67
Th e F a i l u r e o f t h e Con s e r vat i v e P r o j e c t…
expectations, oriented towards concrete and immediate policy measures. This favored
both the emergence of ever-newer, populist forces and the progressively more populist
character of the whole political field. Secondly, the Lithuanian political framework be-
came increasingly unstable as a result. Both of these tendencies have been amply illus-
trated by the parliamentary election in 2004, where all the major political parties except
the Conservatives and, to some extent, the Liberals, adopted populist rhetoric, whereas
the greatest share of the seats in the parliament was captured by the one-year-old, radi-
cally populist Labor Party.
VII. WHY WE LOST – AND WHAT IS NEXT FOR
THE CONSERVATIVE PROJECT IN LITHUANIA?
So why did we lose in the end? I would venture four principal reasons in descending order
of magnitude.
1.
Weak public relations
: quite a few sound projects, reforms and initiatives created nega-
tive public opinion because formation of public opinion was neglected and insufficient
attention was given to explaining their consequences and necessity to the public. Con-
servative failure to regard society as a partner in dialogue led to resentment and grow-
ing political alienation. Media battles were invariably lost to the opposition, and the
overly negative image of the Conservative project became entrenched.
2.
Ideological inertia and lack of new creative ideas
. Having formulated a few winning reci-
pes in the beginning of their parliamentary term, the Conservatives did not seek to
engage with society on the fundamental theoretical level. In the period under discus-
sion, Conservative policy-makers rarely resorted to hard conceptual analysis of the
processes that the society underwent. A few disjointed slogans and schemes that passed
for “conservative ideology” obstructed, rather than facilitated, the view of the society’s
real state, and of the problems that would emerge in the future. The absence of seri-
ous analysis meant that when the underlying social reality changed, the Conservatives
failed to adapt to it. It took several years for a new comprehensive Conservative ideol-
ogy that addressed the burning issues in the society to emerge.
3. No one could have foreseen the
Russian economic crisis
that was to have such grave con-
sequences for the Lithuanian economy. When it unfolded, however, the institutional
inertia and overconfidence on behalf of the Conservative government resulted in fail-
ure to formulate an adequate response, thus bringing about much more damage than
was unavoidable.
4.
Injudicious choice
was made of
Rolandas Paksas
as a prime minister when the succes-
sor to Gediminas Vagnorius was sought. Betting on Paksas’ personal popularity, rather
than seeking a political figure who would have both the necessary qualifications to
address Lithuania’s critical situation and the commitment to the conservative project,
the Conservatives unleashed a populist “monster” that would eventually gobble up a
significant part of their electorate and would succeed in inflicting further damage on
their public image.
