"War is a deception. Truth is what simplifies things, not what creates chaos."
When Tomsky, one of the leading protagonists of the October Revolution who was later forced to commit suicide, was asked if multi-partyism and democracy were possible in Soviet society, he replied that they were possible, provided that they (communists) were in power, and all the rest in prison. This totalitarian way of thinking, which internally destroyed and eventually finished off Soviet communism, is very much alive and in full swing in today's Montenegro. The powerful people here renounced all the good sides of the socialist system (large enterprises and factories were destroyed, labor rights and social rights were abolished, gross theft of common property was carried out, healthcare and education were devastated), and remained faithful only to its dark signs: persecution of political dissidents, ideological falsification of history and tradition, sectarianism, idolatry and war against the Church.
From the ideology of the Comintern to the ideology of neoliberal globalism, only hatred is cultivated and survives in Montenegro. As a derivative of selfish autocracy, shallow political skill and nepotism, petty politics, without charisma and statesmanship. Because even the maxim: divide et impera (divide and rule) has limits to its "utility value." If, namely, divisions and conflicts are constantly inflamed in one's own people, if even a minimum national consensus is not reached on key issues, then the government inevitably splits and weakens over time. Looking for allies against his own citizens, he becomes a slave and a vassal of other people's, precisely enemy interests.
But who are our enemies? Who are our detractors, whom, according to ancient wisdom, we should love and keep closer to us, compared to our friends? Are they those who want to cancel our freedom, historical dignity, religion, name and surname, who want to transform us into their faceless servants and lackeys?
For the local government, the only enemy is the opposition. All means of coercion are allowed against the opposition. Except detention. Because, according to the CPC, political dissidents should be directly "put in prison", and not "detained", as can be seen from the official interpretation of recent verdicts. The political action of the judiciary is "legal", but "not constitutional", is further implied in the official interpretation, because the immutability of the DPS is, unfortunately, not yet standardized as a constitutional category. "Not yet, but still already," says Hermann Broch in the novel "The Death of Virgil."
And precisely this type of legal irrationalism and acrobatics, this legal-intellectual absurdity, is a burning indicator of the ending rule. All things strive to maintain their being, Spinoza wrote, but this striving, in its overemphasis, dialectically leads them to self-destruction. A string on a musical instrument will only produce a tone if it is not too tight. Otherwise it shoots. Just as a bow breaks, whose arrow aims to shoot too far. And this is not about the "happenings of the people" who, after all these years of fruitlessly scattered and unsatisfied desire for change, surrendered to "nirvana" and a kind of banal indifference. Nor is it about the "devastating" power of the opposition, which, even in better circumstances, did not show sufficient sobriety, unity and political maturity. At work here, to express it mathematically, is the implosion of an oversaturated set, an affected power that has begun to crush and pulverize itself - infinitesimally, to the point of utter impersonality, to the point of unusability.
At the beginning of Plato's "State", the rhetor and sophist Thrasymachus tells his interlocutor Socrates that the only thing that is just is "that which benefits the stronger." Every ruler makes laws for his own benefit, not for the benefit of the people, and it is therefore just to obey laws that benefit the stronger , for the benefit of the ruler. Thrasymachus is essentially an immoralist. He believes that people are bad by nature, equating the concept of justice with the concept of power, strength and personal gain.
Another of Socrates' interlocutors, Glaucon, advocates the idea of immoralism even more vigorously. Glaucon claims that people are just only because they fear being punished for their injustice. If, on the other hand, a man could, in some mystical way, make himself invisible, if he knew for sure that his actions would go unnoticed and unpunished, then he would certainly be unjust.
Both of these notions of justice are, in an absurd way, united in our public life and discourse. Our injustice is visible, but unpunished. "Justice prevails", but it is hidden under the form of "legal unconstitutional action". Long ago we scoffed at the Socratic-Platonic dreams of justice as knowledge and harmony that should be established in the soul of the state and the citizen.
In our country, the state is "put in prison", but not "detained." We are divided, but we are not divided. In the schizophrenia of neo-communist capitalism. On the verge of cracking. Not yet, but still already affected by the horrors of pseudo-social reality.
Because in the Manichean sharpened mirror of our own delusions, overwhelmed by the narcissistic power game, we only recognize each other as our only enemies.
The author is an official of the Democratic People's Party
Bonus video:
