Ilija Aceski, Ph. D.

Faculty of Philosophy
Institute of Sociology

Macedonian Society in the Processes of Transition and

Globalization

Summary
In this paper the author analyses the processes of development of the Macedonian society
after the nineties of the last century, from the point of socialism broke out and the beginning
of setting out the system of market economy and multi party democracy. The accent of the
analyses is put on some areas of the social changes: a) contradictories within the development
of the society in conditions of radical changes on economic, social and political plan; b)
changes of the system of values in circumstances of radical changes within the society; c)
specificities of „the Macedonian case” as multicultural society and binational state.
Key words: transition, social and cultural changes, multi ethnic society, consociative
democracy.

Introduction. Beginning of ninties of the previous century started with a process of socialism
breakdown and initiation of radical changes that led towards new system of market economy
and multy party democracy, followed by crisis, which even at its start was manifested with
huge economy downfall and emersion of great unemployment, decline of life standard and
consumption, which resulted with general crises that interfered all segments of the social,
political and economic life. The process of socialism breakdown resulted with an emphasized
process of population stratification, which means that on one side was a small group
comprising very rich individuals, while on the other one was the majority of the population
that rapidly descended towards the lowest level of social scale and reached the poverty. Soon,
after socialism breakdown, tensions and internal conflicts appeared, what resulted with huge
disapointment of the population from the new system. In almost of countries in transition, the
population showed transparent signes of displeasure and disappointment from the system
which actually didn’t meet their expectations. The treasure that was created during socialism
was privatized in a very short period, in favour of the old ruling structures, groups that were
directly or indirectly bounded to the centers of the political and economic power. (Aceski, I.
1997; Slaveski, T. 1998; Krishtanovskaja, O 1995; Lazic, M. 1994; Tomic, Kaludrovic, I.;
Petric, M,. 2007). The sense of justice, which is particularly emphasized in the period of
ownership transformation, disorted the normal courses of the social and political life i.e. it
influenceed the sphere of political democracy and consequently the actualization of human
rights and belief that political pluralism is better than any other system.
During the first several years of transition, almost all of the countries that changed their
system and entered the process of market economy and multy party democracy, faced

1
enourmous standard downfall which “shaked” the belief that new system will increase the
level of freedom, wealth and justice. Researches, implemented at the beginning of the 20th
century, ten years after the dramatic changes, showed that inequalities are much more
emphasized in the transition countries than in the western, developped societies. The process
of privatization was understood as a bulglary of the collective ownership by those who
occupied main political positions .( L o š o n c, A. 2005; Radmilović, S. 2001.; Bogooev, К.
1994, Aceski, I. 2002).

Contradictories of the Process of Transition

Ownership and political transformation. Primarily, the process of transition means transit
from a system that’s characterized by one party democracy and collective ownership, in fact
non-democratic system, with imperiled human rights and freedoms, towards another system
that’s characteristic for the Western European societies, characterized by private ownership
and multiy party democracy. Reasons for socialism breakdown were found in the economic
inefficiancy and absence of working motivation, which were distructed by the unnatural
alignment, where it was impossible to express the right values i.e on the point where the link
between the labour productivity and its valorization was lost. The essence of transition, from
economic point of view, was creation of efficient economy within efficient market economy,
where privatization was one of the first and most important steps. For instance, the aim of
mass privatization in Poland was maximization of the justice and elimination of the chances
for loss on the part of the citizen. In fact, with mass and rapid privatization, in a short period
of time and without great expenses, the ownership was trasformed, what was one of the
conditions for setting out market mechanisms. (Slaveski, T. 1998; Krishtanovskaja, O. 1995;
Genov, N. 1994; Bogooev, K. 1994; Lazic, M. 1994; Zudin, A. 1999; Aceski, I, 1997).
Macedonian response on privatization started before socialism brekdown, with sell-off of the
social capital and its transformation into shareholder capital, what was maximaly used by the
ruling structures, when privatization according to new rules started. Several years later,
(1994) when the new Law on privatization was adopted, management bodies of the
enterprises, in cooperation with the political structures, in a short period of time preoccupied
the most attractive parts of the ownership, i.e the most profitable companies. As indicated by
the analysts, soon after socialism breakdown, people didn’t make a mistacke with ansering
that previous nomenclature mutated into capitalistic class, making them owners of the capital.
Privatization enabled them to keep in their hands the economic resources and simultaniously
to acquire freedom that used to be denied in the period of previous regime. Privatization of
the nomenclature gave certain level of legitimacy to the haul. (Aceski, I, 1995; Aceski, I,
1997; Slaveski, T. 1996; Brajanoski, B. 1995; Roman, F, and others, 1996).

From Process of Transition towards the Status of Post-recession

In the analyses of the Macedonian society we’ll focus on several issues that are closely linked
between themselves and present the complex reality of its situation, immediately after

2
socialism breakdown and disolution of the the Yugoslav federation, in which regime
Macedonia existed for five decades, after the Second World War.
Unfortenately, there aren’t researches regarding Macedonian society, mainly in the sphere of
interdisciplinary studies, or researches from sociological and economic point of view and it
doesn’t give us right to take argumented conclusions about the direction through which
Macedonian society moved during the period of post-transition. Economic and social
indicators are not sufficient to do it. Simply, we’re not in position to do the estimation
according to an analogy of what is happening in other countries in transition and accordingly
to accept it as a characteristic for the Macedonian case, even at first sight, most of the
analyses done by the experts in Sociology and Economy from the neighbouring countries
seem like they refer to Macedonia, too. . (Lazic, M. 1998; Genov, N. 1994; Tomic,
Kaludrovic, I., Petric, M,. 2007. Stevanovic, S , and others, 2008; Stojadinovic, М, Matic P.
2009; ).
The question, which theoretical model is most appropriate to explain and understand the
nature of transformation of the Macedonian society deserves great attention. Macedonia is
too complex society and it makes difficult to explain and enter a theoretical framework that
would satisfy the aim to understand at least a part of the contradictories of the development
and to determine the level of democratic consolidation, two decades after socialism
breakdown that, at least, includes stable political system which comprises elementary culural
and value contents, that have significant role and importance for the great part of the
population. (Bogoev, К.;1994. Maldini P.,; 2007. Perasovic, K 2004.,; Vejnovic D., 2004;).
For example, soon after socialism breakdown, there was a great disappointment in the civil
society values, possibilities to achieve human rights, functioning of the parliamentary
democracy, establishment of the legitimate state, mainly as primary values that would bring
greater freedom and justice, as well as preconditions for fast economy development, mainly
through the process of ownership transformation as a minor condition for improved economic
efficiency. Unfortenately, it didn’t happen: pluralism, multi party system and privatization for
the majority of the population were not expirienced as a step forward towards higher level of
democracy, privatization didn’t provoke higher efficiency and higher rate of justice (Aceski I,
1997; Slaveski, T. 1998; National Report on Human Development in Macedonia for 1998,
1999, 2001;). Accepted and expirienced in that way, it was expected the transition to cause
social changes and also to create new social structure and new values that would be different
from the previous ones – that would mean wider justice, higher efficiency and wealth
(Grudelj,S., 1994; Economic transition in Bulgaria and Macedonia, 1997; Cifric, I.,
(ur)1998).

In the literature, mainly there are three theoretical approaches in the analysis of the transition:
theory of structural approach, or theory of economic and political change, where the starting
point is the situation before tranzition and expectations from the changes, at the beginning
and at the end. The question: do people live better or worse was the most frequently asked
question only a few years after the new system was introduced, but it’s alos actual today in
the countries facing economic crisis and low living standard. Depending on the respones on
this question, the success of the new system is evaluated. Theory of sociocultural approach or
theory of social transformation - where dominant position belongs to the change of social

3
values and theory of modernization i.e the changes are understood as a moment of historical
development. In fact, the existence of a continuum in the society development, from
traditional towards modern one, was caused by some transformation processes, such as
industralization, urbanization, rationalization, bureaucratization, individuation, and other
processes. (Sztompka, 2000.; Vejnovic, D. 2004; Linc, H., Stepan, A., 1998; Perasovic, K
2004).

“Macedonian Case” of Multiethnic Society and State

To understand the Macedonian case of "multicultural, multiethnic and multireligious society,

it is necessary to set up a solid theoretical foundation on which, simultaniously, there must be
a place for largely conflicting and even exclusive attitudes, as follows: on one side, the desire
and efforts to create a civil democratic society, similarly like that notion is accepted in the
developed Western world, but at the same time ro be realized through processes/bases of
ethno-political mobilization, political organization based on empjasized ethnic, religious and
national prgnostic, i.e consociative democracy on ethnic principles. On the other hand, it
must result with creating sufficient elements that will help to preserve the constitutional
character of the state, as unitary community etc. On this point arises the question: “Is
Macedonia a binational state?”, which is frequently found in the sociological and political
researches, but also in the everyday communication among the citizens: where does
consociative democracy lead, how it is possible and if it is possible, how the state can
function on the principles deriving from its binational character. First of all is it possible to
establish an effictive state, which will not produce unnecessary problems, especially those
that come from the ethnic grounds. Furthermore, are the processes of decentralization aimed
towards a direction that leads towards definite formation of a binational state (Stankovic V.,
Pejniovic P.; 2010; Atanasov, P. 2003; Framework Agreement. 2001; Maleska, M. 2005).
Simply, when we talk about the effects of privatization, which in many transition countries is
understood by their population as a criminal operation of the powerful groups, it has the same
meaning, especially in the countries that, as Macedonia, haven’t experienced economic
development that was expected to reduce the percentage of unemployed and also to increase
the living standard.
But, if the problem is observed from another, more abstract level in terms of the processes of
modernization, globalization or Europisation, there arises the question of how this process is
accepted and experienced, whether the society can follow these processes, which means to

4
adapt and to enjoy development benefits, but also to protect from the effects of the opened
attitude towards the World. Globalization is not just a benefit, but also a loss of many
elements that are part of the national and cultural tissue and their transformation. European
integration issue comprises complex relationships between autonomy and globalization. On
its way towards EU integration, Macedonia faces additional problems that deeply penetrate
into the identity of the Macedonian nation, referring to its relations with the neighbouring
country of Greece and the issue about the state’s name.
Secondly, twenty years is a period that’s long enough to recognize and identify the main
features of the changes, which began with a radical overthrow of the institutions of the old
socialist system and started with great enthusiasm for establishment of a new ones that are
typical for the developed Western democracies, which, as it was believed at the beginning
had to be just to copied and applied in place of the old ones, i.e., to perform ownership
transformation, understood as privatization and to establish a parliamentary multi-party
democracy, as conditions that are sufficient for pulling the overall development and for a
short time will approach the democratic and economically developed world. Where is
Macedonia today, first in comparison to where it was twenty years ago and second, compared
to other countries in the neighborhood and the rest of the countries in transition?
(Stevanovic, S , I drugi,; 2008 Post-Socialist Countries in the Globalizing World2001;
Stojadinovic, M.,; 2009. Veselica, V,; Vojnic,D ,.2000).
Economic indicators are rather disappointing; Macedonia still hasn’t reached the level of
development of the nineties of the last century, the percentage of poverty and unemployment
is present among one-third of the total population, productivity is relatively low, the changes
in the sphere of property faces great injustice, trust in institutions is on a low level, there’s
high degree of authoritarian awareness especially among young people, majority of the
population accepts the market economy values, liberalism and pluralism with great cynicism,
nihilism, and disappointment. In Macedonia, as in most countries in transition, prerequisites
for establishing new moral and value basis in the spirit of market economy were not created,
i.e. there wasn’t replacement of the old way of practicing the values, which’s characteristic
for socialism – with system of values that’s characteristic for its dominance of the private
property rights and pluralism of political interests. According to Williams, (Williams, W, E,
.1995/96) basic moral principles and values such as frugality, honesty, trust, hard work and
cooperative behavior are established in the arena of civil society, and they are key elements
for the stability of the society. Respecting private property and the “sanctity” of the deal are
some of those values.

5
Third, is it possible to compile a realistic picture of the changes that Macedonian society is
experiencing, especially in the last ten years, or whether we are in situation to create a
realistic picture of the Macedonian society, which will comprise at least a few non
problematic attitudes concerning specific social, economic, cultural or briefly, an overall
development. It would be correct to determine that Macedonian period of transition is similar
to the one that took place in the countries with which Macedonia was in a community for
nearly half a century, or with the countries of Eastern Europe, but it will not help us to find
out the specifics of its development. To what level Macedonia is a democratic country, is it a
development that’s deficient in terms of winning democratic principles”, or what slows down
the development in many areas of people's lives, especially evident in the sphere of economy,
are questions that are still present and frequently asked. (Konig, M.; Kusic, S., 2004;
Stankovic, В. Pejniovic, P.)

Main Issues of the Macedonian Development

Further on, this analyses refers to several issues that are considered essential to understand
part of the Macedonian specificity within Macedonian reality.
First, whether Macedonian society has overcome the consequences of the first stage of
transition that was full of contradictions, tumultuous events, period of survival, when the
establishment of the state, acquiring the independence and nation, happened with all its
complexity, where politicaly, economically and culturally it was necessary to withstand the
pressure of survival, and which ended with the Ohrid Agreement in 2001, when Macedonia
was defined as a community of ethnicities and the foundations of consociative democracy
were laid. (Maleska, M. 2005; Framework Agreement.; (2001) Engström, J. 2002 ;Bieber, F.
(2008).
Secondly, to what extent the Macedonian state and society after 2001, when the second stage
of development starts, has adapted to political, institutional, cultural form of democracy that’s
not widely practiced within the world - known as consociative democracy, functioning in
multuetnic state, in the circumstances of multi cultural society. Whether and to what extent
this type of democracy is appropriate and suitable for economic development, are the issues
that aren’t exclusively of political or economic significance. (Stankovic, B. Pejniovic P;
2010; Atanasov, P. 2003).
Thirdly, what do sociological researches show about the identity in terms of globalization and
which indirectly gives us part of the answer, without intending to be generalized, but

6
indicative enough to find out how the youth perceives and understands certain Macedonian
conditions, in a way that can be enlightening for those who are trying to analyze the
complexity of the situation in Macedonia. Above all, it refers to the attitude towards global
processes, their perceptions regarding Macedonia, does it have positive or negative
connotation.

Socio-economic Relations

About the situation of the Macedonian society, observed through rough socio-economic facts,
it is not necessary to speak in detail. According to the powerty and unemployment rate,
Macedonia is on the first place in Europe (Stevanovic, S и drugi, 2008.; Veselica, V.;
Vojnic,D ;2000 Konig, M.; Kusic, S., 2004).
It doesn’t present the complete reality of the situation: the percent of underground economy is
high and there’s numerous diaspora, which mince the social condition by means of huge cash
incomes. Macedonia hasn’t achieved the level of development of the 90’s of the last century,
but the fact that the number of unemployed is doubled speaks about the difficulty of the
problems and the level of inequality that refers to social rules and perceptions, values and
attitudes of the actors that have personal expirience and roles in the economic processes,
which are considered as important for acquiring legitimacy of the economic system, above
all. ( Williams, W,E,.1995/96)
The research, done by EBOR two years ago, (2009) showed that Macedonians are the most
unfelicitous nation in compersion to 29 different nations covered with that survey. Almost
80% stated that the situation is worse than during the 90-ies of the last century, 60% said that
there is more corruption than in the socialism. When poverty is combined with pathological
unacceptable inequalities that are closely related to corruption, profiteering, crime, ethnic
inequalities, the image of Macedonian transition becomes much clearer. It took very short
period, just a few years after the communism breakdown, to lose optimism and belief in the
new, the one that replaced the old obnoxious system. (National Report on Human
development in Macedonia for 1998, 1999, 2011, UNDP; Aceski. I, 1995).

Political Stabilization

The question: what is the reason for the democratic deficit of the Macedonian society is far
more complex than it is for majority countries in transition. Some authors search the answer,

7
inter alia, in the fact that the independence of the state and nation happened simultaniously,
but also as a process of dismantling the concept of nation-state, where for the civil society,
which is one of the conditions for democracy development, it is dificult to discuss.
Democratic consolidation of the political system ends with the construction of state-creative
culture, as a socio-cultural base of democracy. It can last for several decades. Democracy
that’s consolidated within all levels becomes immune to the destabilizing factors that come
from the outside. Then, the concept of democratic consolidation which comprises citizens'
political attitudes and values has much higher potential for stabilization. (Wolfgang, M.
2007.)
High importance and role of Macedonian political-ethnic elites remained another significant
factor in the backsliding of democracy in an undesired direction. The respone of the public,
public opinion, or more precisely the language of the moral economy, long lasting transition,
weak or almost no role of the civil society, non efficient institutions and politicization of the
administration that happens permanently, uncertanity in the capacity of politicians who lead
the country and power abusment are only some of the things that extinguish people’s belief
that there are chances for building a democratic and affluent society. Most of these features
will be found in other countries in transition, but it seems that they are deeply rooted in
Macedonia (as the equalitarian syndrome is rooted) and even it can be said that there are
elements of radical egalitarizam that is dysfunctional and presents an obstacle on the road
towrds intensified modernization. (Aceski 2002; Radmilović S., 2001. Vejnovic D. 2004;
Veselica, V,. Vojnic, D., 2000)
Perception of the student population, which was formed in period of nineties, shows wiard
attitudes towards society changings. The majority of the students, almost 70% are convinced
that Macedonia is governed by the individual rather than collective interests, 1/3 are
convinced that democracy is possible (!) without free democratic elections, but also that
democracy and freedom of speech are obsticals for maintaing the progress. But, according to
2/3 of the exeminees, if the state has strong leaders, then progress and stability are
guaranteed. Among the students there is an exceptionally high level of authoritarian
conscience and huge doubtfulness in the effectiveness of the state institutions. Issues that are
closely related to the construction of the new system are directly derived from the mental
picture of how the state functions, whether it can provide fairness and basic preconditions for
a normal life. Democracy is instrumentalized, it is less successful in a phase of poverty.
Characteristics that refer to most of the countries in transition, and especially to Macedonia
are: essentially poor country, problems with the rule of law, unsuccesful fight against

8
corruption, insufficiently protected property rights, problematic judiciary. (Grdesic,M. 2008).
As a rule, weak civil society corresponds to this type of states, within them there’s dominance
of the power of the political leaders, party state is established and there’s an unnatural
marriage between the ruling party and the state. According to some serious analysis,
Macedonia becomes a typical case of partitioned state.
When we discuss the successfulness of the changes that are directed towards developed forms
of democracy and development, the issue of civil society role seems to be an important part
of these processes due to several reasons, which are related to the degree of democratic
development. In particular, it refers to situations where the development of society is under
strong pressure from ethnic elites and where ethnitization affects almost all segments of the
development. Namely, there is not democratic development without developed civil society,
and even more, Macedonia has one more remark: the existence of the state in the future may
in question if it is absent. Civil society develops tolerance and it is its core, it strengthens
democratic freedom, while in a multicultural state as Macedonia, it can play the role of a
controlling mechanism that controls the ethnic elites that are not controlled by anyone in their
struggling for power.
Unfortenately, in Macedonia, even the civil sector is under strong party influence and loses
the role that objectively belongs to it. Civil sector development can save the society from
further ethnic divisions on all grounds.

Concluding observations

Is Macedonia a typical example of a country in transition, similar to the majority of the

countries, which at the beginning of the nineties of the last century, abandoned socialist
model and started creating a new system, characteristic for the developed, western
parliamentary democracies, is a question that can not be answered precisely. Even at the
beginning of the transition, Macedonia faced problems that weren’t characteristic for other
countries, and today, twenty years after it faces major economic problems of high
unemployment and poverty, as well as huge “democratic deficit", and encounters
insurmountable obsticals on its way towards Euro-Atlantic integration.

Transition process, understood as a transition from one system to another, seems to be

completed, but the question regarding the level of democratic development is still opened.

9
Macedonia is a country that still lacks number of elements of a “normal" democratic society,
there’s still a feeling of a status of a weak state and weak civil society, followed by
exceptionally huge problems on social, economic and political level.

The matter is, how successfully democratic processes may develop in conditions of economic
underdevelopment, unemployment and high poverty. Then, the system of consociative
democracy imposed rules of behavior that are not always directed towards higher efficiency
of the state management affairs and institutional stability. Change of the state character, after
2001 caused by ethnic conflict stabilized the situation significantly, but the issue regarding
stability of the interethnic tolerance and coexistence remains to be actuel. Integration into the
European Union and NATO will greatly stabilize the process of development, but also it will
create new problems.

Ilija Aceski, Ph. D.

Faculty of Philosophy
Institute of Sociology

Summary

Macedonian society in the processes of transition and

globalization

In this paper the author is analyzing the processes of development of

Macedonian society after the nineties of the last century, since the
moment of the breaking out of the socialism and the beginning of the
establishing the system of market economy and multi party democracy.
The attention of the analyses is put on some areas of the social changes:
a) contradictories of the development of the society in conditions of
radical changes on economic, social and political plan; b) changes of the
value system in condition of radical changes of society; c) specificities of
„the Macedonian case” as multicultural society and be national state.

Key words: transition, social and cultural changes, multi

ethnic society, consociative democracy

Used literature:

Ацески, И. 1995 Општеството и човекот во транзиција, Прв дел . Екопрес: Скопје.

Ацески, И. 1997. Општесвото и човекот во транзиција, Втор дел.Екопрес:Скопје
Ацески, И. 2002. Општесвото и човекот во транзиција, Трет дел. Филозофски
факултет:Скопје
Atanasov, P. 2003. Multiculturalism as a theory, policy and practice. Skopje: Evro
Balkan Press.
Bieber, F. 2008. Power-sharing and the Implementation of the Ohrid Framework

10
Agreement. Skopje: Promo DSGN.
Blokker, P. 2005. Post-Communist Modernization, Transition Studies, and Diversity in
http://est.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/8/4/503 European Journal of Social:
Богоев ,К. 1994. Економска транзиција, концепти, резултати, проблеми, Зборник,
Економска транзиција, МАНУ
Брајаноски, Б. 1995 .Односот на трудот и менаџментот во услови на транзиција во РМ,
Годишник на ИСППИИ – Скопје, бр, 1

Veselica, V., 2007. Globalizacija i nova ekonomija. Zagreb: Ekonomski fakultet, Inženjerski
biro, HDE i Zavod za poslovna istraživanja. Samobor: A.G.Matoš.,
Veselica, V.., Vojnic,D ,.2000. Europske zemlje u tranziciji na pragu XXI. stoljeca,
Ekonomski pregled, 51 (9-10) 829-86
Vejnović D. 2004.Teorija tranzicije и drustvena kriza, Socioloski pregled,1-2, Sociolosko
drustvo Srbije,
Grdesić,M. 2008. Problem slabih drzava i slabih drustava u Istocnoj Evropi, Anali hrvatskog
poliitoloskog drustva. Zgreb
Grudelj,S., 1994, Dominantne vrednosne orienracije ; vo Lazic, 1994, Razaranje drustva,
Filip Visnjiċ , Beograd
6
Gligorov, V. «Transition, Integration and Development in Southeast Europe», Ekonomski
pregled, 58, br. 5-6: str. 259-304., Zagreb, 2007
Генов, Н., (ред) 1994 Рискове на прехода, Софија,
Дал, Р, 1991, Општествената реалност и пазарната економија , во Цивилно општество
во посткомунизмот, Македонско радио , трета програма, Скопје
Економска транзиција во Бугарија и Македонија, 1997, МАНУ, Скопје.
Engström, J. (2002). The power of Perception: The impact of the Macedonian Question on
Inter-ethnic Relations in the Republic of Macedonia. The Global Review of Ethnopolitics
1 (3): 3-17.
Криштановскаја, О., Трансформација старој номенклатури в новју россијскоју елити, ,,
Социс,, бр.3/95
Криштановскаја, О 1995, Нелегалне структуре в Росии, Социс, 1/95. Москва.
Konig, M., Kusic S., 2004. Zemlje Istocne Evrope na putu u Evropsku Uniju- Od tranzicije
do integracije, Ekonomski pregled, 55(1-2).
Linc ,H., Stepan,A., 1998, Demokratska tranzicija I konsolidacija, Filip Visnjic , Beograd
Lazic, M,1994 . Razaranje drustva, Filip Visnjic :Beograd
Lazic, M., 1998(red) Racji hod, Srbija u transformaciski procesima. Beograd.
Лепехин , Б.А. 1999, От администраттинои диктатури к финасовои олигархии,
Обштествение науки и современост , Но. 1
Lijphard, A. 1992. Demokracija u pluralnim društvima. Zagreb: Globus, Školska knjiga.
Lajos Csepi and Erzebet Lukacs, 1992, Privatization in Hungarry, , vo Privatization in
Central and Eastern Europe, EditedBx.A., Bohmand M. Simoneti, CEEPN,
1991.1993(KN.1,2,3i 4
L o š o n c, A. 2007. Postoji li moguãnost instaliranja socijalnog kapitalizma u post-
socijalistiåkoj tranziciji?, Sociologija, br.2.
L o š o n c, A. (2005). Od tranzicije do transformacije, ili od jednostavnosti do
kompleksnosti,u: Dijalozi o tranziciji u demokratiju, ur. R. Bubalo, Novi Sad: HCIT.
Magyar trendfigyelõ, 2007.)
Недков , Милан и други. 1991, Приватизацијата на општествениот капитал во
Република Македонија,Републички фонд за развој.

11
Maldini P., 2007. Model u postkomunistickom kontekstu, Drustvena istrazivanja . Zagreb,
br.4-5.
Maleska, M. (2005) What kind of a political system did Macedonia get after the Ohrid
Peace Agreement? New Balkan Politics 9, < http://newbalkanpolitics.org.mk >
Post-Socialist Countries in the Globalizing World, Moscow: Russian Academy of Sciences,
2001.
Piotr Sztompka,2000.Cultural Trauma: The Other Face of Social Change
European Journal of Social Theory http://est.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/3/4/449
Patrick, K., 1989, Javno vlasnistvo , Ekonomska demokratija ili demokratizacija ekonomije,
Pogledi Split, 2/1989
Radmilović S.,2001. Tranzicija u tržišnu privredu je nešto mnogo više i teže od
'kreativne destrukcije' netržišnog sistema, Ekonomist, Vol. 35, br. 3, 2001.
Stankovic , В.,Pejniovic P., 2010.Postaje li Makedonoja binacionalna drzava Socioloski
pregled, br.1
23.4.2010.
Stojadinovic, M., 2009. Zemlje u vrtlogu tranzicije, Srpska politicka misao, 4/2009
Roman, F, i drugi.1996. Kapitalizam so kamaradsko lice. Ekopres. br.104, mart , Skopje
Стeвановиђ, С., и др. 2008. Анализа неких резултата досадаснје транзиције у Србији и
истоцно-европских земалја, Економске теме, Нис.
Perasovic, K 2004.,Sociologija tranzicije , sociokulturni I neomodernizaciski pristup,
Drustvena istrazivanja ,Institut drustvenih znanosti , Zagreb br.3
Stevanovic, S , I drugi, 2008. Analiza nekih rezultata dosadasnje tranzicije u Srbiji I
istocnoevropskim zemljama, Ekonomske teme, br. 2008, Nis..
Стојадиновић, М., Матић П.2009,Землје у вртлогу транзиције, Политичка мисао .
Институт за политиќке студије. Београд
Славески , Т. 1996, Приватизацијата во Македонија , пет години подоцна, прилог на
Екопрес, , Скопје,
Славески , Т. 1998. Приватизација, пазар, држава. Екопрес-Магнаскен:Скопје
Sen, A., 1987, On Ethics&Economics, Blackweil,,Oxford.
Стратегија за намалување на сиромаштијата, јули, 2000. Министерство за развој на РМ
и Светска Банка.
Tomic, Kaludrovic, I., Petric, M,. 2007. Hrvatsko drustvo prije I tijekom tranzicije,
Drustvena istrazivanja4-5 /Zagreb
Taking Stock of Poverty in Macedonia, Izve{taj izgotven za Kancelarijata
na Svetskata Banka vo Skopje, april-maj 2000 godina
Захариева, М., 1994, Културни модели б ситуација на преход, С тојание и тенденции
Зудин, А, 1999, Олигархија как политическаја проблема россикого посткомунизма,
Обштественнние науки и современоста , Но 1/1999.
Framework Agreement. (2001) engleska verzija Ohridskog sporazuma <
http://faq.macedonia.
org/politics/framework_agreement.pdf > 26.06.2001.
Frčkoski, Lj. (1998). Model of the Interethnic Relations in Macedonia. Skopje: Kryg
Cifric, I., (ur)1998.Drustveni razvoj и ekoloska modernizacija, Hrvatsko sociolosko
drustvo,Zagreb.
Williams, W,E,.1995/96, The argument for free markets: Morality vs. efficiency, Cato
journal,Vol.15Nos.2-3
Wolfgang, M. 2007. Nasuprot svakoj teoriji: Brza konslolidacija demokracije u
srednoistocnoj Europi. Anali hrvatskog politoloskog drustva.

12