Transformation als Lebensschule

Ostdeutsche Frauen-Biographien als Reibungspunkte der Generationen

„In meinen Gesprächen habe ich immer wieder gemerkt: Da ist etwas, was es bei den Frauen im Westen Deutschlands noch nicht und im Osten Deutschlands noch immer gibt: das tief verinnerlichte Wissen, dass Arbeit Selbständigkeit verleiht, dass Kinder zum Leben dazugehören, dass es keine Schande ist, seine Kinder in Tageseinrichtungen betreuen zu lassen oder nach der Schule in den Hort zu schicken. Kurz: dass zur sozialen Frage immer auch die Frauenfrage gehört“ 

Dr. Judith C. Enders, Mandy Schulze

Die Frauen der „Dritten Generation Ostdeutschlands“, geboren zwischen 1975 und 1985, haben eine doppelte Sozialisation erlebt. Zum einen eine DDR-geprägte durch Eltern und Großeltern, welche den größten Teil ihres Lebens in der ehemaligen DDR verbracht haben. Zum anderen mussten sie sich abrupt in einem neuem Schul-, Ausbildungs-, Beschäftigungs-, ja Gesellschaftssystem zurechtzufinden.

Im medialen Diskurs taucht die dritte Generation kaum auf und wenn, dann sind es oft Beispiele gescheiterter Biografien. Dabei haben sie während des Transformationsprozesses einzigartige Kompetenzen erworben haben, die in vielen Bereichen der Arbeits- und Lebenswelt eine Bereicherung sein können.

Für diesen Artikel haben wir ausführliche Interviews mit 9 Frauen dieser Generation geführt. Die meisten von ihnen hatten für ein Studium ihre Heimat verlassen und waren entweder erwerbstätig oder auf der Suche nach einer passenden Tätigkeit.

Selbstverständlich Selbstständig

Die beruflichen Erwartungen waren das erste Thema, welche die jungen Frauen zwischen 25 und 35 Jahren ansprachen. Neben dem Thema Beruf und soziale Sicherheit, wurde das Verhältnis von Beruf und Mutterschaft bzw. Partnerschaft angesprochen. Sich beruflich zu verwirklichen und damit persönliche und finanzielle Selbständigkeit zu erlangen, beschreiben die befragten Frauen als Voraussetzung für eine gleichberechtigte Partnerschaft:

„Ich glaube in der Beziehung ist sehr, sehr wichtig, dass auch die Frau oder ich eben halt sehr selbstständig ist und da ihren eigenen, eigene Erlebnisse und Erfolgserlebnisse auch hat.“

Darüber hinaus ist dies aber auch Vorrausetzung für die Familiengründung. Wichtig ist bei allem ein ausgeglichenes Verhältnis zwischen diese Sphären: Der finanzielle Erfolg steht nicht im Mittelpunkt bei der Frage nach einem gelungenen Leben. „Ich denke auch, was wichtig ist, dass das Leben eine gewisse Balance hat. Dass man ausgelastet ist mit den Sachen, die man alltäglich tut, und damit halt am Ende eine Zufriedenheit erlangt und glücklich schlafen kann. (…) Ja, da braucht man halt auch nicht so viel Geld. Da ist das eher zweitrangig.“

Die Entscheidung, für die Familienarbeit als Hausfrau und Mutter seine beruflichen Interessen in Frage zu stellen, tauchte in keinem unserer Gespräche auf. Als typisch weiblich – und damit kaum anders als in anderen Regionen Deutschlands – ist hingegen die Bereitschaft zu bezeichnen, das Streben nach Karriere nicht in den Mittelpunkt persönlicher Verwirklichung zu stellen: „Als Führungskraft bin ich jetzt ausgebildet, habe einige Trainings gehabt, habe auch schon viel gecoacht und Leute gehabt, die ich dann inhaltlich und so beraten habe jetzt, aber das ist okay. Also, ja, ich muss diese Rolle nicht haben“. Ebenso als typisch ist es, zugunsten von Familie und Kindern auf Teile der Karriere zu verzichten. Kindererziehung wird als Aufgabe für Frauen aber nicht hinterfragt.

Das Erbe der „Schlüsselkinder“

Die befragten Frauen kamen oft an einen Punkt, an dem sie über ihre Eltern und deren Einfluss auf ihr Leben sprachen. Dabei standen deren Erfahrungen mit der Transformation im Vordergrund. Um dieses Erbe wird scheinbar noch gerungen. Die Sprachlosigkeit zwischen den Generationen wird bewusst problematisiert: „Meine Eltern sind geschieden, also zu meinem Vater hab ich jetzt nicht weiter groß Kontakt. Er ist halt aber das, was so ein typischer Wendeverlierer ist, was man sich darunter vorstellt. Weil es halt eben auch das für unsere Beziehung so schwer gemacht hat und weil mich dann auch immer …

“Also das Problem ist, dass man mit den Eltern nicht darüber reden kann.“

Die Auseinandersetzung mit der Elterngeneration spielt für die jungen Frauen aus dem Osten mit Kindern eine ebenso so große Rolle wie für alle anderen jungen Eltern: „Wenn du Kinder hast, dann spielst du deine eigene Kindheit ungewollt auch immer wieder durch.“ Die doppelte Sozialisation der Befragten in Ost und West spielt in der Auseinandersetzung mit der eigenen Kindheit jedoch eine besondere Rolle und wird zur innerfamiliären und gesellschaftspolitischen Herausforderung:

„So eine simple Frage wie: Sag mal, Mutti, wann hast denn du uns eigentlich immer abgeholt nach der Kita? (…) Und die ist total ausgetickt an dem Tag: Wir haben alle gearbeitet, wir konnten gar nicht anders!”

“Natürlich, wir haben euch um halb sieben hinbringen müssen, weil wir mussten um sieben Uhr auf Arbeit sein! Wir haben Vollzeit gearbeitet, und wir konnten nicht so schöne Sachen machen wie ihr jetzt, und so. Und dann in den 90ern auch: Ja, ihr wart nun mal Schlüsselkinder, und jetzt sagen sie immer Schlüsselkinder dazu, aber es war ganz normal, dass ihr den Schlüssel hattet und nach Hause gehen konntet, wann ihr wolltet. Man hat auch Vertrauen gehabt zu seinen Kindern, und jetzt wird man so [angesehen], als ob man sich nicht gekümmert hat so … .“

Wir müssen reden: über den Wert der Alltagserfahrung

Hier steht das kritisch gesehene Bild der Mutterschaft in der DDR, für das sich die jungen Großmütter glauben rechtfertigen zu müssen, einem echten Interesse der jungen Frauen, die ihren eigenen Platz in der Gesellschaft als Mütter suchen, entgegen. Eine junge Frau spricht allerdings klar aus, was es gesellschaftlich für eine konstruktive Auseinandersetzung und schöpferische Aufarbeitung der Transformationserfahrungen der Eltern braucht.

„Was ich finde, was absolut in diesem medialen Diskurs vernachlässigt wird, das sind so diese persönlichen Biografien, auch abgesehen von Knastgeschichten, mal hart gesagt, oder Fluchtversuchen, oder wie auch immer. Also ich finde so, diesen Mikrokosmos auch einer normalen Durchschnittsfamilie damals in der DDR, auch eben unserer Generation, das wird vollkommen vergessen irgendwie.

(…) Das ist unsere Kindheit, das kann man nicht ändern. Und es ist ja auch gut, wie es jetzt so gelaufen ist, dass die Wende kam, dass wir die Chance hatten, noch mal ganz neu anzufangen, ein anderes Leben zu führen, als unsere Eltern das konnten.

Aber der Diskurs fehlt, die Diskussion in der Öffentlichkeit, aber auch untereinander, dass man sich quasi bekennt dazu auch: Hey, wir teilen da was, wir haben irgendwie ein gemeinsames Fundament, warum reden wir nicht mal drüber?

Also sogenannte westdeutsche Freunde, die dann sagen: Ja, es war ein Stück Geschichte, aber hey, ist doch vorbei. Aber es ist ja noch da, es ist ja trotzdem präsent. Also meine Familiengeschichte prägt das bis heute. Viele Streitereien, viele Zerwürfnisse beruhen immer noch darauf, auf Vorwürfen auf ungeklärten Ereignissen, wie auch immer. Und ja, es wäre schade, das nicht irgendwie auch mal zum Anlass zu nehmen, darüber zu reden“. Oder mit den Worten Martina Rellins, die als westdeutsche Journalistin und Autorin ostdeutsche Frauen nach der Wende befragte:

„Auch in meinen Gesprächen für dieses Buch habe ich immer wieder gemerkt: Da ist etwas, was es bei den Frauen im Westen Deutschlands noch nicht und im Osten Deutschlands noch immer gibt: das tief verinnerlichte Wissen, dass Arbeit Selbständigkeit verleiht, dass Kinder zum Leben dazugehören, dass es keine Schande ist, seine Kinder in Tageseinrichtungen betreuen zu lassen oder nach der Schule in den Hort zu schicken. Kurz: dass zur sozialen Frage immer auch die Frauenfrage gehört“ (Rellin 2004: 11f).

Darum bleibt es wichtig, sich mit den Frauen der ehemaligen DDR und mit ihren alltäglichen Geschichten auseinanderzusetzen, im Gespräch zu bleiben. Gerade für die Frauen der Transformationsgeneration ist dies eine Chance, die eigenen Identität zu schärfen und sowohl die Stärken (Stichwort: weibliche Unabhängigkeit) als auch die Schwächen (Stichwort: Doppelbelastung) der Lebensentwürfe der DDR-Frauen kennenzulernen. Es gilt, medialen Zuschreibungen etwas „Reales“ entgegenzusetzen.

Germany: Chances of identification for communities

Vacancies – eyesores or/and (new) chances of identification for communities:  How to support initiatives of people and their voluntary work to successfully breath new life into unoccupied buildings

Mandy Schulze, Humboldt University of Berlin, Institute of Education, Germany

Abstract. Since 1990 the rural regions of East Germany experienced a great social and political transformation, followed by a process of deindustrialisation and a very high mobility of young people. This process left many empty public spaces and industrial buildings, vacencies, buildings which lost there social meanings and functions. A project in Saxony showed the potentials of people and initiatives engaged for this kind of apparently useless buildings and supported them with consulting and organized education settings. Attending to the project a qualitative research was done to learn about this voluntary work and to answer the question: What are the motives of the egaged people? Which kind of support they need? What are the factors of success? What kind of support for community learning can be given? Casestudies were analysed in order to know more about the motivation of voluntary works around vacencies. The article gives a glance into the variety of initiatives in order to answer the question: How to support the (re)creation of function and identifiaction of vacencies as a part of cummunity education?

Keywords: adult education, rural development, community learning, transformation

 1. Introduction

Community Education is described as an longterm and fundamental requirement to empower a sustainable soil for a Lifelong Learning culture (Chrisholm et al. 2009: 32ff). Emphaszied is especially the informal learning of the civil society at a regional level. The targets for a culture of Lifelong Learning culture should be reached by personal development, social, cultural and general education contents headlined with voluntary work in new learning environements with a high component of selflearning. Because of the longterm view of this strategy and the qualitative aspects the focus is on the practice and organisation of existing projects and initiatives (see Lassnigg 2013: 5ff). The following article is built up by such an evaluation.

In the last 25 years, the Upper Lusatia, a region on frontiers between Czec Republic and Poland, was facing a profound structural change. This process of economical and political transformation left many vacancies due to closed down plants and a declining population. The spectrum ranges from industrial buildings and historical half-timbered houses (Umgebindehäuser) to objects, which served the community as places of social life in a village or a town, such like guesthouses, pubs and theaters. Many of those were lingering over a sad fate for years or just became ruins. But spaces can always be read as texts. And so those empty buildings are connected with the collective experiences of the people. The perception of those spaces as eyesores changed slightly and some of those buildings received more attentation. It is to aknowledge that especially people from the community groups began to engage in activities around the vacancies. The extend of the dedicated people ranges from inhabitants to returnees and newcomers. The decisive factor is always if the local environment of the community administration and other players are supportive or repressive. In the last years in the region of Upper Lusatia many and very heterogeneous groups and initiatives around vacancies were formed. It is obvious that they are not very institutionalised concepts. The engines of the revival are idealism in a positive sense, local ties and commitment, civil voluntary work and personal learning.

The project “Zukunftsprojektor” had the issue to find, show and support voluntary initiatives by offering educational support. The focus was on groups and their voluntary work for the preservation of the vacancies and the collective use in the region of Upper Lusatia. The project was financed from the program “Neulandgewinner” by the “Robert-Bosch-Stiftung” and guided by the “Zukunftsbündnis Upper Lusatia.”. The academic evaluation was accompanying the whole project for two years and focussing on the following questions:

  • – What are the motives and challenges of this kind of initiatives around vacancies?
  • – And which role takes the buildings and their potential use for the voluntary work?
  • – What kind of function takes the initiatives in terms of community learning?
  • – What are best practices of supporting this kind of building-voluntary work in rural regions?

2. Methodological background

As a qualitative approach the study had not the issues to test theoretically hypotheses within an empirical context. Because of the exploring character of the program and the project itself an inductive methodology was preferred. Attending the approach of the American pragmatism (see Joas 1996) and especially in the context of very innovative and creative contexts of development. The practice as doing is the first step. The second step is than the theoretical reflection on the base of empirical experiences.

This pragmatic understanding of innovative development doesn´t claim that there are already theories of how to do the right things right and how to support engaged groups around vacancies in the perfect way so that community learning is happening and everybody can participate. In this theoretical approach the focus is not on a normative controlling if community learning is happening while some people want to change the ruin within the centre of their community. But the focus is open to question which kind of goals were reached in the empirical practice and to formulate them together. In this thinking the goal of the voluntary work developed in a retrospective perspective not in a prospective (see Weick 1985: 33f; 278f; 340f). Everybody involved in the project is looking from a special perspective to the common process and is so adding this perspective to a development which is generating a theory (Schäffter 2008), here a theory of how to support voluntary work for vacancies in order to support this as a sort of community learning. The two steps empirical method is reflecting this inductive approach.

The Research objects were: First to describe the history of the initiatives for the unoccupied buildings and their needs. Second to gather success factors for the support and to argue with the impact of this groups for the revitalization of community life. The results were organized into: Motives and history of commitment, challenges, support needs and success factors of commitment. The resaerch results are providing the opportunity to bring attention to issues of community learning to support local development in the regions of Eastern Germany. Learning is seen as a social proccess and associated with personal and social issues. In this perspective adult education as Lifelong Learning is to reflect historical and social transformation as a ‘searching process’ to find innovative and individual solutions in a transformation society. “People are learning because they want to contribute to the common goal, sharing the responsibility for achieving change or perhaps just keeping something going“ (Gilchrist 2013: 02-2).

This contribution provids the perspective of how vacancies in rural communities can give an opportunity of new identification with people and their practical engagement. And different examples for the way to breath new life into unoccupied buildings.

3. Casestudies – A glance into the practice of the voluntary work for vacancies

3.1 Der Kretscham – The public house

Kretscham is an old word for a public tavern in the middle of the village. Very often with a ballroom inside to dance and to celebrate. An association of 15 members keeps one of these old buildings in a village of 5.500 inhabitants up. Their issue since more than 12 years is, to open this building for the public as the cultural centre of the community. The starting point of the voluntary work of the young people was very practical. While looking for a space for shared house, which is not easy to find in a village, the youngsters found the former public house and started to rent the old hotel level up the former ballroom. From the beginning the young residents were confronted with the meaning of the building for the community of the village: “When we came the first time to the works on the house, we realized, that very day, it was unbelievable, plenty of people stoped in front of the house and asked us to be allowed to come in and to take a look inside. That was the moment when we realized what an importance this house has in the heads of the generation of my mother and grandmother.”

Many personal memories and a very high public interest is besoming the reason for the first public event. Planed as a small barbacue party with a DJ, this party becomes a hit with over 800 guests. The reason for this resonanz is the local identification with this house: “Very old couples, more than seventy years old, came up the stairs and where sitting on the gallery, holding hands and just looking into the ballroom. Onetousand people were telling onetausand stories, apparently in this house half of the village must have been married, fathered or something like this.”

Other events like public parties and exhibitions followed the first event as well as continuing constractions on the almost dilapidated building. The association was founded and the voluntary worked professionalized. In the first years the construction of toilets and fire protection the most important projects. Now the organization of the parties and events is professional and the house three times a year open for the public. The biggest cahllenges for the initiative are financial sorrows and the difficulty of the private ownership of the house. With a private owner communal financial support is not possible. Support is required both in providing legal advice as well as to network with other vacancies initiatives. After all, the key question in such a long-term voluntary work is, how can the people, who cover the costs of the association, open the facility three times a year and organize and carry out voluntary events in the future?

3.2 The water tower

The association LEBENs(T)RÄUME e.V. (registered association) was founded in 2012. It consists of approx. 35 active members with a mixed-age structure. Its goal is to make the shrinking region more livable with offers for nature experience and environmental education. At first the project Stadthonig (honey from town) started off. An old industrial wasteland was converted into a bee pasture and so honey is produced and sold locally for several years now. The association connects its approach of environmental education with the preservation and analysis of the historic industrial heritage of the region. The association has drawn wide acclaim among the locals in a short time through the work with the bees and the production of honey. Due to the high publicity of the assocation in the small town, the dedicated members were offered another vacant property for sponsoring and thus for “revival”. The historic water tower is part of the former company premises LAUTEX where more than 40,000 people were employed until the early / mid-90s. The tower borders the former fire station equipment store of the company’s fire department, which the association manages as a user. The water tower is “one of the few buildings that has been preserved from the whole complex” of the company LAUTEX. All other buildings were demolished as part of urban development. Since the acquisition of the building the issue of sustainable use is top priority. Due to the historical significance of the building, the memory work plays an important role:

There are many elderly people who love to see how it has developed, what has become of it, how it will continue to be used and are very grateful that it has been preserved as one of the few buildings and that their memories can live here. Every two weeks we have a narrative café for seniors, where many of these former employees can really reminisce, and so old stories come back to light and that is nice to see. And it’s also important for us that we get information that we can look back on and reappraise to keep the history alive. This approach goes hand in hand with the question of what the historic building is supposed to become. There is a need for sustainable search for ideas with the local community. In addition to the collective development of ideas the question arises how the implementation and the development of the association’s work is going to be managed and this is drafted as a demand for advice. Although the association’s work is on a voluntary basis, future profitability and the creation of a permanent position is aspired.

3.3 Wächterhaus and Fleischbänke

The Fleischbänke (stalls for meat sales) were first mentioned in 1361 as a location in Zittau for slaughter and sale of meat and were built in 1759 at its present location. It was used until the 19th century followed by vacancy. And the Wächterhaus Zittau is a historic inner-city building from the 16th century with an eventful history, among other things as Jewish prayer room and department store and has been empty since 1990. A ‚Wächterhaus’ is an utilization concept for vacant properties. Initiatives were founded for both buildings in 2011 with the help of the Stadtforum (a city board) to establish a revival by temporary use. Partly the same people work for both initiatives, the Wächterhaus and the Fleischbänke, and take that voluntary work forward. The use and but not the purchase of the buildings is in the foreground, in order to protect them from demolishing: “We are only interested in, that the building, so that we can use it temporarily, so to speak, in order to draw attention to the building and if someone comes who buys it, then we make way or use it as long as it’s possible and attention is useful.

Attention and public interest is achieved by using the facilities by artists, the granting of access for everyone and the implementation of various public events: “There is a license agreement, which lasts about, in our case, ten years, and the time, we can spend it in here without making major structural changes, we can use the building for our purpose” Especially the historical reference and the provision of access to the building is a crucial factor for the revival. The entire local community is invited to visit the building and to get acquainted with the temporary use and the space it provides for everyone. This openness is also one reason for his personal engagement in the voluntary work: “The events themselves were a good step forward, so also for the town, because they, could all come, there wasn’t anything unpleasant in here, but all came in, looked at it, oh, beautiful old building, and I have been here once as a child and I remember it as a big department store. So many older people who showed interest in it and don’t say uhä what you are doing now, but through the connection with art it has been open and has been accepted and is still accepted. And that’s something I found very inspiring, to participate in things, to integrate myself.

The starting point for the selection of the buildings for temporary use is their present inner-town location and the interest of direct interaction with the history: “The Fleischbänke is an independent initiative whose, primary purpose was to find a few people who said: ‘Man I walk here often, passing this meat market, I think it’s such a pity that this is lying bare’.” The stories and the identification of the people is made a subject of discussion in the events and made accessible through an open door: “The fact that this is now just within the town, which is, still something supporting, that they searched for something in the inner-town, even next to such a road, which is highly traditional.”The community from the very beginning supports both initiatives. The Urban Development Company is interested in the voluntary work and therefore establishes communication to owners. The organization level of the Meat Market might be relatively low, but for the implementation of large-scale events such as a Christmas markets all local citizens and stores etc. worked closely together. Existing networks with urban actors and direct approaches played a major role in order to get attention and support. The takeover by an investor is scheduled for the voluntary work and cooperation is aspired and has already been successfully implemented for the Fleischbänke initiative. The work is rewarded with public attention and personal feedback of the community at the events. The work is voluntary but the commitment is remunerated with a greater say in urban development.

Whereby the committed people are aware of the problem of property relations and available municipal capital, “because on the one hand you can of course tear down buildings and build something new, but on the other hand, there are a lot of buildings that are just empty because there is some sort of problem there. The initiatives address this gap of urban incapacity and advertise their town and a broad attention: “That is a possibility, with such a Wächterhaus, as well as with a project like Fleischbänke, to campaign for an object, where you think that is worth it to take it further into the interests of the urban public, and sometimes that is enough, that is of course marketing, i.e., to market buildings and real estate property, perhaps encourage people to purchase a property, you just have to put in a lot of energy, or perhaps distribute the energy to several people, simply to present various projects und yes, make people curious .

The challenge in addition to the architectural barriers is that the requirements for temporary use have to correspond with the existing building stock and the inner-town location. In addition to the structural requirements the greatest need for support may well lie in the ensurance of a continuous project work. A project which lasts longer than the first start-up and the first success and which presents the initiatives permanently, even if the buildings are different. The respondent clarified a direct need for consultation, to not overexert themselves especially in larger user groups and thus put the whole project at risk. It is important to address both individual motives of those involved, as well as to convey the social aspect of the common activity: The success is supported by a vision beyond individual and social objectives. The secret recipe is in addition to the search of like-minded people, the reinterpretation of vacant properties into opportunities for a new use. The regional networking plays a central role as a counterweight to structural weakness.

3.4 The Volkshaus (formerly used meeting house for trade unions)

The Volkshaus was built in 1928 as a union house with bonds at the Bauhaus style and Expressionism and funded by the unions. The house was used as a multifunctional cultural and educational center. The house, which is owned by the town Weißwasser, is vacant since 2005. For two years now an initiative establishes to take care of the preservation of the house. A two-member team of the project “Zukunftsprojektors” accompanied the foundation of the association and the project development closely. The active group consists of about 15 people who attend the regular meetings. The objective of the voluntary work is to conserve the inner-town historical monument: “It is important that the monument remains. And that’s why I have decided to take part.” The Volkshaus is a particularly striking example for a former cultural center in the town center. On the one hand, it is still very present in the minds of the people on the other hand this cultural center hasn’t been replaced yet by any other similar locality. In addition to the preservation of that listed and historical building, the Volkshaus needs to be revived as a center for cultural and eventful activities. In this town doesn’t exist any entertainment facility like this meeting house. However, before the use of the building can be contemplated specifically, essential steps should be taken care of. Based on the initiative of the City Council, who initiated a petition to save the Volkshaus and discussed the handling with vacant inner-town monuments in meetings, an initiative group emerged due to a call in the newspaper. Rejection of funding opportunities triggered the foundation of the association. There is a great need for support in terms of the cooperation with the local administration. It is primarily not about the issue of funding commitments, but about the support of the voluntary works by permits. This is where the volunteer structure of the initiative meets bureaucratic structures. The strength of the support team lay not at least in the trans-regional importance, and was of benefit to the initiative due to project attention in general. In particular, the persistence of the participants is one of the success factors for the new initiative. But the cooperation with the town as the owner remains a requirement for further voluntary work:

 4.  Motives, challenges and potential

Accompanying the four initiatives and groups who support the work on vacant properties in rural areas, the following overall results can be outlined: The trigger for this type of voluntary work is diverse. Nevertheless, we can resume four points:

1.     The vacant properties are mostly historical buildings, allowing the population to combine a part of their own history and the history of the community. In these buildings people lived, loved, worked, and danced. Often the buildings are still remains of already demolished complexes.

2.     The vacant objects are perceived by the people as “eyesores” and thus are contrary to the personal connection. This contradiction often leads to initiation of voluntary work.

3.     The vacant objects offer the voluntary work a directly experiencable space. This concrete and immediately available space is one of the main triggers for common action.

4.     It is seen as an opportunity to jointly make a difference, either as a group, an association, or cooperation with the local administration.

Just as diverse are the challenges and difficult to generalize because of the different ages and level of maturity of the six accompanying initiatives. Three different stages of maturity can be determined for all of the initiatives.

During the initial phase the first step is, in addition to group building, to gain support from the community. The reflection of the history of the building is an invaluable contribution. Another challenge is the support from public administration and authorities. Once again the support from the community and a possible impact of the project, for example as part of town marketing, makes a contribution. An important factor especially to gain new commited members is public relations work. The team of the “Zukunftprojektor” achieved great things and made the importance for the local community be seen especially trough the attention in trans-regional networks.

During the professionalisation phase the work load in terms of project development and administration rises. In this phase it’s important to strengthen the idea of voluntary work and the experience to jointly work for a goal and uphold it. At this point it is necessary to hold on and withstand setbacks. Not all plans work out immediately and the first optimistic mood vanishes. At this stage it becomes apparent how important the approval of the people is to achieve long-term success. Therefore, it was particularly important to be present with the building for example at local festivals, days of the open monument or with a cultural highlight at Christmas. The community could be convinced, ideas of usage could be gathered and a great support was given. The building moved back in the minds of the community.

During the implementation phase many objectives had been achieved or adjusted to what is possible. In this case it is important to set new goals or convert the voluntary work in economic endeavours. During this stage the municipal coorperation is essential. Wether it is a long-term conversion in a cultural center or a handover to an new user, at this stage it is important to transfer or to handover the voluntary work. This process is like a generation change. The need for support of the voluntary work can be clearly defined from the described challenges.

The three success factors of the accompanied voluntary work are:

Voluntary work as door opener:

  1. Object-related: The object must be open and free for use and open for the general public. Voluntary work and learning within is literally a first door opener for the public.

Open door policy:

  1. In terms of voluntary work and community learning: The actions must be transparent for the public and the involvement must be solicited continually. This open door policy is crucial to gain new members and support from the municipal administration. Public campaigns have a favourable impact on this matter.

An sympathetic ear for members:

  1. Organization-related: It is extremly vital to gain companions for voluntary work and get them enthusiastic about common ideas. Regardless of the organisation level, working and getting along well together is essential for the voluntary work. The metapher of a sympatethic ear would be the thing to do.

5. Levels of supporting community learning within vacencies

Some of the requirements can be satisfied by short distances and consultation. Also the involvement in community activities such as local festivals or an interview with the official journal provide public recognition and awareness and promote discussion about vacant properties in the community. The more vacant building with their history and possibilites are visitied and not torn away the more people will take part in the discussion about future use. This calls for possibilites of public discussion about what will become of an old industrial plant, a district culture house or chimney.

The project “ZukunfsProjektor” provided assistance in form of networking, exchange between different regional and trans-regional projects and decision-makers as well as group-related presentation und mediation. On the whole, the issue of vacancy and the existing voluntary work in the region Upper Lusatia has been appreciated already in a long overdue manner and made visible beyond the individual communities. The awareness and appreciation of such voluntary work is still lacking in many areas. In the same time the reflection of the volountary work the learning on a personal and social level and in the community also was part of the suport work. The volunteers got more aware of their engagement in the community and there big issues in partiziaption. These levels of learning are listed in the follwing colum left side down below. The very general description of a program format is precisely shown in the right column towards the qualitative concept of the specific design from the project community space of learning (Lernort Gemeinde, see Schäffter 2009).

The example of the monitored objects within the famework of the project “Zukunfts-Projektor” in Upper Lusatia confirms the thesis that the self-organized groups and initiatives around vacancies become model examples, how to handle vacancy in rural areas, which challenges it brings and what value a supporting network has.

Buildings are not only material and substance; they are more like medium and reason for self-organised and self-empowered action. The processes that take place in this context, are teaching spaces in previous empty spaces. What do they teach us? They teach us that we experience in changing times the change of community voluntary work as well: In future times people will get involved in a non-binding, action-oriented manner. We will experience a mixture which joints common public interest and creation of value, meaning structures will be rebuilt and developed further. And community learning happens within this new structures. Following this line of argument, a process is taking place which the regions in transition like Upper Lusatia. A long time it’s been known as transformation regions. Considering transformation, then there are two pathes ahead: the path of imitation or the path of evolution. In Saxony the first path was taken over long distances. The interesting thing is now: With the newly outlined forms of community learning– here observed as an example for vacant properties – the second path applies here: the evolutionary. Because commited people find, due to “contraints” but driven by common goals, their own ways and recreate and “invent” themselves and solutions. For societies this is precisely the germ cell of social innovation – an invaluable asset for rural areas. The “vacancy” is the potential of rural areas. It creates a freedom for possibilities. This means that the empty space as free space becomes teaching space becomes pioneer space.

6. References

Chisholm, Lynne/Lassnigg, Lorenz/Lehner, Martin/Lenz, Werner/Tippelt, Rudolf (2009): Wissen – Chancen – Kompetenzen. Strategie zur Umsetzung des lebensbegleitenden Lernens in Österreich. Retrieved from http://erwachsenenbildung.at/downloads/service/LLL-Strategie_ExpertInnenbericht.pdf

Gilchrist, Alison (2013): Community development as a learning process. Insights from the UK. In: Magazin erwachsenenbildung.at, No. 19, Retrieved from http://erwachsenenbildung.at/magazin/13-19/meb13-19.pdf

Joas, Hans (1996): Die Kreativität des Handelns. Frankfurt/Main.

Lassnigg, Loranz (2013): Community Education als Aktionslinie der nationalen Strategie zum lebensbegleitenden Lernen (LLL:2020). In: Magazin Erwachsenenbildung.at, No. 19, Retrieved from http://erwachsenenbildung.at/magazin/13-19/meb13-19.pdf

Schäffter, Ortfried (2009): Lernort Gemeinde – Ein Format Were entwickelnder Erwachsenenbildung. In: Mörchen, Annette/Tolksdorf, Markus (edt.): Lernort Gemeinde. Ein neues Format der Erwachsenenbildung. Bielefeld, pp. 21-40.

Schulze, Mandy/Enders, Judith (2014): Innovative Forms of Adult Education – Bringing people together for rural development in East Germany. In: Guimaraes, P./Cavaco, C./Marrocos, L./Paulos, C./Bruno, A./Rodrigues, S./Marques, M. (edt.): Local Change, Social Actions and Adult Learning: Challenges and Responses, Proceedings. pp. 122-131.

Weick, Karl, E. (1985): Der Prozess des Organisierens. Frankfurt/Main.

Deutschlandforschertagung 2016 – Children of Transition

“The good, the bad and the Eastern Europeans – refugees and the communist past.”

Under this headline, Iva Kopraleva and Rafaela Tripalo from Transition Dialogue Network presented research results from Bulgaria and Croatia at the conference “Deutschlandforschertagung 2016 – Children of Transition, Children of War” in November in Vienna. Together with Louisa Slavkova, they have exeamined the link between transition experience and today’s attitutes towards migrants.

The results are resented in the research paper.

img_3218

On the same conference, Olena Pravylo presented findings from inter-Generation Talks and Interviews with the “Children of Change” from Ukraine, Russia and Germany.

img_3150

Breaking the Silence: Memories of the Times of Change

As different as the transition experience was among people in the same country (let alone among the three countries), most interviews reveal a similar crucial experience of lasting impact: loss of trust, rules or orientation // Findings from inter-Generation Talks and Interviews with the “Children of Change” from Ukraine, Russia and Germany

img_3150

As Transition Dialogue-Network, we are taking a narrative approach, looking on how people individually remember, how they reflect on the past, and the impact of transition on their life. We let people tell their story and try to map a vivid picture of transition experience in Eastern Europe in comparative perspective.  Activities include a series of interviews in Germany, Russia and Ukraine. A focus is on the “children of change” those who experienced transition from the late 1980s in childhood or teenage time.

The years of change turned out to be a lasting point of reference for people’s life and thinking. This frame of reference is a set of often unreflected narratives, reshaped memories, for younger people partly second hand. These narratives have a great impact on people’s self-image and attitude towards society. They must be revealed to understand what makes citizens become a driver of change – and what not. Also, civic education need to deal with how people actually perceive society and democracy, rather then solely teaching them about it.

We had dozens of guided interviews with participants of the Wendekinder (30-40 years old) and the parent generation (50-70 years old) old. In the German case also interviews between parents and their actual children.

This is what we learnt from the interviews in the differnet countries

UKRAINE

TRANSITION MOMENT The answers are split: Some named the fall of the Soviet Union and Ukraine independence in 1991 as starting point, others Gorbachov’s “Perestroika”.  Notably the Chernobyl tragedy 1986 is seen as a powerful symbol of erosion of the Soviet system, because people stopped trusting the government: they were not informed about explosion, though they experienced changes of their social and ecological environment. Chernobyl appeared crucial for people in Ukraine, as it is marked by great uncertainty, loose of trust and fear.
(NO) NOSTALGIA Mostly the generation born in the 70s  and earlier is more sceptical about changes, because they remember the good things in the Soviet Union. For them, the guarantees provided such as free health care service were appreciated as one of big pluses, that were lost during interview-stills-vienna-poster_2transformation. However, those born in 80s have no feelings of nostalgia: Even in a caring and loving family environment, due to the deficit of food, toys and clothes the Soviet time is remembered as difficult and hardship.
SOLIDARITY 70% agreed that nowadays solidarity is greater than in Soviet time, they experience a new wave of solidary and effective volunteering since the Maydan revolution. The remaining 30% insist that real solidarity was only in Soviet times, because society was based on the value of helping each other in everyday life – and that was gone today.

RUSSIA

TRANSITION MOMENT People remember transition starting in the late 80ies till the beginning of 2000ies. They experienced it as radical change from one social and economic system to a quite different, absolutely new society.
NO RULES One of the striking features of that time is the feeling of ‘no rules’: that most Soviet structures and values in economics and social life were destroyed. New ones needed to be explored and re-invented. Respondents remember this period as free, uncertain, full of hopes and opportunities, and wild.  The same experience, however, had a different impact on people’s life: While some got in a pure survival mode and absorbed by family issues and raising children, others seek business opportunities and enjoyed open borders.
SELF RELIENCE One of the main characteristics of transition is the feeling of becoming self-reliant and independent (in some degree). Respondents don’t trust the state, and try to ‘not to deal’ with the state.  They also understand their own rights, know when they are broken, and try to defend them. This is also seen by them as a ‘heritage of 90ies’. It is worth to know that the respondents take a critical stand towards the current politics and ideology situation in Russia.

GERMANY 

TRANSITION MOMENT Interviews revealed a role switch between children and parents in transition time, as children were able to adapt to the changing society more easily. Parents who were formerly well settled, had to re-orientate; needed to deal with new institutions, rules and values. At the same time, children had to make major decisions for their professional and future life in a dramatically changing educational system. The parents, however, were unable to deal with these issues.
GENERATION DIALOGUE The German case set a focus on dialogue and its effects for relations in the family and between generations. The authors observed three broad patterns of dialogue: 1. children and parents are able to reflect and rethink the past, 2. the dialogue between generation showed clear limits of issues that could be touched, and 3. the dialogue was impossible.
HYPOTHEK OF THE PAST Interviews show, how not talking about the past affects family and generation relations in contrast to those families, where the reflection is not denied. The authors conclude, this effects the overall capacity of a society to critically access the past and present social and political situation: Family members that did not come to terms with transition time privately, were not ready for a debate in a more public space either and less able to deal constructively with current social problems. Yet, many parents do not see a responsibility to speak about the past as a chance to develop future society or social relations. Instead it seems irrelevant to them to deal with something that is gone.

Conclusion

As different as the transition experience was among people in the same country (let alone among the three countries), most interviews reveal a similar crucial experience of lasting impact: loss of trust, rules or orientation. However, this is not only negative. Answers from all three countries suggest that these experiences can be interpreted as opportunities. Of course, this depends on the personal situation. But findings, e.g. from Ukraine, show that the interpretation of transition can be rewritten from negative to positive: While the perception of political institutions is still negative, the Maidan movement lead to a lasting attitude of “the more it is to us, to do something about society”.  Findings from Germany suggest that initiating dialogue and reflection can open spaces for such a reassessment.

Contributors/Interviews: Olena Pravylo (Congress of Cultural Activists, Ukraine), Polina Filipova, Vlada Gekhtman and Oksana Bocharova (Sakharov Center, Russia), Dr. Judith Enders, Dr. Mandy Schulze (Perspektive³, Germany) Christine Wetzel (DRA e.V., Germany).

This Research was Presented at
Deutschlandforschertagung ’16: Children of Transition, Children of War. The “Generation of Transformation” from a European Perspective by Olena Pravylo.

 

“Man muss im Schutzraum des Privaten seine Haltung finden”

Im Buch “Wie war das für Euch? Die Dritte Generation Ost im Gespräch mit ihren Eltern” erzählen die 1975 bis 1985 Geborenen, warum sie nicht aufhören können, sich mit der eigenen Herkunft und der Familiengeschichte auseinanderzusetzen. Die Interviews und Reflexionen im Buch zeigen aber auch, dass diese Auseinandersetzung über Transformationserfahrungen in der Familie auch eine wichtige gesellschaftliche Dimension hat. Judith Enders ist Mitherausgeberin des Buches und Mitglied des Transition Dialogue-Netwerks. Wir haben nachgefragt. 

Was wolltet ihr wissen?

Judith: Gibt es in eurer Familie Kommunikation über die Wendezeit? Wenn ja, wo und wie läuft diese ab, gibt es Tabuthemen oder Grenzen? Wenn nein, warum nicht? Was sind die Ursachen für das Schweigen?

Mit welchen Erwartungen bist Du an das Buch herangegangen?

Judith: Meine Vorannahme, dass sich ein differenziertes Bild ergibt, da es ja nicht den DDR-Bürger gab. Die AutorInnen sind zufällig zusammengestellt, aus unterschiedlichen Lebensumständen: Beruf, soziale Einbindung, Familiengeschichte. Zum Tewie-war-das-fur-euch_cover-2il haben wir Leute angesprochen, die wir kannten. Andere trafen wir einfach zufällig. Das Kriterium war Menschen zu finden, die Lust auf den Dialog mit den Eltern hatten. Aber auch einige, wo die Kommunikation mit der Elterngeneration Schwierigkeiten machte, weil diese eigentlich nicht wollten oder noch nicht darüber nachgedacht hatten – wo unserer Buchprojekt den Impuls gab, diesen Dialog zu beginnen. Das war zum Teil eine emotionale Herausforderung, hier mussten wir die Entstehung des Textes wohlwollend begleiten.

Was hat Euch bewegt, dieses Buch zu machen?

Judith: 2012 organisierten wir mit der Initiative „Dritte Generation Ostdeutschland“ eine Konferenz zum Thema „Die Dritte Generation Ost im Dialog mit der Zweiten Generation“. Hier haben wir gemerkt, dass sich unter den 100 Leuten eine interessante Dynamik entwickelte, eine große Verwunderung darüber, dass das Thema so wenig bearbeitet ist, dass es so wenig Gespräch zwischen den beiden Generationen über die DDR gibt. In den meisten Familien gibt es eine große Sprachlosigkeit, jenseits von Anekdoten oder Allgemeinplätzen über die Vergangenheit. Das hat uns motiviert, dieser Thematik Raum zu geben. Das Buch soll ein Anstoß für die Leserinnen und Leser sein, mit der eigenen Familie ins Gespräch zu kommen und im eigenen Umfeld weiter zu diskutieren.

Warum sollte ich als Mitdreißigerin mit meinen Eltern über die DDR reden?

Judith: Das ist grundsätzlich für alle Menschen wichtig, da unausgesprochene Dinge in der nächsten Generation weiter wirken. Das Spezifische bezüglich der dritten Generation Ostdeutschlands ist, dass ihre Elterngeneration in einer Zeit, in der die Eltern sich normalerweise mit ihren Kindern über ihre Zukunft, Werte etc. auseinandersetzen, also in der Pubertät, dazu wenig Gelegenheit hatten, da sie zu sehr mit sich selbst und der Bewältigung der Umbruchszeit beschäftigt waren.

Eine weitere Dimension ist, dass man nach circa 20 bis 25 Jahren überhaupt erst gesellschaftliche Ereignisse so reflektieren kann, dass die Emotionen nicht überhand gewinnen und eine sachliche Auseinandersetzung erschweren.

In Eurem Buch spricht eine Autorin von der Erwartung eines „Ostdeutschen 68“. Das wäre jetzt zeitlich so weit. Hattet ihr erwartet, dass das käme?

Judith: Erwartet nicht, aber die Idee hat Charme. Ich denke, dass aufgrund des gesellschaftlichen Drucks dafür kein Raum da ist. Es gibt zu viele andere Probleme. Aber nötig wäre es, um eine Aufarbeitung des noch nicht Bearbeiteten anzustoßen. Die Auseinandersetzung mit der DDR erschöpft sich ja nicht im Auswerten der Stasi-Akten. Und in Westdeutschland gab es wenn überhaupt nur eine marginale Auseinandersetzung mit der DDR Alltagskultur und der Wendezeit. Ich glaube, da haben viele kein Gefühl dafür, wie schwierig die Umbruchzeit für viele im Osten war. Da fehlt das Verständnis, nicht nur Empathie sondern einfach das Verstehen, was passiert ist und was das mit den Menschen gemacht hat. Die Bürger aus Westdeutschland sollten auch erkennen, dass die Wende Teil ihrer eigenen Geschichte ist.

Wie wirkt diese verpasste Auseinandersetzung auf die Gesellschaft heute?

Judith: Es gibt immer noch strukturelle Unterschiede im Engagement, in der Bewertung und Wahrnehmung der Demokratie als Staatsform und den Möglichkeiten der Entfaltung, die sie dem Einzelnen bietet.

Es ist wichtig, die eigenen Rolle und das eigene Verhaltens in der DDR erst einmal in der Familie zu reflektieren. Das ist ein Schutzraum, wo das Gespräch weniger mit Schuld und Scham belastet ist und man einfacher darüber reden kann, wie es einem damals erging und wie es einem heute mit der Erfahrung geht. Dies öffnet dann Reflektionsräume dafür, auch öffentlich diese Debatte zu führen und sich auseinanderzusetzen. Man muss im Schutzraum des Privaten zunächst selbst seine Haltung finden, um sich der gesellschaftlichen Auseinandersetzung stellen zu können.

Wenn man die Vergangenheit persönlich nicht verarbeiten kann, dann blockiert das ganze gesellschaftliche Gruppen oder eine ganze Generation – die ja auch nur aus vielen Individuen besteht – neue Situationen und Erfahrungen anzunehmen. Die verpasste Auseinandersetzung im Privaten hindert eine ganze Generation sich mit der Gesellschaft heute, ihren Möglichkeiten aber auch ihren Problemen auseinanderzusetzen.

Das Interview führte Christine Wetzel

„Wie war das für Euch? Die dritte Genration Ostdeutschland im Gespräch mit ihren Eltern.“ Chr. Links Verlag, Berlin 2016

von Judith C. Enders (Hg.) (Autor), Mandy Schulze (Hg.) (Autor), Bianca Ely (Hg.) (Autor)

What motivates people to become a driver of change in a time of transition?

Results from a Workshop at the 2015 NECE Conference in Thessaloniki, 22nd October 2015

Why we are asking this question

“Transition ends when we have disenchantment,” we learned in our first meeting in Sofia. But when transition ends due to disenchantment, it does not mean, that everything is ‘done’. Rather, people have become frustrated about the transition process, they do not believe in their possibility to bring about change. As activists, teachers, researchers in the wide field of civil society and citizenship education one of our main concerns is how to empower people. How to encourage them to be the change the want to see happen? In this brief workshop we presented best practice and learnings from our own work and asked participants to share their experience.

The workshop was held by Many Schulze (Perspektive³, Berlin), Olena Pravilo (Congress of Cultural Activists, Kiev) and Christine Wetzel (German-Russian-Exchange, Berlin). Documented on film by Dörte Grimm (Perspective³).

The workshops participants joined us from Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Armenia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Croatia and Germany.

Olena’s Case on DIMG_20151022_150044riving Change: Establishing a Cultural Management in the community of Zaporizhzhya (Ukraine)

It all started with the occupation of the Ukraine Ministry of Education. The idea was spread on Facebook by artists and cultural managers after the end of the Janukovich government. It was not to destroy anything symbolically, but actually to do better, and to run the ministry with a lot more passion and expertise.

The problems of Ukraine’s cultural administration were, according to Olena, lacking concepts for cultural development, overall bad administration of policies, and no openness towards other sectors as education or economy. The idea of self-made cultural policy spread to other cities, Assemblies of Culture were set up and registered as NGOs – as in the community of Zaporizhzhya.

Olena explained, what drove the activists to take this great challenge was not to accept excuses: “We in Ukraine can always look at other countries and find reasons why things can not be changed here: Because we have less money than Germany, because we are not so small like Estonia, and so on. But we said, we can do it. We just start, see what works elsewhere and try to do it here.”

Therefore, the activists in Zaporizhzhya invited experts from all over the Ukraine to share their experiences and best practice from other communities. There was no big funding for this event, everybody traveled on her or his own expanses, local activists all provided their bit to make the event happen. It was a kick-off for cultural self-management in the Zaporizhzhya. By now, the activities have resulted in the initiating of a cultural strategy for the community, and the developing of a cooperation with the Economic University. A book fair was established and diverse cultural projects created.

“We need examples, we need to repeat them, spread them, show others what works,” Olena stressed, and, as simple as crucial: “Ask people to do something! Encourage them, give them examples of what they can actually achieve. Do you have a telescope, do you know something about the space? Why don’t you show children the starts and the universe?”

Mandy’s Case on Driving Change: How young people looking for place to live accidentally opened a social space and investigated local history (Germany)

Mandy’s story of change had to starting points. One was a typical ‘lost place’, like you can find plenty of it all over the former communist countries in every community: empty town halls, factories, schools, hotels ect.

One the other side there were five young people looking for a place to live and work. They found an empty, run down public house in the town of Niederoderwitz to settle.

“The five had nothing in mind with community issues or civic empowerment,” says Mandy. “But From the moment they had started to work ob the house, they got confronted with locals who stopped by and asked to come in and have look. They became aware of the enormous meaning the house has for the people in the village.” For decades all festivities had been celebrated here; birth, birthdays, carnival, thanksgiving… With closure off the hotel the village had lost it’s social heart, the place were people would meet.

So, they opened the house for a first garden party – and 800 out of 1.500 villagers came. Consequently, the house was opened regular and became the new community center. The group of 5 people grew to 25. They were confronted with new issues of management; dealing with the administration, finding supporters and funding, investigating the local history. They invited chronologists and historians. They established themselves in the village, got children and had to deal with related issues, like Infrastructure for young families.

Essentially, the hotel hall was not just a place to celebrate. A public space like this is simply crucial for the development of a sense of community in the first place. Without a place to gather, community life is disintegrating, emptying and frustration growing that there is ‘nothing here anymore’. The five young people had realized the potential of that place. How it matters to people, that they perceived it as an open wound in their village – and they are willing to change something about it, to give it new sense. By accident, they, just seeking affordable housing, became community activists, bringing public space and local citizen-driven self-organization (back) to live.

Thus, in terms of the workshop question, the case shows three things: Firstly, start small and local, the ‘home’ is a place everyone can emotionally connect to – and this is crucial.

Secondly, the people can create a political awareness starting from concerns for issues that are considered to be not political at all, like housing, some questions asked on the past.

And finally – despite all praise to the possibilities of virtual communication – the necessity to provide a physical space, a laboratory and hub for encounters and those who are willing to be drivers of change.

see more of this case on Facebook: www.facebook.com/KretschamNiederoderwitzEv/

In 2013 a network was founded supporting initiatives like that in Niederoderwitz reclaiming the public space. They are analysing and providing knowledge and support on issues like: What are triggers for civic engagement?
What are the challanges for those who want to engage? How can they be supported?  www.zukunft-oberlausitz.com

Open Discussion Results

We asked everyone to note down her and his answer to the workshop question and later share it with us. Here are insights the that were given by the participants from their experience:

  • Do not work on a group, you want to do something for, but work with them. Listen and develop approaches with them, that build on their needs, ideas and capacity.
  • Show people ‘the better live’ that is possible and provide them with examples how to get there.
  • You need a common issue if you want to keep people on board. This seems obvious, but often it is not the case when you look closer.
  • Education is an extremely powerful tool!
  • Ask people questions that make them start thinking.
  • Talk, talk, talk to people! Support encounters between different groups to share experience and examples, then develop programs to implement knowledge in practice.
  • We need to make ourselves visible, we need public spaces to unfold, grow and spread ideas.
  • Perform the best examples of your own, be the example, be the change – start local, then grow up the levels.
  • Support the people, who are willing to do something; empower them, build their confidence, if possible provide financial support.
  • Show them the consequences of their actions, show them what happens when the make changes – and what if not.
  • Networking and team-building: Make people feel that they are not alone!
  • You need to organize and structure the ideas, provide the ground to make ideas work
  • Lower administration burden!

The workshop holders suggest, that the examples given by the participant apply to all kind of civic engagement in different circumstances. We further suggest, all the points given link into each other and form a ‘Circle of Motivation‘:

The chart point to motivation and incentive structures on different levels; the individual (1) (2), but also organizational (3) (6) and institutional (4, also including funding) level, that are all relevant for people to drive change processes – though one can partly make up for the other. Bottom up activity should ideally meet a top down structure that facilitates engagement, e.g. with funding, providing spaces for meeting, give access to key actors. But this are not opposites: The Ukraine example shows the attempt of changing this very environment for activity.

The six elements build on each other and are linked, but they are not solely linear: E.g., sure, it helps to talk about and spread your cause at every stage of the circle. And, obviously, listen to those you want to address with your activity before you start is always a good idea! As it was stressed by a participant from Georgia early in the discussion, our attitude towards those who we want to work with is important. We should be facilitator, not the instructor who always knows better. For there is nothing less encouraging if you do not get the chance to follow your own ideas.

And finally: Do never forget about the social experience of engagement! Whatever you do; provide space for getting together also with agenda, celebrate results, tell others, honor activity and – say thanks.

Circle of Motivation

Driving Change Diagram

Thank you to all of you who joined this workshop and shared their experience!

by Christine Wetzel

see the workshop video and read more about what we did at the conference http://www.transition-dialogue.org/workshop-at-the-2015-nece-conference-in-thessaloniki-22nd-october

Workshop NECE conference 2015: How to motivate people to become a driver of change

“Transition ends when we have disenchantment,” we learned in our first meeting in Sofia. But when transition ends due to disenchantment, it does not mean, that everything is ‘done’. Rather, people have become frustrated about the transition process, they do not believe in their possibility to bring about change. As activists, teachers, researchers in the wide field of civil society and citizenship education one of our main concerns is how to empower people. How to encourage them to be the change the want to see happen? In this brief workshop we presented best practice and learnings from our own work and asked participants to share their experience.

The workshop was held by Many Schulze (Perspektive³, Berlin), Olena Pravilo (Congress of Cultural Activists, Kiev) and Christine Wetzel (German-Russian-Exchange, Berlin). Documented on film by Dörte Grimm (Perspective³, Berlin).

The workshops participants joined us from Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Armenia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Croatia and Germany.

NECE Congress “Us” and “them” Greece, October 22-24, 2015

Workshop I

What motivates people to become a driver of change in a time of transition?

Results from a Workshop at the 2015 NECE Conference in Thessaloniki, 22nd October 2015

Why we are asking this question

“Transition ends when we have disenchantment,” we learned in our first meeting in Sofia. But when transition ends due to disenchantment, it does not mean, that everything is ‘done’. Rather, people have become frustrated about the transition process, they do not believe in their possibility to bring about change. As activists, teachers, researchers in the wide field of civil society and citizenship education one of our main concerns is how to empower people. How to encourage them to be the change the want to see happen? In this brief workshop we presented best practice and learnings from our own work and asked participants to share their experience.

The workshop was held by Many Schulze (Perspektive³, Berlin), Olena Pravilo (Congress of Cultural Activists, Kiev) and Christine Wetzel (German-Russian-Exchange, Berlin). Documented on film by Dörte Grimm (Perspective³).

The workshops participants joined us from Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, Armenia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Croatia and Germany.

Olena’s Case on Driving Change: Establishing a Cultural Management in the community of Zaporizhzhya (Ukraine)

It all started with the occupation of the Ukraine Ministry of Education. The idea was spread on Facebook by artists and cultural managers after the end of the Janukovich government. It was not to destroy anything symbolically, but actually to do better, and to run the ministry with a lot more passion and expertise.

The problems of Ukraine’s cultural administration were, according to Olena, lacking concepts for cultural development, overall bad administration of policies, and no openness towards other sectors as education or economy. The idea of self-made cultural policy spread to other cities, Assemblies of Culture were set up and registered as NGOs – as in the community of Zaporizhzhya.

Olena explained, what drove the activists to take this great challenge was not to accept excuses: “We in Ukraine can always look at other countries and find reasons why things can not be changed here: Because we have less money than Germany, because we are not so small like Estonia, and so on. But we said, we can do it. We just start, see what works elsewhere and try to do it here.”

Therefore, the activists in Zaporizhzhya invited experts from all over the Ukraine to share their experiences and best practice from other communities. There was no big funding for this event, everybody traveled on her or his own expanses, local activists all provided their bit to make the event happen. It was a kick-off for cultural self-management in the Zaporizhzhya. By now, the activities have resulted in the initiating of a cultural strategy for the community, and the developing of a cooperation with the Economic University. A book fair was established and diverse cultural projects created.

“We need examples, we need to repeat them, spread them, show others what works,” Olena stressed, and, as simple as crucial: “Ask people to do something! Encourage them, give them examples of what they can actually achieve. Do you have a telescope, do you know something about the space? Why don’t you show children the starts and the universe?”

Mandy’s Case on Driving Change: How young people looking for place to live accidentally opened a social space and investigated local history (Germany)

Mandy’s story of change had to starting points. One was a typical ‘lost place’, like you can find plenty of it all over the former communist countries in every community: empty town halls, factories, schools, hotels ect.

One the other side there were five young people looking for a place to live and work. They found an empty, run down public house in the town of Niederoderwitz to settle.

“The five had nothing in mind with community issues or civic empowerment,” says Mandy. “But From the moment they had started to work ob the house, they got confronted with locals who stopped by and asked to come in and have look. They became aware of the enormous meaning the house has for the people in the village.” For decades all festivities had been celebrated here; birth, birthdays, carnival, thanksgiving… With closure off the hotel the village had lost it’s social heart, the place were people would meet.

So, they opened the house for a first garden party – and 800 out of 1.500 villagers came. Consequently, the house was opened regular and became the new community center. The group of 5 people grew to 25. They were confronted with new issues of management; dealing with the administration, finding supporters and funding, investigating the local history. They invited chronologists and historians. They established themselves in the village, got children and had to deal with related issues, like Infrastructure for young families.

Essentially, the hotel hall was not just a place to celebrate. A public space like this is simply crucial for the development of a sense of community in the first place. Without a place to gather, community life is disintegrating, emptying and frustration growing that there is ‘nothing here anymore’. The five young people had realized the potential of that place. How it matters to people, that they perceived it as an open wound in their village – and they are willing to change something about it, to give it new sense. By accident, they, just seeking affordable housing, became community activists, bringing public space and local citizen-driven self-organization (back) to live.

Thus, in terms of the workshop question, the case shows three things: Firstly, start small and local, the ‘home’ is a place everyone can emotionally connect to – and this is crucial.

Secondly, the people can create a political awareness starting from concerns for issues that are considered to be not political at all, like housing, some questions asked on the past.

And finally – despite all praise to the possibilities of virtual communication – the necessity to provide a physical space, a laboratory and hub for encounters and those who are willing to be drivers of change.

see more of this case on Facebook: www.facebook.com/KretschamNiederoderwitzEv/

In 2013 a network was founded supporting initiatives like that in Niederoderwitz reclaiming the public space. They are analysing and providing knowledge and support on issues like: What are triggers for civic engagement?
What are the challanges for those who want to engage? How can they be supported?  www.zukunft-oberlausitz.com

Open Discussion Results

We asked everyone to note down her and his answer to the workshop question and later share it with us. Here are insights the that were given by the participants from their experience:

  • Do not work on a group, you want to do something for, but work with them. Listen and develop approaches with them, that build on their needs, ideas and capacity.
  • Show people ‘the better live’ that is possible and provide them with examples how to get there.
  • You need a common issue if you want to keep people on board. This seems obvious, but often it is not the case when you look closer.
  • Education is an extremely powerful tool!
  • Ask people questions that make them start thinking.
  • Talk, talk, talk to people! Support encounters between different groups to share experience and examples, then develop programs to implement knowledge in practice.
  • We need to make ourselves visible, we need public spaces to unfold, grow and spread ideas.
  • Perform the best examples of your own, be the example, be the change – start local, then grow up the levels.
  • Support the people, who are willing to do something; empower them, build their confidence, if possible provide financial support.
  • Show them the consequences of their actions, show them what happens when the make changes – and what if not.
  • Networking and team-building: Make people feel that they are not alone!
  • You need to organize and structure the ideas, provide the ground to make ideas work
  • Lower administration burden!

The workshop holders suggest, that the examples given by the participant apply to all kind of civic engagement in different circumstances. We further suggest, all the points given link into each other and form a ‘Circle of Motivation‘:

The chart point to motivation and incentive structures on different levels; the individual (1) (2), but also organizational (3) (6) and institutional (4, also including funding) level, that are all relevant for people to drive change processes – though one can partly make up for the other. Bottom up activity should ideally meet a top down structure that facilitates engagement, e.g. with funding, providing spaces for meeting, give access to key actors. But this are not opposites: The Ukraine example shows the attempt of changing this very environment for activity.

The six elements build on each other and are linked, but they are not solely linear: E.g., sure, it helps to talk about and spread your cause at every stage of the circle. And, obviously, listen to those you want to address with your activity before you start is always a good idea! As it was stressed by a participant from Georgia early in the discussion, our attitude towards those who we want to work with is important. We should be facilitator, not the instructor who always knows better. For there is nothing less encouraging if you do not get the chance to follow your own ideas.

And finally: Do never forget about the social experience of engagement! Whatever you do; provide space for getting together also with agenda, celebrate results, tell others, honor activity and – say thanks.

Circle of Motivation

Driving Change Diagram

Thank you to all of you who joined this workshop and shared their experience!

 (Protocol by Christine Wetzel)


Workshop II

“Otherness” through the eyes of the generation of transition

The workshop explored the way the generation of transition understands the notion of “otherness” and how their current perception has been influenced by the process of transition towards democracy in the post-communist space. The participants presented the results of a small scale study on the topic, conducted in several countries from Eastern and Central Europe.

Olena Pravylo, Congress of Cultural Activists (Ukraine)

Rafaela Tripalo, “Stiftung Wissen am Werk” (Knowledge at Work Foundation, Croatia)

Iva Kopraleva, Sofia Platform (Bulgaria)

Moderator:
Louisa Slavkova, European Council on Foreign Relations/ Sofia Platform (Bulgaria)

@NECE Congress – “Us” and “them” – Citizenship education in an interdependent world, Thessaloniki, Greece, October 22-24 2015

„Es geht nicht um einen Minimalkonsens“

„Mapping Memories of Post-1989 Europe“ –  Konferenz 29.11. – 01.12.2015 in Wien.
Polina Filippova, Sacharow-Zentrum Moskau, nahm als Mitglied des Transition Dialogue-Netwerkes an der Konferenz teil.
Beitrag von Maria Ugoljew, freie Journalistin
Wien. Historiker und Aktivisten begaben sich auf der Konferenz „Mapping Memories of Post-1989 Europe“ in Wien auf die Suche nach einem gemeinsamen Narrativ für Europa. Dazu wurden in Workshops und auf Podiumsdiskussionen gegenwärtige ost- wie westeuropäische Diskurse skizziert, Forschungsprojekte vorgestellt und Gemeinsamkeiten sowie Unterschiede in den Erinnerungskulturen umrissen.
Auf die Frage ob ein gemeinsames europäisches Narrativ gegenwärtig machbar ist und wenn ja, welche Ansätze dabei zu berücksichtigen wären, gab es verschiedene Antworten. Eine Spurensuche.
Professioneller Diskurs vs. politischer Opportunismus
Dass es für Ost- und Westeuropa in naher Zukunft ein gemeinsames Narrativ geben könnte – daran war nach Alexei Millers Beitrag gar nicht zu denken. Der Geschichtsprofessor der European University St. Petersburg bezeichnete die aktuellen Entwicklungen vielmehr als eine „Tragödie“. Geschichte werde auf beiden Seiten politisiert, Akademiker würden sich wie Politiker verhalten und die „Rolle öffentlicher Gurus“ einnehmen. Statt eines professionellen Diskurses herrsche politischer Opportunismus. Der Euromaidan werde als Faschisten-Bewegung bezeichnet, die Nord Stream-Pipeline mit dem Hitler-Stalin-Pakt verglichen und Wladimir Putin als Hitler des 21. Jahrhunderts bezeichnet. „Wie konnte es passieren, dass Geschichte so politisiert wird?“ fragte er.
Das Individuum gehört in den Mittelpunkt
Ruhigere Töne schlug hingegen Polina Filippova vom Sacharow-Zentrum in Moskau an. Die Situation sei zwar eine schwierige, „aber wir dürfen uns nicht zurücklehnen und sagen, dann ist das halt so im Westen und im Osten“. Bei der Entwicklung eines gemeinsamen Narrativs müsse vor allem eines berücksichtigt werden: der humanitäre Ansatz, der das Individuum in den Mittelpunkt rückt. Ein Aspekt, den auch Jörg Skriebeleit, Leiter der KZ-Gedenkstätte Flossenbürg, forderte. Denn erst durch die humanistische Grundierung würden unterschiedliche Narrative zum Tragen kommen.
Klein statt groß, lokal statt elitär
Einen Perspektivwechsel forderte Zaal Andronikashvili vom Zentrum für Literatur- und Kulturforschung in Berlin. Man müsse von den kleineren Ländern ausgehen, nicht von den großen, sagte er. Denn eine europäische Erinnerungskultur könne nur gelingen, wenn alle Stimmen berücksichtigt werden. „Aber ich weiß nicht, ob man das schafft“, sagte Zaal Andronikashvili.
Ljiljana Radonić von der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien bat ihre Kollegen, beim Politisierungsprozess von Geschichte nicht zuzuschauen – Wissenschaftler sollten sich dagegen wehren, „nicht neutral und höflich sein, sondern Kritik üben“. Hinsichtlich eines europäischen Narrativs regte sie an, den Prozess keinesfalls mit einem Minimalkonsens abzuschließen, zu normieren oder zu kanalisieren. Viel wichtiger sei die Frage, wie diese Diskussion geführt werde und ob aus der elitären Idee ein lokales Projekt entstehen könnte.
International statt national
In welchem Verhältnis nationale und internationale Erinnerungen zueinenader stehen sollten, darüber sprach unter anderem Oliver Rathkolb von der Universität Wien. Er plädierte dafür, nationale Erinnerungsräume aufzubrechen und sich loszulösen von der Idee, dass es das eine Narrativ gebe. Weder funktioniere das für eine Nation, noch für Europa.
Maria Ugoljew

Country profile – Germany

How is the period of transition framed in your country? What allows us to label a generation the “Transition Generation” as such?

What are uniting experiences and phenomena?

In the German case the most emotional event of course was the fall of the Berlin Wall on the 9th of November in 1989. These pictures are deeply written in the historical memory of the whole nation. But on both sides of the wall, the associations and pictures have a different effect.

What is distinct for each country – why?

Germany as such feels like the trigger of change and transition of this time, nevertheless there have been a lot of historical key points and preconditions located in different spheres and countries, for instance the politics of Perestroika and Glasnost after the empowerment of Gorbatschow in Russia.

What is the effect on civil society today?

In general it can be resumed there is a differentiated civil society in Germany for all reasons of political, social and cultural issues, more or less well organised – caused by a long tradition in western Germany since the end of the second world war.

What marks the beginning and the end of the transition? When was the moment “when history stopped”?

The most pictured point was the fall down of the Berlin wall, but as well the summer of 1989 with mass escapes/ getaways of citizens of the GDR by entering the embassies of western Germany in Hungary and Czech Republic have been clearly the signs of change in both German countries, some more in the GDR.

Who / what groups drove transition? What happened to these people during transition?

Drivers of the transition have been the so called “Bürgerrechtler” or dissidents in the former GDR, but after unification they took a back seat in the political process.

What was the role of civil society?

The eastern civil society with their experiences and contacts took over the public life in the East and formed a democratically organised but “East-West-hierarchical” system of civil engagement. In the eastern part of the country the people got more and more silent after the mass demonstrations. A huge deindustrialisation and unemployment wave took place in East Germany and so many people moved to the western part for work and education. In the early 90s East Germany got to know as a neo-Nazi-area by attacking foreigners.

Is there something like a common narrative on the time of transition and before? Is that narrative contested? How and by whom?

There are two common narratives, an eastern and a western one. In the East the people felt more or less as citizens of second class, the western Germans felt like paying a high monetary price for unification. These are long lasting cut and dried opinions and mind driving pictures. With the films “Good by Lenin” and “Sonnenallee” there is a parallel nostalgic narrative about the socialist time, where especially for the older generation their work and social security were safe. But because of feeling ashamed by being the people who moved the socialist system to change into a democratic and than losing their jobs and being the poor and naive eastern people there is not much talking about the time from the late 80s to the middle of the 90s within the families. Therefore the initiative 3th Generation East Germany and the association Perspektive 3 e.V. had such a great success in the public and media. There is still a need for talking and reflection about the experiences in East and West. With the fall of the Berlin wall not only the GDR ended but also the border between the to blocks of East and West changed. So many things in the social system of West Germany changed as well. There was no need anymore to show a proper social and welfare system “against” the East. The neo-liberalisation started with the fall of the Berlin wall. This has to be discussed in a wider focus of economic and social transition in Europa and the world.

What values shaped the transitions period and was there a conflict between the different sets of values and worldviews?

There has been a dream of finding a third way of social life and economies between capitalism and socialism, a hope for more equity and fairness in the society as such. And there have been neoliberal optimists who saw a chance to liberate the whole economic sphere, finding new markets, consumers, options, profits and chances for wealth and welfare in a globalized world.

What are the typical representatives of the generation of transition in your country and what are their characteristics?

The Third Generation of East Germany is described as those who were born between 1975 and 1985 in East Germany. It involves about 2.4 million young people who can be considered as a generation due to their cohort membership and by a similarly stored imprint of the experience of 1989 and the subsequent upheaval. They were socialist within two systems the socials and the capitalist and migrated in large numbers from their regions of origin.

Those who are born in the West of Germany faced a more globalized and less social capitalistic society as in the 1980s, but they have not suffered such a deep change of all circumstances of life like the East Germans of this and every generation. Some are still rarely interested in any East-German case and never travelled there in their life.

How is the period of transition relevant to the way the generation of transition thinks and acts today? Does it influence how they make decisions or how they attempt to tackle contemporary challenges?

The people and institutions in East Germany have to deal with many challenges of unemployment and a de-industrialised future. At the same time there are on a personal level feelings of lethargy and a lack of solidarity and empathy among the people. In the communities a people driven community-oriented local perspective for development is missed. On an institutional level the challenges are an ageing infrastructure combined with a low level of funds. There is a hope that the 3rd Generation of East Germany is now in the position to act as a change agent within the Eastern regions but they are not very present in the elite structures in politics or economics for example and a very few living in rural areas.

Judith Enders / Mandy Schulze