Response to Mark Kramer | Communist and Post-Communist Studies - Volume 35, Issue 2

It is a rare and rewarding opportunity for an author to receive a truly careful and thoughtful review written by a highly regarded scholar and, in addition, to be able to respond directly to reviewer’s observations and criticisms. We are fortunate to be in such a situation and we are very grateful to the journal’s editor for his kind offer and an effort to facilitate this exchange.Mark Kramer is very generous in his praise, stern in his criticism. While some of comments are well taken and will allow us to improve our conceptualizations, data collection techniques and analysis in possible further work on the subject of protest politics in postcommunist Eastern Europe, some other criticisms are misdirected or not well founded and call for corrections or rebuttal. Our response will come in two parts. First, we will address the issues that are the result of unfortunate editorial errors or, perhaps, our insufficiently clear presentation. Second, we will debate several specific points; here our disagreements with the review are more substantial. In this section we will also acknowledge Kramer’s critical points that should help us identify those weaknesses of our work that can be remedied in the future.