The fact of the matter is that up until 1989, the peoples of Eastern Europe were denied
their fundamental democratic rights.
During Soviet system, there was one opinion, there was one right answer.
In Eastern Europe, before the Berlin Wall came down, there was a very, very explicit
aspiration towards what you might call civil society or the open society.
There was a powerful students’ movement and of young intellectuals in defense of human
rights, of constitution provisions.
A lot of people began to search for ways how they could introduce more freedoms.
This was a very good point for Soros to intervene, to step into the picture.
I set up a foundation.
I reflected what it is that I really care about, and it turned out to be a rather abstract
concept of an open society.
The freedom of thought.
Democracy, transparency, and accountability.
These purposes did have a common denominator, which was opening up the country.
The open society, which is part of a big tradition of political reformism, is based on two very
simple assumptions: that capitalism is a system that have a capacity for self correction,
and, secondly, that democracy is a system that have a capacity for self correction.
Anything that was an alternative, an expression of civil society, we were ready to support.
He helped, of course, first of all financially.
But it wasn’t just about money.
It was about ideas, about the theory of open society.
The Central European University was also—I think—incredibly important in order to exchange
ideas, in order to exchange experiences.
The foundation also financed the travels of researchers, scientists, grants.
In those days, it was simply helping individual actors, to give them space, to give them opportunities.
Bringing a book to someone was a real success.
We justified our claims for better life in terms of the justice, and the entire struggle
that followed—and that eventually brought down communism—was based on human rights.
It’s relatively easy to rewrite the constitution, but it’s more difficult to change people’s
attitudes towards power.
People started to think that if communism was bad, then we should have absolutely free markets.
There’s no time for discussion.
We will introduce—implement—these ideas, not searching for—not looking for—democratic
legitimization for it.
With hindsight, I think that the problem was that all those little things we had been given
by the regime, the strength and our attitude of dependence from this power.
In Russia, they reconstructed something that’s not all that different from communist systems
that collapsed—it’s also an authoritarian system.
Societies don’t just close back up.
They’ve changed by the experience of being open, even for a short time, and that change
is there and can be the foundation for another period of openness.
You have to fight when you feel that your autonomy, your humanity, has been taken away
or you are not able to live it out.
Before, people when they realized that something is wrong, you know, with this world, they
tried to organize.
Now, when they realize that something is wrong, they try and individually to adapt to this
imperfect situation.
To revive it, we need ourselves, we have to be closer to each other.
But, also, what is needed, I think, is imagination.
Imagination is creativity, and without that nothing moves.
And since open society is an ongoing struggle, you can’t do anything without imagination.
When you are engaged in trying to improve the world, you have to keep on changing what you do.