Somewhere in the early nineties, when the Montenegrin emancipation story was gaining momentum, in the LSCG office in the Kruševac Business Center, there was an extremely bizarre and unusual thing. That was the time when, in large part thanks to the actions (and stickers) of liberals, people's awareness of the double-headed eagle, the heraldic symbol of Montenegro, returned.
There on the wall was a stuffed eagle with two heads. It is, therefore, a true eagle, to which the taxidermist has added another head. So that installation was paid for by (at least) two eagles. It's hard to imagine how unaesthetic it looked, although someone, surely, with the best of intentions, must have put a lot of effort into making this bizarre trophy.
I remember that once, a famous Montenegrin naturalist resignedly told someone from the party right - Move this freak, it's unnatural and creepy. Indeed it was. Whenever you literally translate something from the symbolic plane into reality, you get - monstrosity...
Montenegrin nationalism probably didn't even exist then, but obviously one branch of the emancipatory story from the nineties unequivocally went in that direction.
Of course, Montenegrin nationalism can never be the same as Serbian nationalism. Quite simply, we are talking about two different genres of nationalism - one is imperial and unitarist, the other is the so-called defensive and separatist. It is always so - such is the relationship between Spanish and Catalan, or Russian and Ukrainian nationalism.
The fact that it is "defensive" and that it does not threaten anyone outside Montenegro does not mean that it is not - nationalism. It is easy to recognize: nationalism always goes with banality. Of course, you can find banality elsewhere, not only in nationalist discourses and platitudes, but it is there as a rule - indispensable. And it doesn't look more natural anywhere, if you ask me. Banality is the key stamp that gives "final confirmation" to any nationalism. Look how unworthy the level of public talk about anything has been lowered.
In an attempt to properly understand the current form of Montenegrin nationalism, let me briefly recall the history of (big) ideas. Almost all major Christian heresies invoked the spirit of early Christianity. What is it that makes the spirit of early Christianity so different from what came later?
When, namely, yesterday's exiles and victims, suddenly, by the political will of, what would be called today, the Roman elite, became the government, i.e. when the state put the police (which until yesterday persecuted them) and shackles (which until yesterday were on their hands yesterday), things have completely changed. As the state religion, Christianity overnight became part of the repressive apparatus of the Roman state, using political power even for theological disputes. We got what we got.
The moment when victims get the chance to become executioners (and agree to it), fundamentally changes any idea, no matter how big and important it is.
That happened here too. Putting himself in the service of power, part of the former fighters for Montenegrin independence, he accepted all active and rhetorical modes - the "archenemy", that is, Serbian nationalism. Today's outbursts of nationalist cg tribunes are incredibly similar to what we heard in the early nineties from - on the other hand, where then, admittedly, there were also Djukanovic i Mandic...
Instead of refusing to see Montenegrin nationalism, it would be better to explain to people why it is good for that glass to pass them by.
Nationalisms focus only on the past and the future. One was golden, and the other will be again, when we finish some urgent national affairs... How nicely he remarked Amos Oz, they despise and hate the present. That is why their vision is never a real society, but a fantasy community.
A cocktail of banality, frustration and big words, and as all nationalism is, even if it is seasoned with good intentions, it always gives rise to ugly drunkenness and an even worse hangover.
Bonus video:
