Making the future inevitable: Legitimizing, naturalizing and stabilizing. The transition in Estonia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan

In discussions of post-communist transitional politics, it is commonplace to find arguments that attribute regime stability to a government's capacity to legitimize its policies. And the most robust source of such legitimacy is often adduced to economic achievements appreciated by the public. But many political theorists have developed an important distinction between regime stability that comes about through legitimacy and that which derives from naturalization, the latter being a population's acceptance of a regime and its policies because of the unthinkability of any alternative. Legitimization is most often considered to be the result of democratic procedures, while naturalization does not need democratic conditions to effect political stability. Collective conversations in the form of focus group transcripts reveal that the transitions in Estonia, Ukraine and Uzbekistan evidence both forms of political stabilization. In Estonia, discourses of legitimization and naturalization are evident; in Uzbekistan, some legitimization, but little naturalization; but in Ukraine, neither source of support for the continuation of the transition is available.