€ ee RADIO FREE EUROPE search COMMUNIST AREA ‘This material was prepared for the use ofthe editors and policy staf of Radio Free Europe. 1959 YUGOSLAVI. 10 Jan PARTY VS. INTELLECT Summary: The current conflict between party leaders and groups of Marxist intellectuals in Zagreb and Belgrade is not a quarrel between erring scholars and "always correct" party functionaries, but rather a deep conflict between two ideological lines. Even though party leaders have, since December 1971, done their utmost to centralize the Party and reintroduce strict discipline, the opposing intellectuals, mostly young people, would still like to see the implementation of the self-management systen, which in the long run should lead not only to a withering away of the state but the Party as well. Although Josip Broz Tito was a member of Yugoslavia's working class before the last war, most of his aides and collaborators were intellectuals. It was these people, particularly the students at pre-war Belgrade University, who in July 1941 helped him to organize.partisan units and start an.armed uprising against occupation forces throughout Yugo- slavia. Before the Second World.War Yugoslavia was predominantly an agricultural land: about 79 percent of its. population earned a living from agriculture; less than 10 percent were blue-collar workers, while the remaining 11 percent belonged to various other professions. (1) By comparison, the March 1971 census in Yugo- slavia revealed that only about 37 percent of 20 million Yugoslav citizens have been tilling the land. The bulk of Yugoslavia's peasants became industrial or quasi-industrial workers... At the same time hundreds of thousands of young people studied at various universities throughout the country, thus tremendously strengthening the intellectual stratum.e The Party's’ current conflict with the Praxis people in both Zagreb and Belgrade has also involved major clashes at the universities. in both cities. Asa result relations between the Party and the intellectuals have considerably deteriorated. The party leaders would like to see the problem resolved before the 10th Party Congress convenes sometime in May of this year. In the opinion of the party leadership, the best solution to this problem would be for the many rebellious intellectuals to resign and leave the country's political scene. But if they are not willing to go voluntarily, they may be threatened with forcible removals. Currently, however, it..appears that some responsible leaders are trying to prevent any dramatization of the situation by promising application of strict. democratic measures. Thus,for instance, Professor Stipe Suvar [shu-var], President of, tne Ideological .Conmission of the Croatian Central Committee and one of young, liberal-minded party leaders, said recently that in dealing with rebellious intellectuals, the Yugoslav Party has been very lenient. The most liberal newspapers: in Western Europe attacked us after the [December 1971] 21st session [of the Yugoslav Party Presidium at which purges of top Croatian leaders were announced] and accused us. of. having reintroduced Stalinism; they claimed that a catastrophe. for socialist democracy had. taken place because we. censured several nationalists or similar. people while some of. them were sent to prison... What.are you.doing with these people? - they asked us sternly,. But. what did we do? ‘We have not shot anybody because: of political crimes, nor.have we sent anyone to prison for life.. Moreover, remembering what some initiators of inimical ideas did -- ideas which could have provoked, new bloodshed if one bears in mind our primitive mentality. -- we. sentenced such people to ridiculously short terms. As far as they are concerned, I would say we played a tragi-comic role. (2) Intellectuals Accused Of Fac: One can understand Tito's harsh measures of December 1971 when the so-called "Croatian nationalists" were purged and those of October 1972 when the "anarcho-liberals" in Serbia were ousted. But the current conflict has involved people who are neither nationalists noranarcho-liberals. People around the Zagreb philoso— ghical bimonthly Praxis have been known as merciless opponents of the purged Croatian leaders precisely because of their nationalis- tic approach; while Serbian leaders such as Marko Nikezic and Mme. tinka Perovic have been known as stubborn advocates of a full- fledged implementation of the self-management system.As a discussion between the Praxis people and several top Croatian leaders in Zagred showed, the essence of the conflict centers around a differing interpretation of Marxism. Thus, the current conflict is difficult to.résolve by means of a compromise or by a direct cut.(i.e., by a purge). This the more. so because the accused intellectuals in Zagreb. and Belgrade for the first time in many years are. united as Croats and Serbs, an unusual phenomenon in nationality-torn’ Yugoslavia. .Generally speaking, the Party should be happy to see. the leftist intellectuals among the Serbs and Croats.marching together, but it is obviously not. The. reason is simple: these united Serbian and Croatian intellectuals (most of them young people) are not in agreement with the Party ideological line. The problems.are manifold and as in all issues dealing with ideology, the conflict assumes the’ characteristics of a religious war which can only lead. to a deep rupture in the yelations between the two groups of intellectuals in the party. J Following the war and the assumption of power by the e Communist Party of Yugoslavia, the working class. began to strengthen. numerically, although the intellectuals remained the leaging elite in the néw society -- particularly after Tito's conflict with Moscow in June 1948. It has been, however, a historical fact that all ruling comiunist parties (not only the Yugoslav Party) consider all. intellectuals, in principle, as adversaries. They are usually rebellious, permanently dissatisfied and have subbornly insisted that the existent pseudo-freedom be replaced'by real freedom. For most intellectuals. in Yugoslavia whether in the Party or outside, it has not been a.free cultural development which has ‘threatened the political monopoly of. the Party, but vice versa.. For. this reason the intellectuals have usually been accused of trying to smuggle "decadent and inimical ideas" from’ the West into the country, thus undermining Yugoslavia's self-managing socialism. But regardléss.of what the Party has thought about the intellectuals, it:has always been. very careful hot to "destroy" them completely but rather to subdue and control @ then. After all, it is the intellectuals rather than the workers who have been leading the party. Thus, the current conflict in Yugoslavia - between the Party and the leftist intelligentisia is actually a conflict between. two groups of intellectuals: between. that which one can call the ruling: group, claiming "full workers’ support" in all spheres. of life, and. the. "oppositional group" (so called by their colleagues in power). requesting, "real workers! self- “which in the long run should, lead not. only to. a away of the state but also to. the withering away of the total party monopoly. The “oppositional _ group" among the intellectuals accuses the “ruling group” of trying to revive "state capitalistic tendencies" which actually means reintroducing Stalinism, In other words, by propagating the workers! self-management system only verbally, the ruling people in Yugoslavia -- this is the gist:of:the criticism levelled by the "opposition" -- have actually restricted the workers’ rights.oe eo Against Omnipotence of the State Professor’ Predrag: Vranicki, one of the editors of Praxis, the: rector. of Zagreb-University:and: author: of: a book. unique to the. communist-world’ (nis. History of Marxism) pointed recently to the sore point: of. the. ‘current tdeological platform. He spoke. of the: clash between. the.."dictatorship of the. proletariat" and the self-managementsystem... Vranicki, who is one of the rare Praxis. people. respected: by the ruling group.in Zagreb, spoke at a party meeting’ last December.: ‘His words. deserve to be reproduced here because: they clarify. the: essence. of. the current conflict, which in: the: past: has: usually been: accompanied. by a great number of less: important: matters which only. further confused the issue. Said Vranick: It is:wrong to°treat-self=managing socialist society as a dictatorship of. the:proletariat. The dictatorship of the proletariat-is the state-of the working class, i.e., it-is the-essence-of. the: working:class'!state.... The state does not*play the: same: role. under. the. conditions. of state socialism. as\it.does. under. the conditions. of self-managing socialism: In. the: first-case the. working class. practices its power. through various: party and state institutions, while in self-mafiaging socialism, the idea is that the working elass* becomes the: direct bearer-of authority. Thus, if self-managing socialism were. a form of. the dictatorship of. the: proletariat, this would. mean that by strengthening. self-management, the state would also be _ strengthened... But. the. state: must wither away... In other words, self-management. is an historical negation. of both the’state andthe. dictatorship of the proletariat; self- management’ cannot. be. identified with the state because it is against the state. (3) By insisting that the: Party must be in full control of all developments. in the country, the. ruling party leaders have actually undermined self-management, ‘regardless of what. they have been verbally preaching.. And. this'is the chief reason for. opposing the Marxist intellectuals in both Zagreb and Belgrade. -For in Professor Vranicki's opinion;:instead of centralizing-the Party; one. should. democratize. it to an even greater extent. "If the League. of ‘Conmunists,.as: the. avant-gard organization. of the whole working class, would. lag. behind. as. far. as. its. democratization is concerned, this could. have.a negative. impact on the self-managing democratization process. as:a whole," Vranicki said. This claim is totally contrary to the present party line. which ingists on strict discipline, no opposition of any kind and full centralization of the top party organs. In such. a. situation. when. two. completely. opposing. forces confront each other, it is improbable that-a compromise could’ beWorked out.. But even if the. opposing" intellectuals are definitely: removed: from. the:political scene, the internal situation: in: the Yugoslav: Party: may-easily deteriorate, which would only sharpen the ever-present nationality problem. Slobodan Stankovic (1) “Dr. Zoran Vidakovic, Promene u strukturi jugoslovenskog . drustva i Savez_ komunista anges. in the Structure. of the ‘ Yugoslav Society and the League of Communists), Belgrade, R96 25 D5. 2%. \ oe (2) Wecernje “Novosti; “Belgrade; ' 31 December 1973, 1/2 January e “ (3) Wjesnik, Zagreb, 15 December 1973. €e¢