In the beginning there was one Party. But in it, we who remember, and were not deprived of the awareness of the place and time in which we lived, there were many parties. How is that? Well, just like that. Pluralism was not democratic, but of interest: Serbs and Croats had their own, Albanians, Muslims (later Bosniaks), Macedonians, Slovenes and other Montenegrins had their own. Then – thieves. Then – careerists. And those who sincerely believed in communism. Those who pretended to believe, but were trying to get by. Those who didn't care. Ear. And the third thing.
In short: kids, don't let anyone lie to you – it wasn't communism, nor did evil uncles suddenly come and ruin everything.
If we start from the beginning, it is worth remembering that in 1920, in the first elections of the newly formed state (see under Krleža, Pijana novembarska noć) the communists were third in strength, and in Belgrade and Zagreb first, ahead of, for example, the Pašić party. And in another 59 (and in words: fifty-nine!) cities of the Serbs and Slovenes. So much for the inauthenticity of communism among Serbs. And other Croats. History may be written by the winners, but it is revised by the losers.
So, when in the autumn of the year the Berlin Wall fell, word spread through Belgrade's cafes and bars that something was brewing, when democrats, nationalists, national-democrats, social democrats, national-social democrats, Ravna Gora, Nedićevci, Ljotićevci and other nacosh bashibozuk were gathering, quietly leaving that one Party, it was clear - who wanted it to be like that, and who understood the meaning of the night gathering called the Eighth Session, as well as the daily actions under the common name of the Yogurt Revolution - that the world was changing dramatically. It is not true that we all did not understand anything about the fall of the Wall. Those who did not understand, do not understand even now. The world, not the walls.
Parties were formed. In Pazova, I forget which one, communist scum gathered. There it is now, rolling around, sometimes directly, sometimes through successors, in public spaces. The Slav parties of non-members briefly embraced the members, only to later divorce publicly, through impossible coalitions, cohabitations and other arrangements. And there they are, still divorcing. They still can't agree on who is to blame. And Seve and Boris say it nicely: does it matter who is to blame/when all this has already happened.
And what are they, those parties, to us, what do they bring to us?
We get a lot of stolen money. A lot of wasted time. A lot of wasted intelligence. They owe us, well – our lives. Are we to blame for that? Absolutely. Moreover: we are the ones who are most to blame. When, back then, I held my nose and voted for that sleepy man, knowing that I was wrong – and even announcing it publicly, I was attacked from all sides: that I was pushing pistons into the wheels of the revolution. It is true, I was pushing pistons because revolution produces too many accidental victims, I know that from my extended family. But still, I voted. To make it worse: I always will. Because, the worst of all Serbian revolutions was the White Party revolution. Those thirty thousand or so politically illiterate people made what we are living in now possible.
And it's always like that: revolution has always been, whether armed, mental, plush – a matter of a radical minority. And not of a silent majority. That's how it was around Karađorđe, around Lenin, around Tito. And around Chuck Berry. A small but dedicated group of those who are ready to die – and especially to have others die in their name – for their cause. Always the same goal: to conquer power-in-power.
Hence, it is not surprising that there is general distrust in parties. The Serbian political-analytical bashibozuk has therefore become more and more narrow-minded these days: they have felt threatened. And indeed they have. The political class – and although it does not cover everything, Marx's idea of history as the history of class struggle is not something that should be easily forgotten – which includes both those in power and those aspiring to power, is faced with something that is a kind of Popular Front. There are objections, on both sides, that this is a small group of people, that is, that they have seduced the masses. Of course it is like that. It is always like that. That is how those who rebel against it came to power. Which they call "power" (see under Nušić). That is how they lost it. And that is how they will continue to lose it. That is how history works, that is life – full of noise and fury, and it means nothing, Macbeth knew.
Hence the fear.
Because, here is a famous sociologist, more mentioned than read: "All party struggles are therefore not exclusively struggles for objective goals, but are also rivalries for the control of the distribution of employment." But, he says, sometimes a bit idealistically, further: "The same aspiration (for the distribution of posts in the administration - ed.) appeared (...) in all parties after the great increase in the number of administrative posts, which is a consequence of increasingly strong bureaucratization, but also due to the increasing desire of citizens who are attracted by the specific security of an administrative function. In this way, parties increasingly become a means for their supporters to achieve that goal."
This, we know, will happen, but the immediate continuation painfully resonates in its naivety: "This aspiration is nevertheless opposed by the development of the modern public function, which today requires a multitude of professional intellectuals, who have been preparing for their professional task for several years, and who are motivated in the interest of integrity by a highly developed class honor." And now the author of Spiritual Work as a Call will hammer home for us: "If this sense of honor did not exist among officials, we would be threatened by the danger of terrible corruption and we would not escape the rule of dilettantes." (Published in 1919.)
The rule of amateurs. The result of corruption. Murderous corruption. Sound familiar? Current? Well, have faith...
Does that mean they are all the same?
It doesn't mean.
So they are all similar.
And it's up to us – those of us who are not members and for whom this is not the best of all worlds, who think it could be at least a little less unbearable – not to let them. So that they are similar. That is, I guess, the point of this popular front, an alliance of students and their parents, relatives, neighbors, friends, acquaintances, an association of honorable people. And how will we do that? I have no idea. Maybe by constantly reminding those we think are less nasty of the idea of honor. Because, that's what has been going on in the streets and fields for a year and a half now – the feeling that dishonor cannot be eternal and the only thing.
Honor, not ointment.
It's healthier.
Bonus video:
