O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?

In 2004 I thought that what was called „transition” had been completed and a new perspective for Romania had been opened. As a sociologist I published a book on critical analysis of those 15 years of profound social change. I was wrong. Another 7 years of confusion and sorrow has followed. In Janua...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Cătălin Zamfir
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Expert Projects 2013-07-01
Series:Sociologie Românească
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arsociologie.ro/revistasociologieromaneasca/sr/article/view/507
id doaj-05e847caac1e409a9b40a0277ada3b04
record_format Article
spelling doaj-05e847caac1e409a9b40a0277ada3b042020-11-25T03:35:50ZengExpert ProjectsSociologie Românească1220-53892668-14552013-07-01112O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm? Cătălin Zamfir0Research Institute for Quality of Life, Romanian Academy In 2004 I thought that what was called „transition” had been completed and a new perspective for Romania had been opened. As a sociologist I published a book on critical analysis of those 15 years of profound social change. I was wrong. Another 7 years of confusion and sorrow has followed. In January 2012 I considered a new critical analysis of transition was necessary and I wrote this paper. The paper has two parts. The first part is dedicated to the analysis of the state in the process of transition. Arguments are brought out that state had been a key variable of the entire process of changes. There was a competition between two structural tendencies: on the one hand what is usually called promotion of the legal state; on the other hand we can identify a strong structural tendency what I call neofeudal state: the state as an important source of exploration of its resources by the new groups in power; a transfer of the public resources not from up to down, but contrary from down to up. The neofeudal state is responsible for the economic destructive process of privatisation and for producing the mechanisms of neofeudal exploration of the state and population what are usually called corruption. The second part of the paper try to identify the historical alternatives Romania has in the present situation: a prosperous capitalism and socially cohesive or a precarious capitalism socially polarised. https://arsociologie.ro/revistasociologieromaneasca/sr/article/view/507transitionneofeudal stateprosperous capitalismprecarious capitalism
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Cătălin Zamfir
spellingShingle Cătălin Zamfir
O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
Sociologie Românească
transition
neofeudal state
prosperous capitalism
precarious capitalism
author_facet Cătălin Zamfir
author_sort Cătălin Zamfir
title O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
title_short O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
title_full O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
title_fullStr O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
title_full_unstemmed O analiză critică a tranziţiei II. România în ianuarie 2012 – Către ce ne îndreptăm?
title_sort o analiză critică a tranziţiei ii. românia în ianuarie 2012 – către ce ne îndreptăm?
publisher Expert Projects
series Sociologie Românească
issn 1220-5389
2668-1455
publishDate 2013-07-01
description In 2004 I thought that what was called „transition” had been completed and a new perspective for Romania had been opened. As a sociologist I published a book on critical analysis of those 15 years of profound social change. I was wrong. Another 7 years of confusion and sorrow has followed. In January 2012 I considered a new critical analysis of transition was necessary and I wrote this paper. The paper has two parts. The first part is dedicated to the analysis of the state in the process of transition. Arguments are brought out that state had been a key variable of the entire process of changes. There was a competition between two structural tendencies: on the one hand what is usually called promotion of the legal state; on the other hand we can identify a strong structural tendency what I call neofeudal state: the state as an important source of exploration of its resources by the new groups in power; a transfer of the public resources not from up to down, but contrary from down to up. The neofeudal state is responsible for the economic destructive process of privatisation and for producing the mechanisms of neofeudal exploration of the state and population what are usually called corruption. The second part of the paper try to identify the historical alternatives Romania has in the present situation: a prosperous capitalism and socially cohesive or a precarious capitalism socially polarised.
topic transition
neofeudal state
prosperous capitalism
precarious capitalism
url https://arsociologie.ro/revistasociologieromaneasca/sr/article/view/507
work_keys_str_mv AT catalinzamfir oanalizacriticaatranzitieiiiromaniainianuarie2012catreceneindreptam
_version_ 1724552820975206400