DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

A collection of essays on the history of self-governing socialism

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
teeckard's picture
teeckard
Offline
Joined: 14-07-10
Jul 14 2010 14:50
A collection of essays on the history of self-governing socialism

From November 2009 to February 2010, I summarized the first section in volume one of Self-Governing Socialism, edited by Branko Horvat, Mihailo Marković and Rudi Supek. The entries correspond to readings in the book, and each entry gives some background information on the piece summarized. I hope that it gives some guidance to anyone else who starts reading the book.
You may find the entries here:
http://harasheville.blogspot.com/

rata
Offline
Joined: 26-09-06
Jul 14 2010 15:24
teeckard wrote:
From November 2009 to February 2010, I summarized the first section in volume one of Self-Governing Socialism, edited by Branko Horvat, Mihailo Marković and Rudi Supek. The entries correspond to readings in the book, and each entry gives some background information on the piece summarized. I hope that it gives some guidance to anyone else who starts reading the book.
You may find the entries here:
http://harasheville.blogspot.com/

OMG!

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jul 14 2010 17:20
Quote:
Mihailo Marković

Was this the same guy who along with Krestic, Cosic and others authored the 'Memorandum'?

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Jul 14 2010 17:37
oisleep wrote:
Quote:
Mihailo Marković

Was this the same guy who along with Krestic, Cosic and others authored the 'Memorandum'?

Yes.

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jul 14 2010 17:41

lads all lads

David in Atlanta
Offline
Joined: 21-04-06
Jul 16 2010 19:04

Interesting material. I didn't know Malta was experimenting with Yugo style worker management.

Boris Badenov
Offline
Joined: 25-08-08
Jul 16 2010 19:57

When I first read about the Praxis school (for a history course I was TA-ing; otherwise I probably would not have come across this stuff), I was actually kind of shocked to see that at least in writing a bunch of stalinists could even talk seriously about actual workers' control (within a statist framework, but still) and argue against the holy principles of centralism (even more so than people like Djilas did). Then I found out that some of these supposedly radical socialist thinkers had no problem supporting the murderous nationalist regime of Milosevic (Markovic, as pointed out above, is perhaps the most notorious example).

oisleep's picture
oisleep
Offline
Joined: 20-04-05
Jul 16 2010 23:39

It wasn't so much a case of them coming round to supporting their regime/politics, but actively creating the backdrop for those politics to flourish/grow in the first place

Back in 1986 when it was first released, you had responses like this to it

Milosevic wrote:
nothing else but the darkest nationalism
Karadzic wrote:
Bolshevism is bad, but nationalism is even worse
rata
Offline
Joined: 26-09-06
Jul 17 2010 00:56
mateofthebloke wrote:
When I first read about the Praxis school (for a history course I was TA-ing; otherwise I probably would not have come across this stuff), I was actually kind of shocked to see that at least in writing a bunch of stalinists could even talk seriously about actual workers' control (within a statist framework, but still) and argue against the holy principles of centralism (even more so than people like Djilas did). Then I found out that some of these supposedly radical socialist thinkers had no problem supporting the murderous nationalist regime of Milosevic (Markovic, as pointed out above, is perhaps the most notorious example).

Well in fact they weren't Stalinists at all, as well as Tito's regime wasn't Stalinist but a "revisionist" one. In fact they were proud of their anti-Stalinist stands in philosophy, for example refusing to publish Althusser etc. With the adoption of the "self-management" as official politics in Yugoslavia, this kind of Marxist-humanist critique was something that was a logical development within the intelligence. Some of them have even flirted with anarchism, and some elements of their thought and analyses can be interesting, but development of majority of them into either liberal or nationalist bastards has shown the essence of their thought. They were, or produced some of the key positions for socdemocrat nationalist (like Mihajlo Markovic, ideologist of Milosevic's Socialist party of Serbia) or liberal nationalist (such as in case of Dragoljub Micunovic first president, and still high official of currentlly ruling Democratic party) politics. To be fair we have to say that Zagreb part of the group had more honorable departure.

And of course, you know that Djilas's most important book "The New class" was first edited and published by CIA controlled "left wing" publishing house.

Majority of the Yugoslav dissidents, and the concept of the dissident itself, can not be marked as something that has contributed to liberation of the working class, in fact quite the contrary can be said for most of them.