The current Frankenstein model is not taking us anywhere, upholding the Transparency Law seems to be a good place to start, writes the Speaker of the Georgian Parliament on the social network X.

“Last weekend, Georgian ‘civil society’, aka foreign-funded NGOs, bullied into submission one of their own, so-called ‘Shame Movement’. This particular NGO had decided to declare its funding, as envisaged by the recently adopted Transparency Law, but after extensive virtual bullying, the ‘Shame’ folded, reversed their decision, and even fired their director.

This truly shameful episode reveals the extent of the closing of the mind, conformity, and hate among the ranks of the foreign-funded NGOs.

Let us cut to the chase: by creating an artificial civil society, American and European donors created a Frankenstein monster in Georgia that used to attack the state unconditionally, but now started cannibalizing its own rank and file. This is the unintended consequence of creating a civil society that is not accountable to its own people, unlike the state institutions. Most NGOs fully depend on Western funding and never bother to reach out to grassroots or domestic donors for the projects that reflect the needs of the population. It is unsurprising, therefore, that such a creation displays elements of the Bolshevik behavior, with a rather thin Western veneer.

We know that democracy strives in a pluralist and diverse society. Ideological conformism and the lack of transparency is what differentiates a totalitarian public from a truly democratic society. Unfortunately, Georgian ‘civil society’, with undisclosed foreign funding, a narrowly observed catechism of convictions, and a penchant for bullying and violence, resembles the former more than the latter. Foreign funded NGOs chose to close their ranks and become a uniform, narrow-minded, and embittered community. This does not help either pluralism or democracy.

Bullying, virtual violence, straitjacketing of ideas, denial of reality, ignoring of the needs of people have become their signature actions. Vandalism is a particularly ironic twist of their activity. Let alone vandalism has nothing to do with European norms and values. The true irony is that the funding that enables it, including last week’s smearing of the Parliament building, for example, counts as ‘democracy aid’ to Georgian people. This was just one episode of the Shame’s actions, which previously approved and even romanticized throwing of the Molotov cocktail at the police, just to cite one of many appalling violent actions (https://t.ly/WAY7N). Mind you, consequences of such acts of vandalism are covered from the Georgian budget. Incidentally, it would be a good idea for the foreign donors to include a line in their budget proposals that would help cleaning up the mess that ‘democracy aid’ leaves behind in our streets.

Another irony, more damaging than mixing up vandalism and democracy perhaps, is that the donors have become enchanted by their own creation, accepting the NGOs’ actions and opinions at the face value, uncritically. The fact that the artificial ‘civil society’ does not reflect the interests of the people or the true needs of the society seems to escape the donors. Unfortunately, the donor community appears to be held hostage by their own beneficiaries that formed a clan (their beloved term) to manipulate their benefactors. This mismatch between expectation and the reality, intentions and results, principles and manipulation only led to the increased radicalism of Georgian foreign-funded NGOs, closely resembling them to our hapless opposition parties.

Donors should take their share of responsibility. It is time to re-examine how civil society in Georgia is funded and accounted for. Transparency and dialogue are crucial if we want to untangle this unfortunate knot. Uncritical acceptance of the so-called civil society’s opinions and actions has been a mistake all along. If the democratic principles of transparency, pluralism, and competition really matter then they should be applied equally to the NGOs as well as the rest of the societal actors and the state institutions. The current Frankenstein model is not taking us anywhere. Upholding the Transparency Law seems to be a good place to start”, - writes Shalva Papuashvili.