Voodoo

There is no doubt that Đukanović is a politician who, we can say decisively, has shaped the reality of Montenegro in the last more than three and a half decades, counting from the coup, the so-called AB revolution, and ignoring his apprenticeship in the Central Committee of the Communist Party, from where he stepped onto the historical stage as the leader of the “young and beautiful”. In fact, he was one of the leaders, but clearly the one who had the talent to grasp the key levers of power. Incidentally, this populist episode will shake Montenegro well and sign the obituary of the SFRY.

It is almost unbelievable what a talent for transformation, what a range of activities this man demonstrated during his impressive career: he was a Yugoslav, a Serb, a Montenegrin, he was a leftist, then a key promoter of dubious capitalism, then a socialist and a democratic one, he was a "warrior of light" (B. Džaković), “primus” (B. Mitrić), the aggressor on Dubrovnik, then the one who apologizes, a putschist and legalist, an international business star, a businessman to whom loans are given in the largest banks based on reputation, as he explained somewhere, he was the founder of the construction of the SPC temple and at the party congress he announced the establishment of the already existing church. God gave him everything, the old people would say. A postmodern spiritual chameleon.

As we can see, he was many things, but it seems he can still surprise.

Well, the other day we got - Đukanović's voodoo.

In his latest public address, he showed something that could truly belong to the voodoo of spirituality, at least as portrayed by cheap movies and dubious writers, rather than to decent political discourse, no matter how polemical.

In short - what the young journalist stated is nothing compromising, he is mentioned in the most powerful, famous Epstein papers, more of an indicator of how far Đukanović has gone, at least in name if not in deed. Finally, what did you expect - who else from Montenegro will be mentioned?

The journalist very politely wrote an article about it - no one should be surprised that someone is interested in it. Our man in the world story, that's always interesting to people.

And Đukanović's reaction is for the most part completely expected and clear - we haven't met, I don't know why they're mentioning me, etc. However, there is a truly unusual moment in this announcement.

Speaking of journalists who wonder, lo and behold, whether he knows how he earned the compliment (“great guy”) from Epstina, the man says: "I recommend that if they meet him anywhere before me, they definitely check it out and inform the public about his position."

Stop, stop, this is interesting...

First: what would the journalist meet - Epstein did not mention him to his interlocutors, but rather Đukanović - and, second: where. Epstein has been dead for more than six years, so this meeting between the young journalist and him would certainly have to take place in the otherworldly realms. On the other side.

And people are not sent to the afterlife so easily. An experienced man like Đukanović certainly knows that. He should be more careful with messages like this.

If it's not voodoo divination, first of all it's - he tries to be funny. Which autocrats traditionally don't do well. There are several reasons for this. They lose touch with reality, they usually have a completely wrong perception of reality, so there's little room for humor. On the other hand, they have an ungrateful audience, which is the court. Whenever the master wants to be funny, his subjects burst out laughing, so that over time he must start to believe that he's funny. Devastatingly funny, one might say.

Still, it's hard to imagine anyone finding this funny. Sending someone to meet Epstein, even as a humorous attempt, seems utterly inappropriate, provoking some deeper unease.

Of course, this could just be naked sarcasm. The spite of the retired Boss. Or just plain arrogance, a pseudo-magical excursion unbecoming of a serious man. And either of those points to a lack of style.

It's always been that way: autocrats have the hardest time understanding the concept of decency.