things like ‘died of starvation’ or was ‘arrested simply for being a good guy’ or ‘against dictatorship.’ Almost always false. Generally stories told on behalf of family members are not reliable unless it’s a memoir

A new study came out: An unprecedented mortality crisis struck Eastern Europe during the 1990s, causing around 7 million excess deaths...the first quantitative analysis of the association between deindustrialization and mortality in Eastern Europe. We develop a theoretical framework identifying deindustrialisation as a process of social disintegration rooted in the lived experience of shock therapy.

Many things have happened, but nothing different has happened. The civilizational narrative of Europe has been reinforced, the false dichotomy of RU or EU has been reinforced, and anti-communism, to a lesser extent has been reinforced. Liberals are jubilant, worshipping Gen Z I have seen this so many times where a politician, a group, or a leader, emerges, and everyone on FB, in conversation, will be ecstatic, being like "This is our savior" only to brutally mock them and bully them if they make the slightest mistake. it's either all good, all bad

ENG Translation Changes: In Georgian, Interpressnews.ge says that the opposition leader Vashadze told protestors to encircle the parliament and gave Georgian Dream an ultimatum. In English, the same article is shorter, and they left out "Surround the parliament." interpressnews.ge/ka/article/747…

Google translate

The police in Georgia have been exceptionally good at dispersing protestors. It's clear they have been training for this. The crowds really were massive—huge—and they just got rid of them so quickly. Georgian Dream isn't leaving anything to chance anymore. Overturned police car, a protestor stands, few others stood on it as well.

We have been reading Zubok's book, Collapse, in our study group, and there is a part about how Russian nationalism reared its ugly head and the demands of sovereignty in the USSR. Yeltsin became the front leader of this nationalism. How USSR was an anti-Russian project, he says: “Russia is the only republic devoid of statehood, without economic, political, social, and scientific institutions that other republics had long possessed.” Yeltsin promised his base that he would defeat USSR Party bosses and reallocate Russian resources for RU people benefit

The chair of the parliament committee on legal affairs was like, "Georgians are watching this, and they will know this bill you keep referring to as "Russian law" is word-for-word translated from the US version, and second, this is not law but a bill." Person speaking again in opposition to bill: Do you know what changes were made to FARA in the US in 1970s? Raise your hand.
Chair: Do you know what the first paragraph of Georgian constitution is?
She doesn't know.

I have been busy and off Twitter while traveling to Belgrade. Meanwhile, everything happened. So let's talk about foreign agent law and the two bills proposed by a conservative fraction in GE. The first bill was based on the Russian variant, and the second on the FARA US variant. Nothing highlights more how horrible the politics of the government and many "Civil Society' players are. First let's take the government. So, the ruling party did not directly introduce this, but a more "radical" fraction did.

The most anti-Soviet/Socialist people are the ones who believe that without the Soviet Union, they'd be integrated into the winners club, Europe, and the USSR robbed them of their "true destiny," which rests the assumption that would be accepted because they are white. Belief in white European supremacy is part and parcel of the critique of the USSR/socialism. That's why anti-communists often have at least a tinge of fascism because they may or may not be aware of what they base their criticism on.