Democracy & Diversity
7^th Annual Summer Graduate Institute

I. Introduction

II. Institute Participants and Curriculum

1. Participants

2. The Democracy & Diversity Institute Curriculum

3. Women’s Leadership Workshop

III. Cultural Program

IV. Participants’ Impressions

V. Summary

I. Introduction

As anyone knows who has visited the magical city of Cracow, Poland, it is a strange, beautiful, and haunting place. Among its treasures are one of the largest Medieval Plazas in Europe and its cloth hall; St. Mary’s Church with its altar by Wit Stvosz and the ever-kafkaesque hejnal, the trumpet call which blazes every hour on the hour, only to be cut off at the same point where the invading Tatars’ arrow once struck the throat of the trumpeter in the midst of his warning call to city inhabitants; Wawel Castle, the seat of Polish Kings for centuries, thought to contain one of the seven spiritual centers or chakras of the world; and the historic Jewish district of Kazimierz, with synagogues, cemeteries, and other remnants of its rich and tragic Jewish past, which is today struggling to maintain a Jewish presence, even if largely symbolic.

This historical and architectural landscape provided the backdrop for the Seventh Annual Democracy & Diversity Institute held in the Przegorzaly Castle, overlooking the Vistula River with a view of the Tyniec Monastery high up on a neighboring hill. The city of Cracow, this "genius locii" as Jacek Purchla, a guest speaker as well as Director of the co-hosting International Cultural Center in Cracow, calls it, is certainly a unique and special place, yet one in which people from diverse cultures can see and feel its effects, being small enough to not feel lost, but rather as if you have discovered a rare kind of jewel that can be shared with others, symbolizing a bond that grows into friendship.

This feeling describes the atmosphere of this year’s Summer Institute, where scholars and activists from all kinds of academic and cultural backgrounds formed close friendships in a relatively short period of time. Part of the bonding came from spending hours in seminars, grappling with serious issues of democracy and democratization, governance, nation-building, culture, and gender. In discussing these issues as they manifest themselves in various cultural and political contexts, participants engaged with each other about real and potential problems, challenges, and solutions, with both lived experience as well as the theoretical texts informing their dialogue. In this way, participants learned about each other and about different regions of the world – Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, Central Asia, South Africa, Latin America, and the United States – offering new perspectives that deepened the comparative approach to and understanding of complex common problems of democracy and transition to democracy.

A predominant theme of the 1997 Democracy & Diversity Institute was expressed in the idea of borders and crossing boundaries – physical, cultural, intellectual, and personal. Participants not only were physically and culturally transported to another place, often crossing borders which not that long ago would have been considered inconceivable or at best less imaginable, but were also transported to a different realm characterized by intellectual and personal growth. As described by most participants in their impression papers written to us after the Institute, the most valuable experiences for them consisted of the new intellectual horizons opened up and the opportunity to meet, exchange ideas with, and befriend colleagues from other cultures and parts of the world. To open these barriers, which were previously quite constrained (such as social science scholarship and the ability to meet foreigners under communism), adds to the overall vitality and cross-fertilization of scholarship in the social sciences generally.

II. Institute Participants and Curriculum

1. Participants

Participating in the 1998 Graduate Summer Institute were 44 carefully-selected scholars and activists from the 20 countries listed below (followed by the number of participants from that country): Albania (2); Armenia (1); Austria (1); Azerbaijan (2); Britain (1); Bulgaria (2); Croatia (1); Czech Republic (1); Estonia (2); Georgia (1); Iran (1); Kazakhstan (3); Kyrgyzstan (3); Mongolia (2); Poland (4); Romania (1); Slovakia (2); South Africa (3); United States (8); former Yugoslavia (3).

In addition to a few advanced scholars and activists, the majority of participants this year was from a younger group of emerging scholars, junior faculty, and graduate students who will be instrumental in building democratic institutions and culture in their respective countries. As we have seen from past experiences, supporting the academic development and networking capacity of younger scholars and activists proves to be an important and worthwhile endeavor, which helps to ensure a long-term and sustainable impact at institutions of higher learning as well as NGOs, and strengthens democracy-building in general. The participants were very open and eager to learn, share, and discuss difficult problems and issues facing their countries and respective societies. They benefited greatly from the cross cultural dialogue on questions ranging from nationalism, democratic continuity, citizenship, and institution-building to theories of gender and policy-making. Where else could a scholar from Mongolia, South Africa, or the United States talk about problems of transition, theory, politics, gender, or culture with someone from Albania, the former Yugoslavia, Kyrgyzstan, and Slovakia, all at the same table?

2. The Democracy & Diversity Institute Curriculum

The Democracy & Diversity Institutecurriculum consisted of the four seminars listed below, from which participants were required to participate in two:

• Nation, Identity, Community, team-taught by Professor Ronald Suny of the University of Chicago, Professor Jorge Castaneda of the Autonomous University of Mexico and New York University, and Professor Monroe Price of Cardozo Law School and the Oxford University Programme on Media Law and Policy;
 
Whether defined as philosophical concept, ideology, attitude, or group's state of mind, nationalism continues to be a major idée forcé of the last two centuries, leading to successive reconfigurations of the world map. This course will explore the origins of modern nationalism both in the Enlightenment and in the romantic movement, and will survey the current social science literature. Various approaches to the study of nationalism as a historical phenomenon will be investigated, with special attention given to Central European countries and Israel. In the second part of the seminar we will explore the questions of cultural identity, nation building, and multiculturalism in Mexico and Latin America at the end of this century. Finally, we will examine selected cases of ethnic conflict in Russia and discuss different strategies of conflict resolution.
• Continuity and Citizenship in Democratic Politics, taught by Professor David Plotke of the Graduate Faculty;
How can democratic practices and institutions be sustained?  What do political institutions and values contribute to democratic continuity?  What is the role of self-interest?  These questions require attention in both newer and more established democracies.  To answer them we will focus on the activities and features of individual citizens.  How should we understand the concept and practice of citizenship?  What do citizens need to agree on for democratic politics to continue over time?
• Problems of Democratic Culture, taught by Professor Jeffrey Goldfarb of the Graduate Faculty;
Political correctness, affirmative action, multiculturalism, and identity politics are controversial topics in the United States today.  In this course these contemporary topics will be analyzed as part of the on-going struggle for a democratic culture.  The controversies will be considered in historical and theoretical contexts which involve on-going attempts to address the problems and promises of democracy in America.  It will be a primary task of the class to consider how these issues relate to the pressing problems of the new democracies of East and Central Europe.  Readings will include de Tocqueville's Democracy in America and a selection of Hannah Arendt's essays, as well as texts by Stephan Carter, Toni Morrison, Robert Bellah, Bell Hooks, Henry Louis Gates Jr., and Paul Berman.
• Theories of Gender in Culture, taught by Professor Ann Snitow of the Graduate Faculty and the Network of East-West Women.
In its seventh year, this course continues to reflect on-going redefinitions of the field "gender studies" and now includes a wide range of material from scholars and emerging women's movements in East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union. This summer we will discuss the difficulties of finding relevant and useful entry points for feminism in the region. We will look at current efforts to include "women" inside the powerful international politics of "human rights" and at feminism's relationship to nationalism - with a critical assessment of different versions of "global feminism".

Professors Plotke, Goldfarb, and Snitow have been coming to Cracow for many years, and are all deeply committed to the issues at hand and to exchanging ideas and teaching methodologies with their international colleagues, both inside and outside of the classroom. Often discussions and debates begun in seminars were continued independently with professors or fellow scholars over meals, often extending late into the night on the terrace of the castle or in the lively Cracow cafes. Participants were eager to discuss their ideas and experience, and to benefit from being able to converse with leading American scholars in their fields. Each professor did some individual counseling with particular students on their thesis or Ph.D. dissertations, offering information on relevant literature and contemporary debates. Often professors of the Institute continue to assist Cracow alumni with follow-up advising, and remain in e-mail contact with many former students.

The seminar Nation, Identity, Communitywas team taught this year by Professors Ronald Suny, Jorge Castaneda, and Monroe Price. Unfortunately, Professor Shlomo Avineri of Israel, one of the much beloved Professors of this course from years past who was originally scheduled to teach, was unable to attend at the last minute due to a leg injury. Nonetheless, this ended up being one of the most dynamic and challenging seminars, delving into the complex issues of nationalism, nation-building, and national identity as exemplified in theory and in practice in countries all over the globe.

Professor Ronald Suny started the seminar with the theoretical underpinnings of nationalism, including the theories of naturalism, primordialism, and modernism. His first project in the seminar was to "denaturalize the nation" by talking about its social construction with supporting examples. Students were forced to think about things in a new way, taking into account modernization, communication, and language. Also examined for comparative purposes were concepts of identity in social science thinking – an idea that used to be fixed and stable, which is now de-centered. His expertise centered on the historical and present dilemmas in the Caucusus, including a discussion of conflict resolution with respect to the region of Nagorny-Karabakh, being fought over by both Azerbaijan and Armenia. Professor Jorge Castaneda provided historical background and context in the cases of nation-building in Latin America, furnishing the students with a grasp of a region of the world to which they had little knowledge and exposure. Not only did it bring to them a greater understanding of Latin American history and politics, it also gave them tools for comparative analysis with problems of nation-building and nationalism in the contexts of East Central Europe, the former Soviet Union, and South Africa.

Professor Monroe Price gave the last few seminar sessions of the NIC seminar, and was particularly insightful at articulating key questions about nationalism and national identity that arise on both a theoretical and practical level. Professor Price drew a comparison between the nation-state system and imperialism, looking at ideas of frontiers and borders, spheres of influence as opposed to a highly defined state. Did democratic motivation require the nation-state to realize its articulation? Many of the post-Soviet states are in the process of transition, trying to rebuild the state, finish the process of nation-building, while also negotiating a convergence into Europe. Are new regional formations developing that are very different from before? How will these associations and the idea of sovereignty play out in the international arena in terms of peacekeeping, internal or regional conflicts, and globalization at large? At one point in seminar discussions, a South African participant brought up the example of African nations, observing that in order to resolve conflicts among the different nation-states, there needs to be more regional integration. He commented that there should be an understanding that they do not exist in a vacuum, but rather need to cooperate on political, economic, and social issues. Professor Price expertly teased out the central, and also more subtle issues involved in thinking about all of the questions raised in this seminar. He also shared his expertise in the course of discussions on media law, policy, and reform, particularly in the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the fierce media broadcasting battle waged there over who could control and disseminate ideas of the "nation" via the airwaves.

3. Women’s Leadership Workshop

In the second part of the Institute, we were joined at the hilltop castle called Przegorzaly by 24 women activists from 8 countries in the region (Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovenia). They were invited to take part in a women’s leadership training workshop, specially designed by TCDS, entitled Women in NGOs and Beyond: Strategies for Greater Representation and Participation of Women in Decision Making in Post-Communist Europe. The workshop trainers, who led sessions on how to shape and use policy, media, and legal instruments to further the goals and policy-making agendas of women’s NGOs, included:

Elaine Zimmerman, Connecticut Commission on Children, U.S.;
Delina Fico, Women’s Center, Albania;
Vesna Kesic, B.a.B.e., Yugoslavia;
Ewa Letowska, Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Poland;
Sonja Licht, Fund for an Open Society – Yugoslavia;
Elzbieta Matynia, New School University, U.S.;
Urszula Nowakowska, Women’s Rights Center, Poland; and
Ann Snitow, Network of East-West Women, U.S.

The focus of the workshop sessions was primarily on the practical manifestations and applications of theories and realities discussed with Professor Snitow, as well as in other seminars. Workshop participants shared their knowledge and experience of how to effectively run an organization or a media campaign, with its many challenges; discussed their countries’ targeted problems; and offered methods to help solve them through a variety of means, including social, legal and media strategies. Yet another bridge was built between the "academic" world and the "real" or "practical" world, both sides learning from each other as their realms are not mutually exclusive, but tend to invigorate and nourish each other in a positive symbiosis. Many scholars from Democracy & Diversity expressed how interesting it was for them to meet their colleagues from the region who are engaged in the important work of civil society and women’s NGOs.

III. Cultural Program

In addition to its regular four seminars and workshop, the Democracy & Diversity Institute annually hosts a number of guest speakers and organizes a variety of cultural events and outings. There were a number of highlights to this year’s cultural program, made special by the quality of guest lecturers as well as by the quality of the participants:

Czeslaw Milosz, the Nobel Prize winning poet from Vilno, the borderland between Poland and Lithuania, came to visit us at Przegorzaly for an evening reading and discussion, a highpoint of the Institute every year. For many of us familiar with his work, it is a much-anticipated and magical experience to hear Milosz reciting poems that we love like old friends. For those exposed to his poetry for the first time, what better way than by this special and intimate introduction to the life and work of one of this century’s greatest poets. He spoke to our group about the horrendous climate and experiences he witnessed before, during, and after the Second World War, and about the ever-present need for tolerance and respect for fellow human beings. These words sank deeply, especially coming from such a moral authority. Milosz then proceeded to recite to us his poetry, giving a small introduction and occasional interpretation for each poem to fill in the contours of the lines and images. There were many questions asked to this lion of Polish letters, and the conversation spilled out onto the terrace.

Adam Michnik, writer, historian, and Editor-in-Chief of Gazeta Wyborcza, the largest and most influential daily newspaper in Poland, was another regular Democracy & Diversity guest lecturer. He came from Warsaw to talk to our group a little about his background and experience, and mostly about his perspective on the present state of affairs in the world. Michnik always has an anecdote or two to illustrate his deep and insightful commentary, and did not disappoint that evening. For many of our participants familiar with the intellectual and moral courage of Michnik over the last 30 years – affiliated with KOR, Solidarity, and the Round Table Talks – seeing and hearing him in person, with the opportunity to meet and talk with him informally afterward, was quite a unique experience.

Jacek Purchla, Director of the International Cultural Center, co-host of the Institute, gave a lecture on the history and culture of Cracow, much appreciated by our guests. Educated as an art historian, there is no one better qualified to present the rich cultural treasures that make up Cracow, in addition to giving its historical background. His lecture beautifully situated the city within the cultural heritage and context of a larger Europe, and proved most fascinating for participants discovering its cultural charms, as well as its tragic histories. Participants expressed that one of the best parts of the Institute’s program consisted of providing the possibility of forging strong links with Cracow, a site which was ideal for both its cultural specificity as well as its central location in the heart of Europe.

Shireen Hassim of the Human Sciences Research Council in Pretoria, South Africa gave a talk to participants of both Democracy & Diversity and the women’s leadership training workshop, Women in NGO’s and Beyond. She spoke about women in the new South Africa, painting a detailed portrait as well as offering an analysis of the situation. The opportunity to hear about the intersection of politics, culture, and gender in contemporary South Africa was gripping, illuminating, and new for most of those present. Her talk also served as a good briefing on some of the predominant issues in contemporary South Africa, as TCDS plans to launch a Democracy & Diversity Institute in Cape Town this January.

A cabaret performance entitled "Little Miss Big Mouth" was organized by New School liberal studies student Sarah Valentine. All participants of the Institute were invited to take part: there were poems read, stories performed, hymns and lullabies sung, in addition to a wide-ranging display of national anthems with accompanying dances. It was truly an evening of comraderie and togetherness. People from various cultural backgrounds were celebrating their differences as well as their commonality. Friends and members of the audience called to the stage the small contingents from Azerbaijan, as well as from South Africa, to perform their respective national anthems and traditional dances. There was also a great display of individual talent; it was wonderful to see people blossoming before your eyes, surprising and captivating the audience with a beautiful voice, story, or moving poem. Even greater feelings of respect and closeness were attained among the individuals of our diverse group.

A guided tour of Auschwitz-Birkenau was organized (though optional) for all participants. Offered every year, it is always the most devastating and challenging day for participants to face. After the many hours spent discussing the problems of democratic transition and nationalism in seminars and lectures at the castle – where we embody a microcosm of diversity and tolerance – to go and walk through the barracks and exhibitions at Auschwitz-Birkenau makes all too vivid the consequences of the extreme prejudices and nationalism seen in this century. Participants from all over the world are struck and made silent by the existence and proof of such absolute barbarity and evil. Some of the participants have little knowledge of the Holocaust and of the multitudes of people of various nationalities killed in the German death camps. The guide giving the tour was open and available to talk with and answer questions from individuals in our group, and there was some forum for discussion about the experience in the following sessions of Jeffrey Goldfarb’s seminar, Problems of Democratic Culture.

Trips to Kazimierz, the Jewish District of Cracow, were arranged for students who wanted to have a guided though informal introduction to the historic past and present legacy of Polish Jewry living there for centuries, until their destruction in the Holocaust. Tours were given by TCDS associate Karen Underhill, who previously lived in Cracow and was extremely knowledgeable about the history of Kazimierz – its inhabitants, buildings, synagogues, communities – and the issues that surround its preservation and life today. Participating in these tours were individuals from Serbia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, and Albania, to mention a few, all of who were tremendously moved by revisiting the lost Jewish world and its remnants. Lengthy and honest discussions accompanied these walks, providing a safe forum in which people could ask questions and discuss the complex history of Jews in Poland.

IV. Participants’ Impressions

Participants wrote to us after the Institute about their experiences at Democracy & Diversity, highlighting a number of ways in which the Institute benefited them both personally and academically. Some people foregrounded the intellectual stimulation, great learning environment, and increased capacity for curriculum development, while others stressed the personal and intellectual benefits of the intercultural aspects of the Institute.

• We heard from many participants who emphasized the intellectual stimulation and openness of the Institute, characterized by interdisciplinary and comparative seminar discussion:

Marian Kuna (Slovakia) wrote to us about the benefits of Cracow on "several levels. It has brought me not only new ideas and issues in the field of my research activity, but in both methodology and form of classes, professor-student relations, and on a personal level too. [In David Plotke’s class Continuity and Citizenship in Democratic Politics] we analyzed questions about the worldwide liberal revolution (Fukuyama) in relation to different ways of building and sustaining democratic institutions in countries in transition to democracy. Almost each participant has brought original views to this issue according to special conditions of his homeland. Very different approaches were sometimes presented, because there are considerable differences among such countries as Central European, Central Asian and South African. Deeply different approach of South African participants was related with the absence of a communistic economic egalitarianism and with their experience with politics of apartheid. The notion of social citizenship was in this context very interesting for me, because social citizenship, along with legal and political citizenship, is a fundamental part of contemporary democracy. The issues of ‘politics of recognition’ and multiculturalism, despite that these issues are not obstacles to transition to democracy in my country, were for me new and interesting."

• Our scholars from Poland distinguished the challenging and adventurous intellectual atmosphere, as well as the warm, model teaching environment of the Institute:

As far as topics of the particular seminars are concerned, I found the problem of beliefs and values necessary to sustain democracy to be the most intriguing from the point of view of my academic interests. Therefore, I am very grateful to Professor Plotke for the choice of reading from John Rawls and Alexis de Toqueville. I was equally thrilled to read the readings of Charles Taylor on the subject of multiculturalism and recognition. The discussions of the mentioned topics made the readings more understandable and easier to grasp. What I liked most concerning the class on Rawls was our exercise on practical implementation of the Rawlsian idea of the overlapping consensus. By actually trying to embrace various doctrines, we all could experience the difficulties of reaching a compromise as well as solving the problems of forming a livable community. All of the class discussions hopefully helped me to understand the issue of thickening and expanding democracy via institutions, culture, values, and beliefs.

Professor Goldfarb’s class gave a deep insight into the nature of individualism, multiculturalism, and political correctness in the United States, from the experience of which the newly democratic countries can draw some useful lessons. I personally learned a lot about the nature and causes of anti-semitism and racism. I appreciate greatly the fact that Professor Goldfarb successfully linked theoretical knowledge from our readings with our personal experience about the discussed problems from the various countries of origin of the class participants…. I hope to use the outcomes of our debates in my Ph.D. dissertation."

Ewa Grzeszczyk (Poland): "I was glad to attend both the courses I had selected: Prof. Plotke’s "Continuity and Citizenship in Democratic Politics" and Prof. Goldfarb’s "Problems in Democratic Culture." The readings for the courses were interesting and I will use some of them for my Ph.D. work. Both the seminars were lively, although it was achieved in different ways. Prof. Plotke, who is an excellent teacher and an expert in methodology, often introduced theoretical issues using models or simulations where the students’ participation was vital to the actual understanding of the problem. As a teacher myself, I have learnt a lot from Prof. Plotke and I am going to use some of his teaching techniques. His genuine sense of humor coupled with great teaching skills made coping with the problems of Democratic Continuity not only an intellectual exercise but almost a pleasure. Prof. Jeffrey Goldfarb kept his students awake and eager to discuss by introducing problems of immediate importance for all the participants. These were often "sensitive" subjects, such as anti-semitism, racism or the impact of feminism. Both Prof. Plotke and Goldfarb were attentive to the expectations of the students: during the classes the issues raised by the participants were always discussed. The professors were also willing to discuss or advise the students after the seminars. What I consider of great importance is that both professors made good use of the fact that the participants of the seminars came from different countries and had different experience. I learnt a lot about Kazakhstan, South Africa, Albania, and even Slovakia, listening to the students talking about their countries."

• Several participants expressed how they benefited greatly from the seminars, readings, and professors of the Institute in terms of openness, tolerance, and curriculum development:

• Noting the Institute’s intellectual rigor achieved through interdisciplinary and comparative approaches, many also valued the introduction to and deep engagement with new subjects and methods, including theories of gender and the making of public policy:

I was provided with ample opportunities to concentrate on a number of theoretical issues concerning the social construction of gender and, especially, on such issues from the field of Gender Studies as women’s roles in the emerging new democracies in East Central Europe; the recognition of women’s rights in a global and regional scale; gender aspects of nationalism; the development of women’s movements in the Eastern and Central European countries. Many of these issues, although still insufficiently addressed in feminist scholarship of East Central Europe, would contribute considerably to the comparative study of gender in the ongoing socio-cultural development of the region. Happily, the course "Theories of Gender in Culture" taught by Prof. Ann Snitow brought together a great variety of current perspectives on the emerging feminist scholarship in the region and suggested a detailed study on the relationships and relevance of the various types of feminist writings (American, West, Central, and Eastern European) to the development of gender in this part of the world.

In addition to the dense and rigorous academic program of study, the extra-curricular activities (the distinguished guest lecturers and trips to historic sites) organized by the Graduate Faculty provided a solid ground for informal communication between students and academic staff and got the participants to know a lot about the history and modern culture of Poland and Cracow. For this reason, I think that the participation in the Summer Institute in Cracow was an unforgettable academic and personal even for every one of us."

Gajaneh Zavarian (Armenia) found the Institute to be a beneficial context in which to learn, making her rethink problems in Armenia. She is "taking information, knowledge, and good memories about these three weeks" home. She highlighted how important it was for her to gain knowledge of public-policy making by learning 1) how to articulate goals and objectives, and 2) how to implement and construct policy, a knowledge that she will share with her colleagues as well as NGOs. She also learned about the importance of coalition-building, and its advantages for policy-making. It was her first time studying women’s issues and theories of gender.

• Implicit in the theme of confronting and transcending borders, expressed below, is a deep appreciation for the intercultural dimension of the Institute, echoed by many participants who discovered the differences, similarities, and common humanity of new and faraway worlds and appreciated the chance for real dialogue amidst cultural diversity:

Victoria Corduneanu (Romania): "As a summer student, I had the chance to meet young scholars with similar interests. One of the most important advantages of this summer school was the possibility of dialogue among scholars. I think that direct links and direct dialogue are currently weak points among social scientists. The collaboration among scholars with different research topics should be a main concern as a way for settling interdisciplinary approaches. My main direct profit was to meet, know and listen to scholars from different regions. This was a good opportunity to learn about our similarities and differences as the summer school provided a multicultural environment, by the diversity of the participant scholars.

This might be also a step toward a practical international cooperation. This means, first of all, eliminating the barriers of distance and communication between young scholars.

As a conclusion, I would like to say that my main impression upon the summer school was that it strives for providing a place for communications between generations and regions, which were previously isolated. This is an important issue in the opening of the old systems that governed East Central Europe…. My overall impression was that the summer school succeeded to be a three-week micro-world testing the collaboration and cohabitation possibilities. Even if it is an ‘over-used’ term, I cannot stop myself to think about ‘globalization.’ As a final impression about Democracy & Diversity summer school, I could say that it provides that ‘globalization’ and the broadening of borders, are indeed possible.

• The following participants from Central Asia stressed how important the Institute was for furthering their knowledge and curriculum-building capacities in the areas of political science and gender studies, as well as their personal and intellectual development:

Ainoura Sagynbaeva (Kyrgyzstan) was deeply impressed by the quality of the participants and the organization of the Institute. The seminar readings were new for her, and she enjoyed the style and approach to teaching demonstrated by professors. She had previously experienced similar teaching styles while in the United States, but never in her own country. She is now working on creating a new course on political culture and democratic culture to introduce to the curriculum at her university. Although Ms. Sagynbaeva had gathered some data, she needed new theoretical material, including ideas and examples of other country cases, which were obtained from the seminars and in private conversations with Professors Goldfarb and Plotke. They both provided her with useful materials, as well as with examples of exercises that engaged the participants. She will use most of the reading materials and ideas obtained in the creation of a new political science program at her university for next year. She had many private conversations with Professors Goldfarb and Plotke about methods and readings in sociology and political science in the service of curriculum-building. She is keeping in touch with many people that she met (she said that it was her first time meeting people from South Africa and Albania), realizing that this aspect of networking is important for potential future academic exchange and collaboration. She did some active recruiting and found several scholars interested in coming to visit and/or teach at her university. Her experience in Cracow was also invaluable for her own research on how attitudes and values of youth in Kyrgyzstan are changing in the transition from communism to democracy. She sat in on the Gender seminar and workshop, and was further inspired to work on some related projects within the social science department of her university.

Aigul Bakirova (Kyrgyzstan) from Bishkek Humanities University is head of the laboratory at the Center for Social Research. She found the courses "new for us" and said her interest in studying democracy comes from the fact that her own country is in a time of transition from a communist system to a democratic system. She is creating a course on the development of democracy and will need a greater understanding of its workings to be applied in her research as well. For Ms. Bakirova, the most important concepts and problems discussed were those of democracy and culture, freedom, and gender. Professor Plotke’s course highlighted the importance of building both a good constitution and democracy-building institutions, and how people can use their rights of citizenship as reflected in the constitution. She had great conversations with Professor Ann Snitow, and will organize a class on gender, examining gender policy, to be taught by a colleague. She also had extensive conversations with Elaine Zimmerman of the women’s leadership training workshop and will stay in touch with her, as she is conducting research on the management of non-profit organizations. On a personal note, she was happily moved and fascinated by her first experience of being in a Jewish restaurant listening to live Jewish music in Kazimierz, one of the informally arranged cultural outings for our guests.

One Central Asian participant highlighted the good learning environment in Cracow:

Chinara Tashmamatova (Kyrgyzstan) was amazed by the energy, warmth, and enthusiasm of Ann Snitow, who was always attentive to peoples’ needs. Having graduated from the department of foreign languages, she is now part of the Center for Social Science Research at Osh State University, and is in charge of all e-mail there. She wrote her diploma paper on "understanding cross-cultural communication." Although her English is excellent, she was further put at ease in the classroom by the frequent comments, jokes, and expressions in Russian by Professor Suny in the seminar on nationalism. She said that the atmosphere was so free and open that "even I with my shyness, could participate there," adding to the different points of view about the post-communist situation. She said that she also learned new information about her own country while in the course.

• The three participants from South Africa emphasized the personal and intellectual benefits of intercultural living, meeting and getting to know people from different parts of the world, in addition to the importance of dealing with issues central to the processes of democratization in South Africa:

Mphikeleli Christopher Sibanyoni (South Africa) thought it made sense for the program "to include individuals from ‘different’ nationalities, ethnic groups and race, especially if one takes into account the fact that the world is now globalized. This afforded the rare opportunity to learn about each other through sharing, in class and outside the classroom, our cultural and social experiences. Once you learn a person’s culture you are likely to respect that person, for you begin to realize and understand that the human race is different in some respects and that there are fundamental similarities among social groups. Also, you learn that diversity is a social construction and that those people who belong to a certain social group are not necessarily inferior compared to your particular grouping. You accept that each social grouping or community has a democratic right to differ and exist."

Mondli Shadrack Hlatshwayo (South Africa) found it fascinating to meet and get to know people from America and former Soviet Bloc countries, the latter particularly because they are facing questions of transition similar to those being faced now in South Africa. "While Eastern Europe is coming from a different form of repression, communism as opposed to Apartheid, they are both grappling with transition to democracy and need to confront the following questions: How do you make sure there is participation in terms of civil society? And, How do you strengthen and deepen democracy?" ... "Also important to consider are questions of social services, which are difficult to achieve in a short space of time. How do these countries sustain regular elections? Ideally by the rule of law, if the regime is legitimate whereby people respect it, since it is better to have a democratically elected government. In South Africa and Eastern Europe, the challenge is making sure the criminal justice system transforms and is responsive to the needs of the citizens." ... "The role of the state is to listen to civil society; and if civil society is weak, it needs to become stronger and take part in the nation-building process in order to provide some perspective." He concluded with the pertinent question: "How do you build organizations that can have programs which will not only carry out narrow sectarian interests?"

He also commented that Plotke’s class was extremely interesting, particularly when looking at problems of ethnicity, since it revealed some problems of nationalism which can lead to war and genocide. In the class on nationalism, Prof. Castaneda was good in comparative analysis, able to clearly sum up questions of nation-building in Latin America, showing problems similar to those facing South Africa. In reconstructing a nation, there are the challenges of facing social-economic inequalities that arise. He is researching these areas with respect to the South African case, and is concentrating on issues around the privatization of state-owned enterprises, and on whether privatization helps the previously disadvantaged communities, such as are there any benefits for workers? He is working on these questions through the theoretical debates of political theory, and benefited greatly by the teaching methodology of and extensive talks with Professor Plotke, with whom he is keeping in touch. After getting an introductory, though intensive dose of academic life as it exists at the New School, Mr. Hlatshwayo is applying for a Masters Program in Political Science at the New School in New York City.

V. Summary

From our past and present rewarding experiences of the Democracy & Diversity Institute, we recognize the tremendous importance of bringing people together of different nationalities and cultural backgrounds, especially in the often sensitive cases of war and ethnic or national conflict. Anna Kron of Serbia poignantly told the story of how, at one point in the beginning of the Institute, she was sitting, talking, laughing, generally having a good time with new friends, and wanted to have some pictures taken with them to capture the moment. Then, suddenly, she realized that she was seated between her two so-called "enemies" – Croatia and Albania. All three women broke into laughter and talked about the absurdity of the situation, albeit tinged with sadness. Another such powerful moment of transcending national and ethnic conflict came toward the end of the Institute during the performance night described above. Many small groups came up on stage to sing their national anthems, though none so meaningfully as when a group of women from the former Yugoslavia – by now good friends – lined up arm in arm to sing their common anthem, for a moment transcending the lines of hatred and conflict that had characterized the break-up of their country.

Another significant coming together in the spirit of mutual understanding arose among participants from Poland, South Africa, and the United States. Following a trip to Auschwitz, earnest and difficult discussions arose on the experience of the Holocaust and anti-semitism in Poland, the Apartheid regime in South Africa, and the history of racism in America. Professor Goldfarb was also sensitively engaged in talking about these experiences in his seminar on the Problems of Democratic Culture, creating a space in which people could safely talk about these problematic and painful subjects. Several individuals expressed their deep appreciation for the intellectual courage and emotional honesty exhibited by him and encouraged in his seminar.

The above examples help to illustrate that although it is difficult to measure the concrete outcomes of a program such as Democracy & Diversity, it is without a doubt that the impact of the program on its participants is deep and heartfelt. The intellectual benefits are great, opening new vistas of thought and literature to furnish new courses (both literal and metaphoric) in countries of East Central Europe, the Former Soviet Union, and South Africa. The new bonds forged during the Institute also extend beyond the duration of the program; contacts and friendships continue to grow into the future. In enabling individual scholars and activists to cross multiple boundaries – cultural, intellectual, and personal – an enlightened form of dialogue and discourse was made possible. Hopefully, having had this unique experience, the participants are inspired to carry the spirit of Cracow with them.