Agonism as a State Policy for Engagement of Church in the Project of Europe
The Case of Georgia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7874825 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tamar Gamkrelidze (0000-0003-0086-7387, Maastricht University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 262-281 |
| Publication date | 2019-05-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Church and State (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0021-969X • E-ISSN: 2040-4867 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/jcs/csy032 |
| OpenAlex | W2804289169 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
Since the late 1990s, the national elites in Eastern European countries that sought a membership into European institutions have agreed on the political vision of an integration into Europe. Europe has been a symbol for values of liberal democracy. Nevertheless, the concrete political form of liberal democracy and European values has been interpreted differently and has become an issue of debate and even a heated argument among different political groups. In Georgia, the political agenda of joining the European Union (EU) became most effective only after many years of transition, corruption, and social riots between independence in 1991 and the Rose Revolution in 2003. President Mikheil Saakashvili’s policy of integration into the EU and NATO (in the following: “European project”) between 2004 and 2012 reflected the opinion of the majority of Georgians and brought some stability to the country. The European project emerged as an uncontested, sole roadmap for the development of Georgia without alternative. However, this political agenda entailed debates on the relationship between European liberalism and Georgian values. In particular, the Georgian Orthodox Church (GOC) took part in defending what it believed to be Georgian values against European liberalism. Thus, this article looks at the political agendas of the GOC and Saakashvili’s government between 2004 and 2012. In contrast to most of the literature, the paper will argue that the policy of these two strong, social actors was agonistic in the sense put forward by Chantal Mouffe rather than being antagonistic or hostile.
Argument (complex analysis) · Democracy · Economics · European union · Georgian · Independence (probability theory) · Liberalism · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · State (computer science) · Global Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics · Law · Post-Soviet Geopolitical Dynamics · Public Administration · Religion and Society Interactions
| Citations per year | 0.29 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2019 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |