Neocommunism
Communism and the crisis of Western thought: what was it?
The crisis of Western thought was a crisis of the entire European thought. The West on the one hand, and Eastern Europe (IE) on the other, remained united courts even after the war. In that light, the West was to some extent responsible for communism (as even today it cannot be fully amnestied for its involvement with neo-communism such as this one in Našien). Two branches emerged from that crisis.
The first: postmodern.
Second: Dissent (anti-communist movement).
This second source is today considered a system of the postmodern era.
Since postmodernism was not only a way out of the crisis of Western thought, but also an integral part of it, and since, therefore, the postmodern movement was not only a detection of the discontinuity of Western thought, but also its metaphor, Dissent, on the other hand, became to a greater extent a way out and , finally, strong encouragement through action. He was socially less timid than the postmodern, less "disgusting" about political engagement for the simple reason that he was fighting for his life.
Is it possible to single out a dissident movement from the postmodern era?
It seems not, because it took place in parallel with postmodernism and within it, programmatically encouraged like no other process and, of course, under the aura of not a regional but a world idea.
Ideology, on the other hand, is a perfect breeding ground for dislocated laws. My minority was declared by 25 DANU academics as a traitor to the homeland. An unprecedented miracle - not one to escape a foreign language. They should be awarded the Grandmother's Garter Order of one language, burek-medal, to be presented to them by the chief buregji-philologist, Mr. Krivopakpić Ranko, a language reformer who floats a bill to deprive a novelist of an award, and he is dragged into the cattle car of disenfranchised citizens.
Let's take a look at the background of neo-communism (eighties): Krivokapić R. sees himself in the blissful role of a shoe wiper, under the belly of the secretary of the Municipal Central Committee of SK, and the carrier of the secretary's wife's ceger, and me in the role of a grumpy traitor, novelist-quisling while I write on my knee, in the subway of Budapest, refreshed with a bowl of stew from Hungarian folk cuisine, his early novel Zrela Herta (first edition in 1989 out of a total of six editions so far).
The budget-patriot and mentor of the rewrite-reform of the language exclaims headlong: he says that I "act from extremist positions" and that he will pass a law on treason.
Subtle illegality
If anywhere on the globe a movement could be born capable of animating spiritual forces outside of the Western crisis of thought, yet directly affected by that crisis, then it was IE.
The absence of wholeness, that old European disease, was disqualified in Lyotard's (Jean François Lyotard) eyes because of the "changing character of everyday experience". But those who know the spark of resistance in IE know that the dissidents were not helped by any "changing character of everyday experience" but by their artistic and human strength, tested in dungeons and illegally. They were saved by their will to literary resistance to communism.
In contrast to degenerative processes, this is known even in our cultural haluga, there are regenerative processes. The Politburo of the CPSU took the dissidents seriously. Both processes were unstoppable.
At the Politburo session, Leonid Brezhnev approved the thesis of the head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, that dissidents have become a form of class struggle for the Russian authorities at home and abroad. Chow down on lice!
In the mid-seventies, the dissident movement found itself at its lowest point. The KGB was tasked with breaking it up since Dissent was already a problem for Soviet diplomacy. The President of the USSR, Leonid Brezhnev, ordered that the dissident movement be cut at the root (cf. Kramola: Dissidents in the USSR for Khrushchev and Brezhnev, 1953-1982, Documents of the Supreme Court and Prosecutor's Office of the USSR, Moscow, 2005, 53).
At the beginning of 1976. the so-called the Helsinki stage, because a year earlier European countries, the USA and Canada signed the Helsinki Declaration on Human Rights. The dissidents formed the so-called Helsinki groups and oriented their propaganda more strongly towards the West. Already in October 1977, at the international conference in Belgrade, the materials of the Helsinki group from the USSR were officially on the agenda.
A tone of rebellion
The KGB decided to carry out a counterattack (the leaders of the Helsinki groups, Alexander Ginzburg and Yuri Orlov, and the leaders of the groups in Georgia and Ukraine were arrested). However, at the end of the seventies, a new generation of "leftist dissenters" entered the Russian scene with a radicalized demand to incite rebellion.
The process of resistance in IE and in Russia was unstoppable. Literary actions have increased. In 1978, writers Vasiliy Aksyonov, Venedikt Jerofeyev and Evgeniy Popov founded the almanac Metropol. Those who today we call classics published their works in it: Andrej Bitov, Fadil Iskander, Vladimir Vysotsky, Juz Aleškovski (writers even hid their Jewish name as this: Josif Efimovich during totalitarianism), Bela Ahmadulina, Andrei Voznesensky, Leonid Batkin, Arkady Arkanov.
In Leningrad in 1978. organized mass demonstrations after the arrest of the leaders of the Revolutionary Youth Alliance. What should be emphasized here and repeated everywhere, with or without italics, is, therefore, the truth about the dissident movement as a rebellion of patriots, that they were indeed dissidents, and not a rebellion of traitors as the authorities and the KGB presented them.
(Look at the irony, our modern neocommunism also invests all its resources in the production of traitors: it closes the steel factories in Nikšić and the excavators in Podgorica, but it doubles the production of domestic traitors!).
Where did the breeding of traitors come from in my ordeal, I thought, since I saw myself as a target in the middle of the Balšić market and in the middle of the Podgorica square - why me? Because the production of traitors is a profitable business - the president of Matica Montenegrin, Radulović D., a teacher with a diary under his arm, officially appeals to his role model to protect the country from me:
"Unfortunately, it has been shown once again that the mentality formed in transitional times represents a major obstacle for the emancipation of Montenegro. For this year's laureates of the highest state award, which is symbolically awarded in honor of Montenegro's statehood, the jury chose writers who openly deny the Montenegrin nation and its identity" (letter from the President of Matica Montenegrin to the President of the Assembly of Montenegro, June 26, 2013).
Who is the author of Windmills of Europe, an award-winning 553-page monograph that examines the development of the European novel from the Baroque to the postmodern, with a focus on the reception and enormous influence of Cervantes and Don Quixote in the South Slavic countries and the Slavic world?
He (the poor novelist of the Republic of Montenegro) is "a major obstacle for the emancipation of the Republic of Montenegro". You see how the production of traitors is a lucrative business, it requires nothing less than the law on traitors, my brother, in the middle of the Assembly - let's first produce the negator of the nation and we will silence him easily, with the law on his forehead!
Totalitarian role models
The promotion of Metropol in a Moscow cafe on January 21, 1979 was held under the simple, but dissident, indicative slogan of "expanding the creative possibilities of Soviet literature." Fadil Iskander said that Soviet writers live under occupation. And so it was.
At the end of the seventies, finally, the Jewish Association for Emigration was formed. Thus, 34,2% of emigrants went to Israel in 1979, while 18,9% of defectors arrived in Europe and the USA.
Already at the beginning of the eighties, every significant dissident voice in the USSR, says Gordon Skilling, was practically purged from the civilian face of this military and cultural superpower: "In the Soviet Union, by 1982, voices of free dissent had been more or less completely stifled ". "Beginning in 1982 the voices of the free dissident movement were more or less completely removed" (cf. H. Gordon Skilling: Samizdat and Independent Society in Central and Eastern Europe, Ohio, 1989, 18).
What did Russian writers demand from their regime?
They were looking for "wider creative possibilities of Soviet literature".
What did the dictatorial do-gooder Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev do?
He passed the law and purged dissidents from Russia.
Reader, does this episode remind you of the neo-communist patriots from "The Hunt for Me" (Brezhnevčići one, you naughty Brezhnevčići!)? To politicians like burek bearers to municipal heads and kebab doctors, inclined to enact laws against a writer with such an ominous attribute of the negator of the nation?
Literature retreated to its catacomb zone, to the underground. Aware that the ban on freedom does not concern only the dissident wave, but dangerously encroaches on the very continuity of the national culture, the dissidents took their reserve position in the underground. But it was not an underworld of morality, but, I repeat, of creativity and life - an underworld built from the bricks of private sacrifice and personal destiny.
Yugoslav duplicity
Yugoslavia unfortunately ignored and naively underestimated the dissident movement when it needed it the most. She overlooked it just when it was necessary to drink from its spring and stop the nationalist scoundrels and volunteers for poisoning the Yugoslav well.
And Yugoslavia had the dissident experience at hand (at the time of its disintegration it was already monumental!), look at the grief, look at the immense misery, in the neighboring yard of IE. It was not the dissident movement that failed Yugoslavia, but it failed him. This unfortunate fact is also confirmed by foreign writers, evaluating the Yugoslav case as non-dissident (a study of non-dissent), as Sharon Zukin testifies in her work on dissent in IE (see Sharon Zukin: Sources of Dissent and Nondissent in Yugoslavia, 119-122) .
Let go of your libertarian dreams, my dear Mare!
Yugoslavia was not even remotely like that. She wasted her fertility on political worms. Otherwise, if even a part of the rabid energy of nationalism had spilled over into dissident energy, Yugoslavia would have avoided its Golgotha. But - it's not. The truth is only what happens.
My persecutors concocted a diabolical plan to show the country collapsing under the weight of the betrayal of a novelist, and then they set in motion the apparatus that will save the country at the last minute, and it doesn't occur to them that I saw through them...
Because I read Althusser and I know, even before this shameful summer, that there is a clear difference between what he calls The State Apparatus (government, administration, army, police, courts, prisons) and what he calls the Ideological State Apparatus (a certain number realities that present themselves as a vigilant observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions): A certain number of realities which present themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions (see more Louis Althusser: Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus, Oxford, 2003 , 955). And I know, I will continue to say, because I read Hobbes, Locke, Hegel and Toqueville: that civil society cannot survive without a new discovery (rediscovery), a new research, without an experimental option, where is the individual in relation to executive structures of this type ( different and specialized institutions!) always on the defensive, on guard, with his head in a bag. But he is also a vanguard, the first on the traffic lights if his honorable creative nerve flashes in his vocation.
And I know, finally, that this relationship is complex, that there is nothing new under the sun, at least nothing that will ease the position of an individual who looks back in a frantic race to see how far the chase has reached on his heels, whether the pursuers are panting on his neck, how many tails is on his trail, as well as the fact that even the West is not amnestied from the permanent questioning of this everywhere vulnerable issue:
"This concept... was being revived and re-thought as a relationship which was applicable to both Western and Eastern European states" (John Keene: Civil Society and the State, London, 1988, 158).
Do not protect the country from one novelist, gentlemen cash-patriots, because you are also a country, but it is a lazy, lazy, money-making one... And the tower is not shaken by a writer, behind whom there are thirty or more volumes (forty years of literary craft, every day!), but parasites and dembels, neo-communist bourgeois-elite lounging on a soft sofa...
Bonus video:
