What do you think?
Rate this book
Taking Stock of Shock: Social Consequences of the 1989 Revolutions
Kristen Ghodsee and Mitchell A. Orenstein blend empirical data with lived experiences to produce a robust picture of who won and who lost in post-communist transition, contextualizing the rise of populism in Eastern Europe.
After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, more than 400 million people suddenly found themselves in a new reality, a dramatic transition from state socialist and centrally planned workers' states to liberal democracy (in most cases) and free markets. Thirty years later, postsocialist citizens remain sharply divided on the legacies of transition. Was it a success that produced great progress after a short recession, or a socio-economic catastrophe foisted on the East by Western capitalists? Taking Stock of Shock aims to uncover the truth using a unique, interdisciplinary investigation into the social consequences of transition--including the rise of authoritarian populism and xenophobia. Showing that economic, demographic, sociological, political scientific, and ethnographic research produce contradictory results based on different disciplinary methods and data, Kristen Ghodsee and Mitchell Orenstein triangulate the results. They find that both the J-curve model, which anticipates sustained growth after a sharp downturn, and the disaster capitalism perspective, which posits that neoliberalism led to devastating outcomes, have significant basis in fact. While substantial percentages of the populations across a variety of postsocialist countries enjoyed remarkable success, prosperity, and progress, many others suffered an unprecedented socio-economic catastrophe. Ghodsee and Orenstein conclude that the promise of transition still remains elusive for many and offer policy ideas for overcoming negative social and political consequences.
After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, more than 400 million people suddenly found themselves in a new reality, a dramatic transition from state socialist and centrally planned workers' states to liberal democracy (in most cases) and free markets. Thirty years later, postsocialist citizens remain sharply divided on the legacies of transition. Was it a success that produced great progress after a short recession, or a socio-economic catastrophe foisted on the East by Western capitalists? Taking Stock of Shock aims to uncover the truth using a unique, interdisciplinary investigation into the social consequences of transition--including the rise of authoritarian populism and xenophobia. Showing that economic, demographic, sociological, political scientific, and ethnographic research produce contradictory results based on different disciplinary methods and data, Kristen Ghodsee and Mitchell Orenstein triangulate the results. They find that both the J-curve model, which anticipates sustained growth after a sharp downturn, and the disaster capitalism perspective, which posits that neoliberalism led to devastating outcomes, have significant basis in fact. While substantial percentages of the populations across a variety of postsocialist countries enjoyed remarkable success, prosperity, and progress, many others suffered an unprecedented socio-economic catastrophe. Ghodsee and Orenstein conclude that the promise of transition still remains elusive for many and offer policy ideas for overcoming negative social and political consequences.
300 pages, Paperback
Published July 9, 2021
17 people are currently reading
425 people want to read
About the author
Kristen R. Ghodsee
21 books476 followersKristen R. Ghodsee an award-winning author and ethnographer. She is professor of Russian and East European Studies and a member of the Graduate Group in Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania. Her work has been translated into over twenty-five languages and has appeared in publications such as Foreign Affairs, Dissent, Jacobin, Ms. Magazine, The New Republic, Le Monde Diplomatique, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, She is the author of 12 books, and she is the host of the podcast, A.K. 47, which discusses the works of the Russian Bolshevik, Alexandra Kollontai. Her latest book is Everyday Utopia: What 2000 Years of Wild Experiments Can Teach Us About the Good Life, which appeared with Simon & Schuster in May 2023.
She loves popcorn, manual typewriters, and Bassett hounds.
Website: www.kristenghodsee.com
Podcast: ak47.buzzsprout.com
She loves popcorn, manual typewriters, and Bassett hounds.
Website: www.kristenghodsee.com
Podcast: ak47.buzzsprout.com
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
October 3, 2022
This is a great read and a thorough comprehensive analysis of the impacts of transition on post-socialist states following 1989. Would recommend this to anyone wanting to get a better sense of the multidimensional aspects of the collapse of socialism in these places.
June 25, 2024
Strange book. The topic is very interesting, and the attempt to merge findings from various disciplines is great, but the authors constantly throw their own ideology onto the topic and it reduces the quality of their work. I did in general enjoy learning about the difficulties suffered by many post-soviet states in the aftermath of the collapse and how they have led to their current political scenes.
The authors however constantly bring up the prevalence of neoliberal ideology as the source of all negative aspects of the transition, with reference to economists such as Joseph Stiglitz. Anyone who knows of, has read, or met Joseph Stiglitz knows that this can only be justified through ignorance, and that he is certainly not a believer in the gospel of limitless free markets. The authors embarrass themselves with claims like this about economists, with whose work they are clearly not familiar(Geoffrey Sachs is another example of an economist they declare is a neoliberal shill).
The idea that post-soviet states would now be better of if they had a Chinese-style transition has aged incredibly poorly considering the rampant corruption, poor growth, and limited economic potential now recognised by economists studying China, yet still the authors laud China as the most successful former communist state to transition.
Based on the way they have injected their ideology into this topic, it’a difficult to have any faith in the qualitative evidence they provide to support their claims.
The authors however constantly bring up the prevalence of neoliberal ideology as the source of all negative aspects of the transition, with reference to economists such as Joseph Stiglitz. Anyone who knows of, has read, or met Joseph Stiglitz knows that this can only be justified through ignorance, and that he is certainly not a believer in the gospel of limitless free markets. The authors embarrass themselves with claims like this about economists, with whose work they are clearly not familiar(Geoffrey Sachs is another example of an economist they declare is a neoliberal shill).
The idea that post-soviet states would now be better of if they had a Chinese-style transition has aged incredibly poorly considering the rampant corruption, poor growth, and limited economic potential now recognised by economists studying China, yet still the authors laud China as the most successful former communist state to transition.
Based on the way they have injected their ideology into this topic, it’a difficult to have any faith in the qualitative evidence they provide to support their claims.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews