Falling Through The Cracks


While I do not subscribe to the conspiracy theories that explain the collapse of Yugoslavia as a result of the foreign plotting, I agree with the assessment by Marko Hren, my friend and Slovenian peace activist from way back (1980s), about the colonizing role of some elements among US actors, that were in charge of preparing grounds for wild privatization of publicly own enterprises in East Europe and for grabbing of the available natural and human resources during the wars of Yugoslav succession in the 1990-s.

Marko singled out the George Soros's "open society" operations in Eastern Europe in that respect, saying that those should be better called "open markets operations". Marko believed those operations are under-evaluated as such for obvious reasons: large part of so-called "progressive" authors in ECE cooperated closely with Soros and his economic interests. The "open market" was the main agenda of this operation while the open society was a marketing tool.

"Operation Soros" was a sort of "New Age Jesuit grabbing frontline strategy" to bring US economic interests acceptable by target civil societies. Marko's thesis is that, in the process of establishing that alt-left empire, Soros ruthlessly dumped on the local civil society scenes, arresting their genuine development.

"They don't call it the Soviet empire anymore. Now, they call it the Soros empire," George said, in character, to my friend, a young American journalist, on a private plane flying over Albania back in the 1990-s. Men, who ascend to astonishing wealth with no sweat, no hard work at all, develop that distinct narcissistic vanity and the sense of grandiosity, like Donald, or George.

Yet, now, twentysomething years later, with the far right on the rise in most of the Europe, and holding political power in some key post-communist countries like Poland and Hungary, we (to appropriate George's royal discourse) can only reflexively conclude that his grand experiment of Open Society failed as abysmally as the Hillary Clinton's presidential candidacy, and for pretty much the same reasons.

There are stories from Russia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Serbia, and Croatia testifying to the colossal failure of implementation. Good intentions to build civil society ended up suffocating genuine civil society building processes by drowning it in foreign money. Good ideas about the open society got stiffed by the existing closed up society narrow minds intimately invested in preserving the status quo, while overtly tasked with the implementation of change. The fight against corruption got corrupt itself.

Sadly, because, of course, Open Society, with its free exchange of ideas, is better for the advance of humanity than rigid authoritarianism of Le Pen. Trump, Orban, or Szydlo variety. However, Soros franchises in Eastern Europe mostly elevated lame scions of the former regime, resented elites, whose families could afford to educate them abroad: they were touted as progressives and hoped to be able to halt the emerging reactionary populism. They proved woefully ineffective at that.

Most of ex-Yugoslav (where I am from) NGOs ended up led by middle-class or high-society elite. That's why there was almost no membership-driven organizations there. They were skilled in foreign fundraising. They got the money — from Soros, for example. Soros funded elites not marginals. The problem was not that NGO leaders were representatives of elite. The problem was not that the elite was doing humanitarian work. It's nice. The problem was the dumping and the fact that NGO leaders belonging to social elite were pretending and, one may say – lying, creating the narratives that rich foreign philantropists wanted to fund.

The elites lacked the passion to fight. Disappointingly, in many places they simply stole money from Soros. So, their haters, a passionate bunch, eventually won. But who could tell that to the vain old man a decade ago? He, who can destroy currencies of lesser countries, why would he believe that he could be wrong at something? And, particularly, if he surrounded himself with the people, who insisted, out of their own self interest, that his approach in Eastern Europe was excellent. Their very survival was intricately linked to supporting this fallacy. Which is why the fallacy survived.

Which is why they live well, despite that the idea of open society failed, and despite that most of their compatriots live worse. And on the top of that pyramid there is the coordinator of that effort, the eminence grise of that failure, the link between the money made by Soros the hedge fund trader, and the money spent by Soros the philanthropist. No, it is not the former Human Rights Watch executive, who now heads the Open Society Institute. It is the person who is with the organization for much longer, practically since its inception. Her name is Beka Vuco.

Beka, as a Jewish Serbian Lesbian Woman, hit a jackpot of political correctness, and early on ascended to a top bureaucratic position within the Institute, overseeing the human resources and granting decisions in the post-communist Eastern Europe. Local executives in the region described her as fearsome, vindictive, and dangerous to cross. Her agenda was advancing the sons and daughters of the ancient regime. Those without the right pedigree stood no chances. And I have a personal experience with her to tell about.

Hence, it is my utmost pleasure to see that what I wrote nearly 25 years ago about that experience still shows on the first page of the Google search results for her name. Ranked fourth globally. Just after her official Open Society page, her Linkedin, and her Facebook page, and ahead of her Twitter, and way ahead of anything that she actually did or wrote. In that rant, I casually compared her compassion and empathy to that of an average NYC subway car. I liked a colorful phrase when I was younger.

When I came to the US early in the 1990, about 18 months before the CIA predicted the wars for Yugoslav succession would start (which they did on the cue), just in time Soros was spreading the wings of his Open Society, the paths between Beka and me were bound to cross. She had the opportunity to give me money on three separate, unconnected occasions, and she failed all three times.

I actually grew resentful after the first two and dedicated that rant to her, that still follows her Google search profile like an indelible ink stain on a cocktail dress. Karma even had it that, briefly, a high school friend of mine became her administrative assistant, the sitting reminder of the one she left behind.

With the benefit of a hindsight, today, 25 years later, I hoped to be able to judge that rant differently. I was hoping I could tell that I was an impatient young man at the time, who judged the administrator too harshly. I was hoping that my experience was an exception to the otherwise highly successful endeavor. But it is not. It is the rule. It is the design.

Identity matters, although we have no control over it. And my identity was not deemed worth protecting by the guidelines Beka adhered to. My life did not matter to the grand idea of Open Society. She treated me like a white man, and I found that highly sanctimonious from my position of an undocumented asylum seeker working menial dead end jobs.

Originally, I came to the US on the F1 visa, on the student exchange to Lock Haven University, PA. When the semester was over in June 1990, I was expected to return to Yugoslavia. But I did not. Due to my past experiences as a journalist and a dissident I had a clear foreshadowing of what was going to happen in that year. Back in December 1989 an officer from the secret police, ethnic Serb, who used to interrogate me sometimes in the past, followed me to public transportation to quietly ask me whether my mom (a German citizen) could help him get an asylum in Germany: they, police, knew very well they were going to split, and he, as a Serb, would not have a job in Croatian police anymore.

Lock Haven University officials did not know that. Those students, that arrived from Zagreb to Lock Haven during the next semester, were all offered to stay and finish their education at Lock Haven, free of charge. I was not. Essentially, I was penalized, instead of being rewarded, for knowing more about what was going to happen. My higher education was thus cut in half by me not returning to Yugoslavia, as I had no resources to pay for continuing it in the US, and as not yet a resident I could not take the advantage of loans and grants. But I could apply for the Open Society grants extended to students from former Yugoslavia who fled to the US, so they can finish their education here.

This was the first time I learned about Beka Vuco. She wrote and signed the rejection letter. Grants were meant for people who came here during the academic 1990 year. The academic year started in September. I came in January. The logic was that I was ineligible because I came the same year albeit 9 months earlier. I was furious at that explanation. Again, I was punished, instead of being rewarded, for knowing more. No attention was paid to the fact that I was in the same boat as those coming here later than me with regards to inability to pay for our education. No attention was paid to the fact that I arrived to this country with a passport that was NOT obtained through regular channels.

Beka was completely oblivious to my past journalist and dissident experience and did not bother to check my references with the Open Society officials in Croatia. She had no interest in my life. She did not take an effort to learn that, despite my young age, in 1988 I was listed by the secret police with 40 other individuals as an "exceptionally dangerous for the regime" in Croatia, who should not be issued a passport and allowed to travel. She showed no curiosity about my story of coming here with the Yugoslav passport issued to me in Slovenia, over objections from the federal government in Belgrade, and at the address provided to me by a friend writing for the magazine Mladina - the address that I am still yet to visit.

She rejected me on a technicality, that simply should not have applied to a person in my situation. It is impossible for me not to think that if my identity was different, she would find more warmth in her heart for my case. At least she would show more interest to learn about it. From her letter, it looked to me as if she wrote it to relive a burden from herself: there were plenty others she needed to help, and she was happy that she could find a good reason to reject one, who, in her mind, did not need, or deserve that help. I was neither Jewish, nor Serbian. I was not Gay. I was not even a Woman. I should have managed on my own.

And I did, to an extent. I never finished college. I worked as a lifeguard at NYC health clubs, and, with a friend, I started producing a weakly ethnic radio talk show at WNWK, called Hrvatski Monitor, and listened by the exiles from the wars of Yugoslav succession between 1991 and 1994 in the New York city. The show was primarily supported by ads and donations from the listeners. About 50% of the public were Croats, with the rest being Bosnians, Serbs and other ex-Yugoslav ethnicities. We were not the only ex-Yugoslav ethnic radio show in town. But we were the only one that was listened by all ethnic groups and that actively promoted peaceful solutions. We were a perfect example of Open Society and of what Open Society should stand for.

When in 1994 Croats and Bosnians started fighting in Bosnia, our support fell apart, and we had to shut down our show due to the lack of resources. At that point nobody there was interested in multi-ethnic, multi-cultural solutions, except for the foreign liberals. In other words, radio show like ours could only survive being financed by some US foundation. And I applied for various grants from various foundations. I got none, as I was a pretty inexperienced proposal writer. I applied to Open Society, too. And I got yet another rejection letter from Beka Vuco. She could not find in the whole of Open Society the way to fit our modest radio show within their media guidelines, despite the obvious benefits it had to the reconciliatory processes between various emigre ethnic groups of former Yugoslavia, the very groups that drove the hatred at home.

Thus, the only show of that kind simply went off the air when we run out of money to pay for weekly broadcasts. I consider this yet another failure of Soros and his Open Society. I moved on to web and internet, and eventually co-founded a non-profit community organization in Queens, Raccoon, Inc. - which for 10 years provided various services, programs, and counseling to the ex-Yugoslav communities, financed by grants from various foundations (New York Foundation, Robin Hood Foundation, American Red Cross, Carnegie Endowment, etc.), but not a single dollar ever from Soros and his Open Society fellows – and not for the lack of asking.

Now, as the open society idea unceremoniously unravels across the East Europe, mocked and derogated as the concept of predatory foreign elites, I believe it is worth remembering how it came to that. Therefore I decided to share this observation with all of you.