At any time when you want to start thinking, your thought […] already exists as a likeness of thought […]. There is always a verbal world which generates Pseudo-questions, pseudo-problems and pseudo-thoughts on its own, and it is practically impossible to distinguish them from true thought.
Merab MamardashviliAfter the war in August 2008 Russia unilaterally recognized the independence of Georgia's separatist regions Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The country is confronted with the specific institutional legacy of Soviet ethno- federalism predetermining ethnic cleavages on the one hand. In parallel the same Soviet system unintentionally created an incentive system for nationalist elites that in 1991, together with national independence, led to nationalist secession of their regional administrative units. In that way it shaped a unique confluence of grievances, perceptions, and opportunities inscribed to a certain historical narrative that developed over the twentieth century.
This chapter deals with one such debate in the Georgian public as a case study for reality perception and value orientation among the people of a transitional society. Based on a close reading of more than one hundred articles and interviews from various print media sources, it inquires about the place of public debates in Georgian society. Is this kind of discourse more public or elite? Is its style imbued with the Soviet heritage or filled with anti-ideological, changing paradigms? Taking the short-term results of this debate into consideration, one may ask, where does the debate lead?
Also different forms of discourse and arguing relate to generational changes: young ‘reformers’, that came to power after the ‘Rose Revolution’ as newly appointed ministers, prefer a Western style discourse of democracy, human rights and market economy; by contrast, representatives of the old state elite, the nomenklatura, rely on the national discourse which has developed over several decades and became politicized since the late 1980s and after the break-up of the Soviet Union represented the sole source of ideological underpinning for Georgia's independence.
The Debate – a reconstruction
After amendments to the current legislation came into force on 14 January 1999, a heated debate developed in the Georgian media because ‘ethnicity’ would no longer be indicated on Georgian identity cards and birth certificates.