Talk:Georgian Dream

This page's ideology bullet is getting raided by people with biased points of view. The Civil.ge source does not say the party is "pro-Russian." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirsty Veblen (talk • contribs) 17:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

What basis is there to call the Georgian Dream Third Way or even Social Democratic beyond their self-designation? The ideology section needs more citations and less going off on a whim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Westchestiditor (talk • contribs) 17:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

The reference to xenophobia was completely unsubstantiated and bias in nature. Thus it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gearge (talk • contribs) 22:21, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Several reliable sources describe the Georgian Dream coalition as a heterogenous alliance that includes liberal as well as radically nationalistic and xenophobic elements. Not the alliance as a whole is described as xenophobic, only some elements within are.

• "ranging from über-liberals to radical nationalists", The Independent
• "They include free-market liberals, xenophobic nationalists, and those who hanker for the era before 2003.", The Economist
• "ranging from hard-core nationalists to liberal progressives", EurasiaNet
• "includes a diverse array of western-minded liberals and xenophobic nationalists", Hrant Kostanyan for LSE
• "Outside the capital, it frequently plays on economic populism and barely concealed xenophobia.", Thomas Van Der Waal in Foreign Policy

Therefore, it is not acceptable to discard this view and remove the well-sourced statement. --RJFF (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Split

There should be a separate articles for Georgian Dream and Georgian Dream–Democratic Georgia, because the latter is just one member of the former. Charles Essie (talk) 02:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Georgian Dream. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160222193553/http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/Brief_26.pdf to http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/Brief_26.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation-world/sns-rt-us-georgia-election-factboxbre88t0iw-20120930,0,2550976.story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Ideology

I believe that it's fair to describe Georgian Dream as syncretic on the basis that they've been widely described as consisting of various groups from moderates to the Georgian far-right, going all the way back to 2012; for example:

• From the BBC: "Some of them are accused of having links to the crime and corruption of Georgia's past while others have made xenophobic, nationalistic or homophobic comments, unchecked by Mr Ivanishvili."

• And, more recently, from the IWPR: "Despite being aware of the impending threats, authorities did nothing to prevent the violence, with many leading figures like the prime minister accusing Pride organisers of being linked with the [opposition] United National Movement and being against the majority will of the people."

On the party's pro-European stance, there are also examples by the party's leaders that go against this, as shown in OC Media, Eurasianet, and Civil Georgia.

Georgian Dream has also been described as Russophile by Carnegie Europe, Foreign Policy, and Politico. The European Parliament has also threatened to sanction Bidzina Ivanishvili (the party's founder, widely considered to be its de facto leader, per Politico, Eurasianet), citing his Kremlin links (see [Eurasianet Eurasianet]).

The source currently listed on the page, The First 100 Days of The Georgian Dream Government: A Reality Check, also describes Georgian Dream as economically liberal, saying, "GD's program combines market liberal economic policies with center-left social policies aimed at establishing a comprehensive safety net to support the country’s vulnerable population."

A previous discussion about the matter, with other sources describing Georgian Dream as consisting of moderates and members far-right alike, is the first topic on this page, as well. However, as was noted, WP:CON is necessary. So, I'll start off a discussion on the matter here. Seeing as you were the person who reverted the edit, @BastianMAT, I suppose it's for the best that we begin discussion so as to develop a consensus as to Georgian Dream's ideology.

Mupper-san (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Let’s start off with far-right. Some sources describe GD as having good relations with some far-right groups, and the other two articles mention controversial/xenophobic members but none state that GD is ”far-right” or has ”far-right” factions, falling under WP:SYNTH. A reliable source stating the position would be needed.

For the second part, economic liberalism. The same source, you used, says; ”The increase in excise taxes represents a major deviation from GD’s election program and raises questions about GD’s adherence to a market liberal policy orientation.” Plus we already have liberalism in the infobox, as the source mentions the liberal faction.

For the third part, the source used in your edit did not describe the party as centre-right nor social conservative, a source describing it as centre-right or/and social conservative is needed or it falls under WP:SYNTH.

For the fourth part, the source used for Eurosceptism in your edit only says the PM cracked down on a pro-EU rally, a source describing the party as Eurosceptic would be needed, otherwise again WP:SYNTH. Officially the party is pro-EU, has applied to the EU and several sources describe it as officially pro-European. However I believe that the pro-European stance has only been a hoax to win over electorate, being against EU would be a political suicide in Georgia. Several NGOs, probably you and other sources agree with this, [1], [2], [3] which leads to me proposing removing the pro-European label entirely from the infobox. Basically the party officially holds a pro-European position, but acts in a way which has made European integration impossible, and was recently denied fast EU membership (with Moldova and Ukraine being accepted).

For the fifth part, the de facto leader definitely has ties to Russia, and is close on Russia, however the FP article does say that the party has not taken a pro-Russian stance but ”appeasement”. [4] The GD does not officially take a pro-Russian stance, but it leans for closer relations with Russia. I believe that this has to be mentioned in the lede, but due to them not officially supporting Russia, russophilia would be WP:UNDUE.

In conclusion, there are WP:RS describing the position as centre-left, so this should be nothing to be disputed about. I propose removing pro-Europeanism from the infobox, and instead adding in the lede their foreign policy - does not officially support Russia but has wanted closer relations, de facto leader has kremlin ties, officially pro-european, has applied for EU, however does not commit to the EU standards and receieved criticism due to that. For the other things, reliable sources having the position/ideology is needed as it otherwise falls under WP:SYNTH, if there any add them into the discussion. Cheers. BastianMAT (talk) 00:52, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I completely agree that Pro-Europeanism is a move for public support (and can be removed from the infobox as such), and I can agree to noting the more pro-Russian appeasement mannerisms in the lede. I'll definitely look for reliable sources which explicitly use the terms far-right to describe some factions of the party.

Cheers!

Mupper-san (talk) 02:32, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

They are self-declared pro-European party, but the fact of the matter is, they are soft Eurosceptic at best, and pro-Russian at worst. It should also be noted that their rhetoric has shifted in the recent years towards Euroscepticism and pro-Russianism. Older sources are pretty much obsolete at this point. If the article should reflect the de-facto state of affairs, the party is definitely not pro-European. I'm removing it until further consensus is reached. My suggestion is to leave this topic out of the infobox and add a link to the ideology section where it's explained in more detail. -91.151.136.192 (talk) 22:50, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Also they aren't social-democratic. They support some social programs, but so do centrists, liberals, conservatives, christian democrats. -91.151.136.192 (talk) 23:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Reading this whole section, it is clear that at the very least, there is no consensus on keeping the pro-European label in the infobox. So I am going to remove the label from there. CrazyPredictor (talk) 00:23, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I think, it would be the best to describe the party as soft Euroskeptic. They identify as pro-European, but their de-facto policies and rhetoric have been consistent with the Eurosceptic label. The party's recent relations with CPAC and Viktor Orban is also a smoking gun. They're also not social democratic. There were some efforts in mid 2010s to push the party towards this direction, but eventually, they all failed. Big tent and right-wing populism would be better labels to describe their ideology. The party officials occasionally use labels like conservatism and traditionalism, but not Christian democracy — probably because Georgia already has a party that uses this label (Christian Democrats). — Giorgi Gzirishvili (T · C), 04:09, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

First of all, the party has stated officially that it wants to join European Union by 2030 and have applied for membership. Just because they don't agree with the European Commission and European Parliament on certain things does not means that they are Eurosceptic. Even with disagreements Georgia still might join European Union since Hungary might block any decision related to Ukraine's accession if Georgia is not included, so that might be the strategy and the party is still pro-joining European Union. https://rustavi2.ge/en/news/259167 Hungary is indeed close to Georgian government and has supported in its statements, but I don't see Euroscepticism being listed in the infobox of Hungarian ruling party page, so why is relations with Orban a "smoking gun"? In reality that might be the strategy to join European Union since the European Parliament dislikes Georgian Government and Georgia still wants to join the EU. And Hungary might bargain for Georgia by saying that it might block Ukraine. For a decision to pass in EU it is necessary to have approval of every member state. So relations with Hungary in no way indicates being Eurosceptic necessarly. 190.114.33.101 (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Checking the sources, the party does seem to be described as such and I agree with this point. I will add it, and if there are any issues with it then please let me know. Brat Forelli🦊 09:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

The party is neither pro-Russian nor Eurosceptic. There are many international sources which deny this. This is a biased narrative of oppositionists and NGOs.

• https://web.archive.org/web/20230504232436/https://carnegieendowment.org/politika/89655 - Denies the claim that party is pro-Russian.
• https://www.mei.edu/publications/georgian-elections-2020-strong-mandate-democratization-and-westernization - Argues that the party is pro-European
• https://caucasuswatch.de/en/insights/pre-election-georgia-toward-perpetual-instability.html - Says that party has multi-vectoral policy while also wanting to join EU.
• https://jacobin.com/2024/05/georgia-ngos-eu-membership-democracy - denies that party is pro-Russian.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.64.112 (talk) 23:31, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Kaladze on the USA: We were not friends, turns out we were each other's enemies.

https://tabula.ge/ge/news/718599-kaladze-ashsh-ze-chven-ar-vqopilvart-megobrebi 5.178.148.196 (talk) 18:32, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Any doubt of the party not being Eurosceptic or at least soft-Eurosceptic has ended with the reintroduction of this law. Also how can a government be pro-Western or Pro-European when it has been threatened with sanctions from both of them?

The party members are also well known for making anti-Western statements. I could just leave it up to the fact that US Embassy has called their rhetoric anti-western, but I'll elaborate further. Between February and July 2022, Irakli Kobakhidze made 9 comments critical of Russia but a total of 57 hostile remarks about the West and a further 26 about Ukraine. They also spread anti-Western conspiracy theories. Some of my favorites being "global war party", "second front", and Kaladze directly saying they can keep the EU candidacy for themselves and that the west are enemies and not friends. Here are some of the many articles:

https://ge.usembassy.gov/georgias-western-trajectory-at-risk/

https://neweasterneurope.eu/2023/03/10/the-european-dream-georgias-growing-anti-european-rhetoric-undermines-its-pro-western-aspirations/

https://www.dw.com/en/the-oligarch-behind-georgias-pivot-to-russia/a-69165038

https://www.gmfus.org/news/georgian-dream-digging-its-own-grave

https://oc-media.org/podcasts/podcast-kobakhidzes-anti-western-rhetoric-and-the-nagorno-karabakh-clashes/

https://jamestown.org/program/russian-praise-and-transatlantic-criticism-underline-growing-anti-western-sentiment-among-georgias-elite/

https://www.politico.eu/article/freemasons-global-war-party-conspiring-georgian-dream-party-claims-russia-ivanishvili/

https://www.democracyresearch.org/eng/1122/

https://kyivindependent.com/georgian-dream-escalates-anti-western-rhetoric-at-tbilisi-rally-with-bussed-in-supporters/

The European officials also consider Georgia Dream to be sabotaging EU integration and have been as blunt to say Georgia will not proceed further on the European integration under this government.

Danish FM - "Georgia will not advance on the path to EU membership."

Ursula von der Leyen - "the law on foreign influence transparency goes against core principles & values of the EU"

Josep Borrell - "incompatible with EU values and standards"

https://1tv.ge/lang/en/news/european-politicians-express-concern-as-parliament-overrides-veto-on-foreign-influence-law/ - Here is an article with quite a substantial amount of statements by EU officials.

Georgian Dream from its inception has been a Conservative and Populist party (socially) and that still holds today to a much larger extent. The views the party shares are broadly conservative, if not far-right / right-wing populist / illiberal.

https://www.rferl.org/a/global-war--party-georgian-dream-bidzina-ivanishvili/32951749.html

https://eurasianet.org/perspectives-unpacking-the-georgian-governments-understanding-of-pseudo-liberal-ideology

https://gip.ge/publication-post/georgian-dreams-populist-conservatism-fight-to-legitimise-and-hold-on-to-power/

https://www.democracyresearch.org/eng/1188/

https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/07/georgian-dream-tbilisi-protests-foreign-agent-bill-russia-war-ukraine/

https://civil.ge/archives/528919

https://www.politico.eu/article/georgia-european-union-candidacy-protest-nana-malashkhia-georgian-dream-party/

Additionally Authoritarianism has been alleged:

https://eurasianet.org/georgia-taking-authoritarian-turn-with-adoption-of-foreign-agents-legislation

https://gip.ge/is-georgia-on-the-path-to-authoritarianism/

https://amsterdamandpartners.com/press-release-georgian-dream-is-creating-an-authoritarian-nightmare-according-to-new-report/

https://daviscenter.fas.harvard.edu/insights/georgian-dream-fights-maintain-power

Russophilia is also accused by western sources, but particularly by the opposition and the current president of the country, who was elected with their support.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/05/07/georgian-dream-tbilisi-protests-foreign-agent-bill-russia-war-ukraine/

https://www.eunews.it/en/2024/05/14/eu-and-georgia-government-clash-over-pro-russian-law-passed-despite-oceanic-protests/

https://www.dw.com/en/the-oligarch-behind-georgias-pivot-to-russia/a-69165038

As for the sources being presented here, they are all either outdated or not appropriate.

MEI and CaucasusWatch sources are all the way from 2020 and 2021, Georgian Dream of the current day has morphed way past those naive articles. Jacobin is a left-wing organization, which has been highly critical of EU and Georgia's EU aspirations in the past and therefore is not appropriate to use here. The only decent article here is the one by Carnegie Endowment which has been since taken down and is only available on The Moscow Times.

I'm not saying that the party is, with certainty, all of those labels, but they are touted way more than the party's supposed Pro-Europeanism. Therefore I fully believe they deserve a mention in the ideology section. Zlad! (talk) 20:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Let's settle the article

After more than a week long redacting and back and forth editing, I think we have co-created a good - and very elaborate and well sourced article. On elaborate: that is why I am making an appeal and request now to not wander off into all kinds of less relevant side alleys, not to bloat the article further with essentially repeating already stated points. Last night another 8k bytes (!!) was added which did not provide much additional value - with a few exceptions on providing some more context (f.e. LGBT). I have extensively redacted it, kept a lot of the additions, but also removed duplicate arguments, while putting some previously removed parts back in (as they were correct in place). Labrang (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

One huge issue I take with is the constant adjustment of the party's given Political Position. Before it was centre-left. Then it was changed to big tent, but the source itself (and quote cited) said that it is considered a big tent party while also centre-left, which was good enough for me. Now we have some fiscal-social differentiation that does not have any sources for it. Thus I would want either sources to be found or for it to be changed to something that can be proven, so just 'centre-left' overall or 'big tent', as before. Brat Forelli🦊 13:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

The question is: what should that parameter reflect? Should it reflect the self-declared orientation? Then it is centre-left (until we get an update of the party website - I cannot imagine the party considers itself leftist these days, but alas, maybe for PR purposes it still does). Should it reflect the reality based on what it practices? Or what independent assessments make of it, such as from GIP in 2017 and 2021, based on the election manifestos? Then it starts to become a murkier affair, as the actual position varies per theme - in a broad sense, the cultural/social dimension (conservative-right) and the economic-fiscal dimension (leaning right of center). Labrang (talk) 14:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I think Georgian Dream economic policies are undoubtedly are centre to centre-left in the scope of Georgian politics. We have a very right wing economic system and they have consistently pushed centre-left policies.

yes, in the overall scope Georgian economy has not been transformed into a centre-left economy, but that’s like saying Bernie would be centre-right in Europe. It has pushed the economic system to the left and that is what matters I think.

On the social policy, I don’t think anyone will argue that they are quite firmly right-wing. Zlad! (talk) 14:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Beyond that, they cannot be considered a big-tent ("catch-all") anymore. But alas, that's my view and not corroborated by scientific evidence. Labrang (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah GD has very orthodox policies now, the disagreement is coming from whether we should consider its agreed upon economic policies on the center left or center right. Zlad! (talk) 21:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)