GEORGIAN PEOPLE`S SOCIAL ECONOMIC AND PSYCOLOGICAL CRISIS

BY. Sophico Sichinava

We cannot say that we can fully describe the psychology of Georgian nation, but we can speak about its common characteristic features.

We went through many revolutions in the previous century. We have put up with each of them so that it became difficult to speak about the peculiarities and psychology of Georgians. As we can easily put up with new circumstances, it would not be difficult for us to adopt and survive in the modern world. Still it is not so. The present social-economic crisis in Georgia affected our psychology, it is reflected in our day-to-day life – politics, elections, etc. Sociologist Emzar Jgerenaia speaks to us.
– The most important feature of Georgian nature is a high level of conformity and humility, It can be called double identity. This is explained by Georgian history when aggressive politics with neighbouring countries was not advantageous to Georgia so the people had to show meekness in relationships with them. This conformist life-style and philosophy have always been actual, which served to form Georgian people’s peculiar mentality. The inner structure is never reflected in external influence. A Georgian always plays a certain role, but this role is never internationalised. You will often see a Georgian woman imitating a European one and a man playing a certain role, but this role does not become his inner principle of life. Therefore, we deal with one very important problem: relationship between statute and common laws. The Georgians have never respected statute laws and acted in accordance with common ones. We read in the notes of travellers to Georgia: “This country has never had laws, which is a reason of these people’s social misery”. Proceeding from the political situation of Georgia, the country could never pass its own laws and rules. The main thing was that Georgians did not have enough inner strength necessary for the organisation of order. We have always had to play with strong states. We were Georgians, but if necessary, we became Persians, Russians, etc. Thus, Georgian nature came into being. This nature has always been under dominance, it has always been ready to use any situation in its own interests, in favour of his family, friends and acquaintances. Today, this is reflected in the dispute of people or oppositional groups on air. These people can embrace each other after the broadcasting is finished. We cannot, certainly, say the same about all people. There are men of principles in thecountry, too. Many psychologists speak about Georgians’ histrionics, but a great distance between statute and common laws and a life-style is more important to me, sociologist. I agree that this distance exists in all cultures. There is no place where people would live strictly under laws, but this situation is more conspicuous here. Tax system is a clear example of it. No one observes tax law because of imperfect tax system. One may think that someone would fulfil these laws if it were not like this. It indicates at one thing: we cannot pass laws that we would observe. A Georgian has always looked for a situation that would not be quite clear. In the language of modern sociology it means that the process in our country is not well defined. Here a man does not orient himself on system rules, but rather on individual nature, mood, etc. Thus, the important thing in policy is leader’s nature, temperament, and charisma. Electors pay very much attention to it, but it is only a particular level of development. If we want to move forward, something should be changed.
If it is nation’s nature, how can this stage pass and another one come?
This stage may not at all pass, but there is a compulsory method. Americans, who have only had a 200-hundred year history, teach to shoot people who have fought for 3 thousand centuries. If we want to exist, we must start making business both in military field and economy. Despite the anti-global movement, the world becomes global. We have to develop particular habits and skills in order to survive in this world.From the viewpoint of technologies development the processes taking places in the world make us change our mentality. When speaking about a new stage of development, we do not mean hope for the nation’s inner potential. We issue from the really existing necessity that will change us.
– There was a time when the Georgian society was politically too exulted, which brought no good. We have also passed a period when people fell into nihilism. How will you characterise elector from the political point of view?
Despite election problems in recent past, the present electorate has changed from what it has been earlier. These elections showed that electorate sees spectre, difference. To a certain degree, electorate’s choice may turn out to be undesirable for someone, for instance, for me, a man of particular political orientations: I follow neither the left philosophy nor politics in economy. I do not think it justified, but what we have today can be called a particular choice. The main thing is that people do not want to be used, they start controlling their voices. If processes go on peacefully, this will become a weak spark that will help to form civil conscience. As for political parties and their relationships, this stage was characterised by check of forces. I think that elections in Sakrebulo were poignant and actual because people need radical changes and want to see new real representatives in politics.
– True, Georgia is a country where a poem about Arsena Marabdeli was written, but Georgians are still considered to belong to the followers of left orientation. Where does this boom of left forces come from?
– Let us say who are these romantic electors of labourists that think about 70-year period with nostalgia. Left orientation is, generally, an intellectual position that is popular in many countries. However, this direction is suitable to countries with left philosophy and life-style.
– So is it a new stage?
– Yes, I think that left orientation, economy and policy is fatal for us in this stage, it will produce no positive results. I do not agree to the viewpoint that the Georgians were initially left-oriented. I think they were neither left nor right…
– At least, they respected property.
– They respected only their own property, but not other one.
– Travelling across Switzerland you will see an inscription saying that wood behind the pavement is a private property; you cannot walk in it otherwise you will be fined. These rules have been formed in the result of accrued experience and labour, which we lack. The 70 years of Soviet power have completely excluded the chance to gain this experience. We are people with the most ancient culture who, in fact, start to develop and live. I think we have the chance to become a society. Respect towards other property helps one to get rid of xenophobia, i.e. hatred towards everything foreign. Georgian tolerance is an artificial, fictitious philosophy. It is an ideology of the weak in our day-to-day life. Just imagine what we would do to people who do not obey us if we were a bit stronger.
– Tolerance issues from the respect of other people’s property that makes you tolerate people who are near you, people of other beliefs and their property; it makes you be guided by common rules.
– I think this perspective is still far as the two parties that won the elections are left, i.e. people do not think so.
– Labourists are, undoubtedly, left. As for nationalists, their economic orientation is not quite clear, but it contains a left potential…
– In the form of left slogans.
– A politician depends on electors.
– So politics has to be played?
– From the viewpoint of politics, these are correct game rules. You should sell goods that no one buys. Production makes no sense then. To a certain degree, a politician is an unhappy man. He should say what would be sold, what would be bought by an elector, i.e. what troubles an elector – social, economic or other real problems. In this case, a politician is frank. However, problems arise as far as relationship towards property and wealth is concerned. People of former communist period have a need of property distribution. Politicians have to take it into consideration. Some do so by showing diplomacy, others do so directly. Let us imagine that houses on the mountain of Sairme are going to be transferred to the property of people. I would like to ask the left: how many houses will be enough for these people? Who will they sell them to? To rich people? The question arises whether the principle of justice will be observed in this distribution. We have no experience in construction, but still we have to come to a certain result – either positive or negative: we should understand whether we can be independent and whether we can be called a society. A manual of sociology defines society as a group of independent people first of all implying territorial and economic independence.
– How does the society take decisions and what does it reckon with when it faces the necessity to make a choice.
– The behaviour of an elector in our society is quite an irrational phenomenon that is difficult to determine. However, while making a choice, it takes into account two factors. The first is leader’s charisma. Its temperament should be in accord with people’s temperament. The second thing is what a politician offers people. When elections are nearing, everybody knows that no elector takes a programme and reads it all over again. Perhaps, this does not happen in any other country, but politician’s tone, manner of speaking, his ideas offered to society are transparent; elector understands quite well the meaning of the phrase. The phrase “Tbilisi without Shevarnadze” implied absence of multi-clan and clan society, equality of chances. As far as labourists are concerned, the slogan was “Let’s drive away robbers from the government”. Labourists had to explain who the robbers were. However, they behaved diplomatically. Yet, electors can understand politicians quite well. Two things are important: leader’s nature and his image, i.e. the extent of elector’s certainty in politician’s honour, his frankness. The second is the topic of politician’s speech before electorate. There are, certainly, other factors, but their role is not so significant. These elections showed that politics is a struggle without any topic. He who chooses a right topic will win.
– Do you think electors believe in politician’s frankness?
– It is not important whether they believe it or not. The important thing here is the way politicians speak, whether he speaks in an understandable language, i.e. topics of TV programmes are discussed in almost each family in a changed way so that an elector receives an impression as if he speaks himself, as if he and the politician need one and the same thing. Elections bring results in case a politician chooses a right rhetoric. Political riots described by mass media encourage people to go to elections. A major part of electors is always oriented on action and is ready to get involved in adventures (in a good sense of the word).
– The conclusion of our interview is that each Georgian must create a qualitative type of new Georgian and prepare for new life. How much time will be required for this and what is the role of state in this process?
– The less is the state role, i.e. the more freedom the state gives to people for making business and the less it intervenes in economy, the quicker will be the process. According to the present theories, society is a self-regulating social phenomenon. The main thing is to form legislative system in such a way as to give a man the chance of acting freely. Our position is transferring of our problems to the state. We complain of bad situation in our country, but do nothing to prevent it. The problem is our participation in this process. Georgians do not believe that they will be able to change the society and state formed by them. Social fatality is observed in Georgia. We retreat as soon as we encounter a problem. We mistake business relations for personal ones. There is no guarantee that we might change. Latin America is in neighbourhood with America, but people do not live like Americans there. Once an English ambassador was asked how he managed to form democracy in England to which he answered that democracy is still in the process of formation. Thus, democracy is an incomplete process. Today, democratic society is a society of risk.
– Is not it collectivism phenomenon implying that someone will do everything for you?
– Psychologists have always raised the question about whether the Georgian culture was collective or industrial. Personally I think that this culture cannot exist in accordance with collectivism principles, nor can it live in accordance with individualism principles. Georgians act as is profitable to them from the pragmatic point of view. As far as responsibility is concerned, we, certainly, like to shift the blame on others. There are peoples that cannot organise social life, i.e. cannot organise it the way it is in Europe. If we wish to live the way we do, it will be so, but definite models are necessary in case we wish to change anything. A man develops when he wishes to change his point of view, and a living person can always do it.