CEU eTD Collection instructions may notbe made without the written permission of the Author.” such inwith copiesmadeaccordance Further made. suchcopies form a part of any must page This librarian. the from obtained be may Details Library. European Central in the or part may be made inonly accordance with instructionsthe by given Authorandthe lodged “Copyrightin the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full Statement ofCopyright: CEU eTD Collection Slovene Political “Progressive” Parties During the Period Interwar VANISHING NATIONAL LIBERAL TRADITIONS VANISHING NATIONAL In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Second Reader: BalázsProfessor Trencsényi Supervisor: Professor Maciej Janowski Central European University European Central History Department Budapest, Hungary Master of Arts Master Submitted to Submitted Oskar Mulej 2010 By CEU eTD Collection but atbut sameit the did time leadnot its disappearance. complete to conclusion the gradual vanishing of nationalliberal that the indeed takingtradition was place a interwar to Thisdegree affectedby period. of leadsto prevailingpolitical the atmosphere isSlovene forces shownthat it were liberal observed the whichthroughout era, adopted they theirdiscourse, modelsmodernization for perspectives for anddifferent socio-economic order and nationality nationalism of progressives’ features the meansof analyzing Through the politics, arethereby being indicated. Slovene in interwar the liberalparty tradition continuity national of speak about to still proper itis question,whether tothe answers Some possible from liberal course. the they departed policies determine of andpoliticians stances parties and observed the to in theextent order of analyzeEuropean mainis casestudy the history.this purpose political aimand The to liberal tradition or were perceived as its heirs, and are as themain descendedfrom forces, pre-WWInational the political which either Slovene put into the general context of Central years. during“liberal” bytheinterwar historiography, Theyarethereby Slovene being treated as labeled commonly parties, political progressive Slovene caseof the with deals This thesis ABSTRACT CEU eTD Collection ORE N ILORPY...... 74 ...... SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 71 ...... CONCLUSIONS 57 ECONOMIC ORDER...... ANDSOCIO- OF POLITICAL ANDTHEPARAGONS MODERNITY AND 4. PROGRESSIVES’VIEWSON MODERNIZATION 41 NATIONALIST DISCOURSES...... 3. TREATMENTOFNATIONALITY QUESTION ANDTHE 25 DURING THE INTERWAR PERIOD...... GROUPSANDPARTIES ITS 2. SLOVENE“PROGRESSIVE”CAMP, 6 ...... CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK 1. THEORETICALAPPROACHESAND THEBROADER 1 INTRODUCTION...... TABLE OFCONTENTS 4.3. 1930’s SHIFT IN PROGRESSIVES’ VIEWS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER.....64 VIEWS 1930’s INPROGRESSIVES’ ONSOCIO-ECONOMIC 4.3. SHIFT PROGRESSIVES...... 60 OFEMBRACEDPARAGONS MODELS, DEVELOPMENT 4.2. ANDPATTERNS BY AND “PROGRESS”...... 57 MINDEDNESS” “FREE YUGOSLAV ANTI-CLERICALISM, 4.1. NATIONALISM, PROGRESSIVES’ RHETORIC...... 50 3.2. THE DEGREE AND TYPE OF NATIONALISM, AS REFLECTED IN PROGRESSIVES’ CENTRAL POINT OF ...... 42 IDENTIFICATION YUGOSLAV IDEAASTHEINTERWAR3.1. NATIONAL SLOVENE ...... 35 ERA 2.2. PARTIES OF THE SLOVENE PROGRESSIVE CAMP DURING THE INTERWAR AS ONE OF ...... 25 ITS MAIN COMPONENTS POLITICAL LANDSCAPE2.1. CAMP OFSLOVENELANDSANDPROGRESSIVE ...... 19 POLITICS “POLITICAL CAMPS” AS PECULIAR FEATURES OF CENTRAL EUROPEAN 1.5. “PROGRESSIVE” AND “FREE MINDED” AS POLITICAL LABELSAND 1.4. CENTRAL EUROPEAN NATIONAL ...... 15 LIBERALISMS 1.3. THE COMPARATIVE ELEMENT ...... 13 AND ITS SCOPE 1.2. ADDITIONAL ...... 10 REMARKS ON METHODOLOGY ...... 6 UNDERSTANDING 1.1. CONCEPT OF LIBERALISM AND THE LEVELS OF ITS USE AND i CEU eTD Collection striking feature of liberalism was its very frequent connection with nationalism. One could One nationalism. with connection frequent very its was liberalism of feature striking about the context of Central Europe, especially during the 19 the especially during of Europe, Central context about the American in Speaking political environments. commonEuropean the and usageof term that forliberalismsletdifferent instance, greatdifferencethe usjustremind in – ourselves, about WesternOnly in have world, political the cultures different of experienced developments changing andmutually politicaldifferent landscapes of various states and nations. aforementioned teaching –the a setof than unified a single philosophies tospeakabout perhaps better is it whereby very one, diverse a also as albeit a political – philosophy treated “liberalism”, political to contrast In andideologies. movements of variety political covering awide concept, broad phenomenavery a asrepresenting itself “liberalism” reveals etc.), personalities, parties, organizations, (political politics in real agents and traditions political living) still or vanished (already representstandpoints of history.political Whenperceived ‘only’ as a labelfor certain factually existing forces interest the to delimited isstrictly scope also ifthe but richness and its broadness all whichmeanings. This is sonot only in case one wanted to employ it onall the possiblelevels and in operate antithetical even sometimes and diverse many carry can which notion, a is Liberalism in dynamic,and . environments. cultures political in particular forces political of variety broad a labeling for history political ever- thelevel of solely has been on it byitself, and broad used complex liberalism. Very certainly their use inalso various national historiographies. One of prime examples of issuch a concept heterogeneity of asimilar can one observe this, As of aconsequence political phenomena. different very sometimes for employed been have designations same the contexts national Political concepts vary in theirand content meaning through time and space. Invarious INTRODUCTION 1 th and early 20 th century, a CEU eTD Collection very little influence evenin the émigré community.( Party” Democratic of “Slovene banner the under organized loosely 1 communist takeover subsequent “Slovene SecondWorldevolution the liberal camp” endedafter political of War and focus on.The intend which Yugoslav the to - parties I therefore National (1933-1941) Party joininglater Democratic Independent(1924-1929), 1924), the Party Democratic(up to Party ofYugoslav by parts wasrepresented historiography. Slovene the liberal the core Still, Nationalists) minoreven groupings (forexampleYugoslav nationalist ORJUNA-Organization of radical were and party agrarian newly-emerged the also seen orientation, national their as well as clericalism, as partanti- their liberalism, national of descendants of direct with alliances thepolitical their origin, liberal movement and are treated as such also in a manner, which seemed to me a rather uncritical one. This applies especially to the interwar the to especially Thisone. applies me uncritical arather seemed to manner, which a use in label “liberal” of towards the I becameattentive my Particularly issues caught attention. When had parties from beenstudyingI history of the camp,certain mentioned the political ( In 1920’s the pre-WWI Slovene “liberal camp”, united in “National-Progressivethe Party” idea. was national the period interwar “liberal”the (or “progressive” groups asthey usually calledduring also themselves) the foundation, distinctive the common presentfrom ground, verythe beginnings, and uniting all which formed political first inparty the 1890’s.Otherwise lacking a clear philosophical mid-19 be backto evolution could traced political whose number groupings, of Slovene has historiography commonly applied thelabels “liberalism” of and “liberal” a to example. asaprime Party”serve can Liberal “National related ideologiesspeak abouttraditionsof “national liberalism” asa forcommon anumberdesignation of and movements, distinctive for Central Europe, of which the German Up to 1960's, two small groups of political expatriates in the USA and Argentina continued the tradition, being Narodno-napredna stranka ) disintegrated into a number of parties. Mostly due to their dueto a into Mostly parties. number of ) disintegrated 1 . 2 Slovenska demokratska stranka th century and century ), but had but ), CEU eTD Collection the late 19 late the newformsadopt from came to also Nationalism andlimited government. order economic free a from away leading were which solutions, solidarist) and socialist (corporatist, collectivist various favored time that at climate political prevailing The order. social and political ideas liberal beof which asvery inmany period, described unfriendly towards can aspects which will serve as a primary point of reference. The latter case should definitely not beleft caseshould definitely latter The of servereference. as which will a primary point as Germany, well as pre-WWI Cisleithania of one the especially context, Central European of a broader part them as will treat thereby its heirs.I as were perceived liberal or tradition national from pre-WWI forces the main which descended political the camp, representing “liberal” political or “progressive” ofSlovene focus ontheparties am to In thispaperI going movements. political Marxist and “clerical”) markedas (sometimes Christian conservative inquestion towards of delimitation parties the national liberal traditions andin certain cases even only reflecting the relation and argue that such designation could be foundedmore less or on supposedheirshipthe the of I would sense). logical formal a (in one negative a largely become to seemed label liberal the period interwar in of the case lands,that Inoticed Czech the asAustria and Central Europe For these reasons, therebymain opponents from the Catholic conservative camp, whom they calledalso “clericals”. observing lessby namedmore or assuch only political their were “liberals” when the interwar period, similar patterns of development “national” theirreferring when distinctive political to position. wasespecially This during the in other orsimply “national-progressive” “free-minded”, as“progressive”, preferredmostly words parts of Moreover, it should be mentioned also that the “liberals” themselves rarely used that label and era. interwar in in “liberals” the of andSlovene policies reflected also the discourses extent considerable a me wereto hassuch seemedto attitudes liberal It that ideals. the incompatiblewith quite th century on, leading to exclusivist, aggressive and even racially-based versions, racially-based even and aggressive exclusivist, to leading on, century 3 CEU eTD Collection broader contextual contextual broader framework of Central nationalEuropean liberalism established. Special will be thoroughly a subject and described the thetheoretical to chapter approaches In thefirst party tradition in the interwar Slovene politics, and provide some possible answers to it. developto the question, whetheritis tospeakabout still continuity proper of national liberal be trying also will I this doing By liberalism. national of traditions the continuing supposedly using these terms,applied bynational historiographies. This should provide also a certain reflectioncritical on when speaking hadbeen“liberal” and“liberalism” era the carrying during areassuch still sometimes about of somenotions the meanings different on laid be will stress ofSpecial camp. liberal the Slovene of case above the contextualize mentioned to try to is aim main my knowledge, historical to contributing of terms In parties which such designations andas “liberal”,“progressive” “free-minded”. were of meanings were the whatshow and to context inthat Slovenia position be will to my aim semantics, political of European Central basic patterns casesand the of other features of general the courses 19 progressives from eraandhow ‘mutated’ farthey the interwar throughout departed politics such by will finding I public. the presentthis towhatto try degree casealso out, Slovenethe – especially that part which either interwarparty of politics Central aspartof general European the context treated progressives, adhered to tradition of national offer My main isinterwar introduction aim to and adetailed Slovene of analysis of case the liberalism or was seen feature. pre-WWI as distinctive its as liberalism” “national with framework political European Central common a to asbelonging treated be therefore will camp “liberal” Slovene of case The interest. my of of topic ‘prehistory’ for the important thus were and whole region for the paradigmatic 19 the aside, since th century liberal developments in Germany were to a large extent th century national liberalism. Taking into account the general the account into Taking liberalism. national century 4 CEU eTD Collection also theactual validity of applying term the during1930’s, will be given. of patterns thatterm inclusion“liberal” and intousing politicalfinally campsparties of and “liberal” themeaningof concerning thecommon notion the during period, interwar the Answersliberalism possible pointed out. or answering of general the to ways questions discussed through the thesis will be provided and the extent of remnants and traces of national and presented data of A summary traditions. liberal national of continuity the of question The conclusion upon. will touched be briefly also thereby turn back will bolshevism and fascism to socialism, national the towards organizations political generalobserved level of politicalstances and policies issueson could inanysensebethese Attitudes of asliberal. labeled the semantics, progressives the whether be question, the pursuing Again,Iwill focus.. deserve aspecial as well as to the will order, regardingones socio-economic which especially the paragons embraced, they Slovene progressives, andtheir towards attitudes existingthe modernity. Models and by shared theSlovene society, modernizing perspectives for to will be chapters two devoted these of second The context. in thewider right theradical views of the of adopting extent the explain and describe to be thereby will aims my of One in question. put be will nationalism their of ‘liberality’ the whereby liberals, Slovene by question nationality the of treatment This will described. be followedSlovene by two introduction a general the to paperwill to the Afterthat proceed pre-WWIthe developments. problem-orientedliberal European whichparties, be as could treated national liberal andheirs abrief into offer outlook parties,provide Central brief other will of and a “political chapter general overview camp”. This also chapters. tradition” “party liberalism”, “national where“liberalism”, as such notions the on laid be will stress Firsttheir of developmentthese will deal withthroughout the interwar era will be 5 CEU eTD Collection Nevertheless this diverseness is still somehow connected. Liberalism in all its historical and historical its all in Liberalism connected. somehow is still diverseness this Nevertheless answers. moral andproviding different touching questions different suppositions, upon liberalisms,different various ‘schools’ have buildingemerged, their on arguments diverse by introduced political andsocial realities. Duetodiversity lackand of uniformity among provideproblems differentapproaches in answers to to many trying andadopted challenges and Throughout its further. evolution, liberal the political hasphilosophy been encountering andAdam Smith developand continuing to through nextcentury the John Mill up to Stuart culminatingLocke, 18 during the of represents a philosophies, beginning group of usually perceived as with thoughtthe John directions. andliberalism First foremost, isapoliticalit philosophy. precisely, More many into points “liberalism” notion, broad A very contemplated. be can it which on levels some words have to be told about the concept of liberalism in general, as well as the differentBefore proceeding the historical liberalism to ofCentral outline European force, asapolitical UNDERSTANDING 1.1. CONCEPTOFLIBERALISMAND THE LEVELSOF ITS USEAND framework for general subjectthe mycontextual of analysis. will second the includes part is elements, comparative establish a which anintroduction sake usageof for the Sinceof my thesis clear sameterms. the inmyviewindispensable time Due tothe broadnessits can topic,be partof this readasalso is anindependentbut essay, at half. first in the bedone will This analysis. in my be employed will it manner the to point and First andforemost, thepurpose of discuss chapteristhis to thenotion liberalismof ingeneral 1. THEORETICAL THEORETICAL 1. BROADER APPROACHES AND THE CONTEXTUAL CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK th century century likewith philosophers Montesquieu, Hume, Kant 6 CEU eTD Collection treated by political history, “liberalism” reveals itself as a name for constantly changing constantly for a name as itself reveals “liberalism” history, by political treated itis usually as On thislevel, similar. and personalities parties, movements, – politics real in of itself denominator certain asacommon historical presenting traditions, actors therefore group of political heterogeneous least alarge designates and not butLast also “liberalism” (Thomas Mann, keine andere politischeForderung kannte, als die hochnationale nach Kaiser und Reich. national,aber unpolitisch gesinnt, wieder Deutsche derbürgerlichen Kultur und wieder der Romantik, die “ minded, hewas liberal in terms of “liberality” and not “liberalism”: 4 Press, 2006), pp. ix-xi, p. xi. Leonhard, Liberalismus, 552.) in 19 middlefor educated classes the distinctive washighly of adherence, and partisan independent doctrines political liberal narrower to the or philosophy political eitherto attached necessarily 3 Oldenbourg, 2001), pp. 548-549. particular preferences and differences” preferences particular furtherance aspirations jostle and the of inbeliefs against of set which mutating (…) universal acomplex “as itself reveals level this on treated Liberalism time. and space of circumstances influences,from alsovery emanating foundationsbutare concrete philosophical to receptive 2 ideals, as well as political views political as well as ideals, setof lessunified even anda broader label to also canbeapplied “liberal” from the philosophy, political Apartthe government, neutral state, autonomous civil society,free economy and individual property. limited law, of rule of principles the furthermore and tolerance equality, liberty, include could ideals, beargued common that embraced byall liberal strands of political philosophy, It reasons. derivedvarious or from interpreted very mayhavealbeit been differently they andprinciples, values fundamental to certain been has committed variations contemporary AsThomas Mann putit inbeing 1918, an apoliticalperson belonging to middle-class culture and nationally Michal Freeden, “Foreword” in Ivan Zoltan Denes ed., Denes Zoltan inIvan “Foreword” Freeden, Michal JörnLeonhard, Bin Bin ich liberal, so bin ich es im Sinne derLiberalität und nicht des Liberalismus.Denn ich bin unpolitisch, th and early 20 Betrachtungen eines Unpolitischen Liberalismus : zur historischen Semantik eines europäischen Deutungsmusters th century German and broader Central European Central space. broader and century German European Weltanschauungen 2 . These can be perceived and interpreted ashaving can . These certain interpreted be perceived and 3 . For instance, a specific liberal world view, not view, world liberal a specific instance, For . , uniting individual ethical stances, common human common stances, ethical individual uniting , (1918) (Frankfurt a.M.: 1956), p. 108; Quoted from: 7 Liberty and the search for identity ” 4 (Budapest: CEU (München: CEU eTD Collection concepts. Ideologies, as defined by Freeden, are on the other hand “products hand other onthe are by Freeden, defined as Ideologies, concepts. political ofemploying terms in eclectic and open bemore canalso and ofpolitical boundaries the above indicated already As (Freeden, Concepts, 59.) understandings.” particular alternative with compete which space, and time in mediated concepts, those of meanings ofthe understandings “particular as concepts political to relation in ideologies treats Freeden Michael 6 of the respective political landscape.specificities on dependent always and formed deliberately partly being latter, the to link direct amore providing thereby are Ideologies life. political ofpractical phenomena and philosophy between mid-level same the broader the both Nevertheless individuals and groups on who operate they are which closein ways tothe us to central directs role positionssocial their and of decision-makingresources, communal important are inThey a polity.” (Ibid., 61.). Begriffsgeschichte 5 flux andreconfiguration” state of being“in acontinuous begin to be coined inside ideologies, which act as “specific configurations of of concepts” “specific configurations which act as be coined insideideologies, begin to of time thecourse by through philosophers created and contemplated sometimes Concepts, political. strictly of realm the above extending time same the at – ideologies political of form ‘the middle ground’ of hardly definable viewsconnects fieldsworld both the in – particularly handother political realities challenge political philosophy new with problems.As mentioned, legitimacyphilosophies for grounds and provide political programsandpractices. On the Political indiscernible. appearpartly sometimes and intertwined actas same time usually at the but each other to irreducible andpractically are theoretically levels described The three as more or less contingent from this point of view. notions appears play of content here,the majorpolitical role a contexts national and cultural regional, the Since locations. spatial and temporal its on dependent essentially phenomenon, primarily by principlethe of political struggle,“liberalism” is as tobe therefore treated a determined and distinguished realities, political of level the On nations. and states various of political agents mutually acting– forces insidedynamic political and different environments Michael Freeden, “Concepts, ideology and political theory,” in Carsten Dutt (ed.), Freeden, Foreword, ix. Foreword, Freeden, (Heidelberg:Winter, 2003), pp.51-63 Weltanschauung Weltanschauungen and political ideologies are not identical, since the formerextend well and ideologies stem from socio-cultural contexts and occupy and contexts socio-cultural from stem ideologies and 8 , p. 52. 6 and appearing “as and ‘lived’ traditions appearing designed Herausforderungen der for consumption (…) consumption for 5 , CEU eTD Collection 8 52. 7 by no means be left out. will ideological questions to attentiveness the certain traditions, to its adherence and “camp” defined byits inside location the political as spectrum of a representative a certain political is analysis my of subject the Since ideologies. adjoining and agents political between relation levels,two although inaredistinct. This perspectives the applies question especially the to mentioned the between separate entirely to task easy an always not is it already, mentioned been has it As force”. political organized an as “liberalism say also may one or – liberalism of traditions to belonging parties, with mainly be dealing therefore will I landscapes. political me,interest arepolitical parties as agents acting inside historically and fixed geographically politicalmeaning traditions, the of traditions Whatreally-existing political will phenomena. In paperthis Iam intendingfocus onto to lastthe of levelsthe mentioned, is that thelevel of them as much as possible. between discerning time same the levels, at mentioned all the account into the take and to that understandstriveapplied, find has liberal possiblereasons label been for outthe to to the way to is here important is What though. scientist political or a historian of outlook ‘external’ from or the ofliberalismby contemporary public bethe perceived representatives get to as still but that, do necessarily even not may They ideology. liberal of traditions ‘home-grown’ claiming to embrace either the principles of liberal philosophy or at least to follow the specific such ideologies. to adherence being Sometimesliberal theyrepresentthemselves by as by distinguished arefurthermore instance, for movements agents, political Particular grouping ofideologies or an ideological pattern of political thought” Cf. ibid., 83. Michael Freeden, Michael Ideologies and political theory: a conceptual approach 7 . Liberalism therefore also designates an ideology more precisely, a or, anideology designates also . Liberalism therefore 9 8 . (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), p. CEU eTD Collection Gesellschaft, Zeitschrift für Historische Sozialwissenschaft Deutsche Deutungenvon ‘liberal’ ‘liberalismus’ und nach1850 imeuropäischen Vergleich,” verschiedener europäischer verschiedener methodisch Ernst,dannlost sichderideengeschichtliche Singular des ist nurDas, was keine Geschichte hat.’ Nimmt mandiese Prämise im Sinne einerkomparativen Analyse 10 (Freeden, Ideologies, 92.) anywhere.” from view the endorse doesnot nowhere’ from ‘view of a absence the weemploy, vocabularies 9 culturefrom differed to culture its andcontents forms actual that be stressed itshould especially tradition(s) asa political When force. treated and ideology political asa liberalism of history writing when account, into be taken always should ones, social and cultural consequent as the well as differences, andtemporal spatial Nevertheless, the analysis can then proceed to the level ideologiesof and further to political agents. be donein a manner where thefirstlevel (philosophical) is taken as a primary one from which was liberal movement ornot,in sense certain thethis whether of word assess, should proper in proper, my view ahierarchy own levelsof shouldbeconsidered. Incase would one wishto liberalism about talking focus. Ideally, as apart not when of central though the account, relativistic does not seem to be of much value phenomenological and historical from treated be to has in question liberalism of notion the Therefore liberal philosophy. perspectives.with inconsistent any quite appear itcould also answerto andthe life political of peculiarities theappurtenant all with a certain region in a certain time meantat label such exactly is what here question leading The label. Still,liberal the bearing agents, political of one is question a position in level the that be clarified ithas to of project, this task the For facts. and values are also discern hard mutually intertwined. Theory usuallysubchapter, and practice as to areas appear trying in theprevious liberalism, conceptof discussed the perspectives for treating The levelsor to be entirely ONMETHODOLOGY REMARKS ADDITIONAL 1.2. ‘nominalist’ and “…whereas we may agree with Rorty that there are no absolutely true standards independent of the independent standards true absolutely no are there that Rorty with agree we may “…whereas From a historical comparative perspective liberalism is undefinable orin words of LeonhardJörn “’definierbar Liberalismen .” (Jörn Leonhard, “Semantische Deplazierung und Entwertung : Entwertung und Deplazierung “Semantische Leonhard, (Jörn 10 9 , No.29 (2003): pp. 5-39: p. 35.) and other levels should still be taken into taken be still should levels other and 10 , whereby arguethat could one , whereby Liberalismus auf in den Plural Geschichte und CEU eTD Collection towards towards politicalother aswell groups, historical supposed as liberal to connections tradition. labeled assuchalso becauseof their inside political position the spectrum, their delimitation butwere courses and policies, following liberal necessarily werenot phenomena, which labeled political it one,since of word) the formal sense a logical, (in “negative” less a more or political of language Such “liberalism”, shouldas political certain landscape. beunderstood of being apart it afactual, term, evolved represented asgradually used insidethe context, be criticallysame insuchcases.Atthe it time still can treated label should beobservedand liberal the apparent, canseem quite agents of political nature such illiberal partly Since the havingliberal references name, anyother the to without tradition). the adopt simply which movements similar and Party Democratic Liberal Russian modern instance in caseof for the (as one a completely is not arbitrary tradition, certain political strict sense of the word.of little Still use, as– itthe is morepolitical or lessIn such cases, the normative clearapproach starting on the level labelof political philosophythat seems beto theitself phenomena remains in any liberalism.as corresponding to of kind proper question and, are notsince liberal it in is be understood hardly thedifferences, and temporal mentioned spatial the account into takes basedone on a employed by the general andwasstill predecessors supposed their stemmed from public “liberal”(which of designation the or even themselves), bearing still although movements, the where apoint reach could transformations time. These adopted courses, whichitMoreover,should it alsobe addedhad thatexperienced also radical transformations through could, even if when movinggreater eastwards. becoming form actual its and liberalism of political model ‘ideal’ between discrepancies a degree of distortion of the concept was present in all the Central and East Europe – the 11 CEU eTD Collection one, observing certain political forces as political phenomena, operating inside concrete forcesoperating as phenomena, observing one, political political certain phenomenological essentially and historical a purely as approach my understand I therefore strict sense of the word. in the value and a face be taken at not should label liberal the that premise the on way, critical Nonethelessmovementslabel which bearing courses beadopt. the did that thiswill ina done findtrying what“liberal” to out meantin spatial certain and temporal context especially movementcorresponded tocertain ideal liberalism of principals ornot.Muchmore, Iwill be political certain whether judging of one the be not will aim my main meaning, in distortions far-reaching by were distinguished term that of eastern uses that perspective asthe well term of the complexity account the into taking Albeit be, how far had they departed and which were the continuities,if any. national liberal ideology, significant for their predecessors. The crucial question will of course The parties, speeches. and articles newspaper in manifestos, themselves manifested as they on which discourses, and stances policies, politicians’ and partisan to my analysis limit I therefore will I am intending and“national”. political “national-progressive” labelsrelated “free-minded”, as“progressive”, to focus, contextually of one particularthe or that bearing “liberal”, as public by themselves or the bore the designation by either were perceived They “political camp”. forming acertain sametime the usually at to be politicalof parties, seen as representatives going are or myenquiry at of least objects heirsThe of politics. certain real of level the political – levels three the of tradition last the on and it observing phenomenon, political asa liberalism treat will I project my in again, it stress To anda considerable generational change, fromalso they to extentdeparted 19 the fin-de-siecle of transformations due to thepolitical I would Mill. arguethat, Stuart Moreover, correspondingor toprinciples byliberaldeveloped thinkerspolitical from John John Locketo necessarily following a ‘proper’ liberal course, i.e. the one which could be seen as founded on 12 liberalism on levels of on as all the usage, liberal th , without century CEU eTD Collection Theory 11 that cannot otherwise be posed”, as well as “answers that cannot otherwise be given”. cannot otherwise that “answers as well beposed”, as otherwise cannot that narrowly subject itself history, national since “questions andperceived respective itenables the of understanding better for beneficial prove can it Moreover, global). or (regional historical knowledge general enriching the thus perspective, bea broader from studied This patterns. for can distinctly way, possibilities isolated, previously arise to ‘national’ cases from transnational developmental history, the broader, asseparated ofnational perspective from limited ceases tobetreated a subject main the points, common reference establishing By introducing abroader perspective, albeita fairly general and superficial one, and developments in that region and will treat it as something essentially arising from them. perspectivemya broader of 19 of intosubject analysis position the to strive will I thereby Europe. frame Central of the inside contextualization My of central the to liberal topicSloveneapproach willincludeelements general of parties 1.3. THECOMPARATIVEELEMENTANDITSSCOPE understandingmutations therebyimportantchallenge. themost their presents in heirs liberal for task.Excavation and liberal the elements surviving of caseof the itself can notbe left completely ignored, as a critical evaluation of its use seems indispensable notion the sametime at the but sense, instrict liberalism about not is therefore My project region. that for alsodistinctive which were “free-minded”, and “progressive” as designations less for andinside orientation contextof Central the European politics related along with more or beused will “liberalism” notion of space. The and of circumstances time concrete understandhistorical therebyto political what environments, trying Jürgen Kocka, “Asymmetrical Historical Comparison: The Case of the German Sonderweg,” German ofthe Case The Comparison: Historical “Asymmetrical Kocka, Jürgen , Vol. 38, No. 1(Feb., 1999): pp. 40-50, p. 49. 13 th and early and early 20 liberal th century political century meant in these meant History and 11 CEU eTD Collection remodeled. their distinctive features upon whom models western the wereimposed and thereby also Moreover, had contexts socio-political European Central - French and British primarily - developments the processAlbeitbeing 19 the throughout can not be What hasbeen forward brings told question the of simplyCentral European political peculiarities. labeled society. Slovene of context as one intheinternal “liberal camp” of as representatives specificity their retained of sametime at the ‘importing’ parties but all-state members became of 1918 Slovene after progressives core the noting that and political developments, they differed greatly from those of other Yugoslav lands. It is worth Evolving aCentral inside andbearingEuropean cultural context mark the of Austrian old particularly the pre-WWI division into political “camps”, did not change substantially. politics as ithad belongedcommon Austrian- to politics main– itspreviously characteristics, political landscapes and party Although traditions. Slovene politics became partof Yugoslav also andtherefore contexts socio-political among differences in great reflected largely of various formerleave lands Yugoslav other newly-founded asideisthat was the Slaviccomposed South state political to reason The survey. this from is absent Slovenes, by settled territory of portion central and units with Onelegitimately might different wonder why restof the Yugoslavia, country the comprising thelargest historiesWorld Warformed Cisleithanean part of monarchy. Habsburgthe and culturallands countriesbackground, special First willthe or those emphasis,up to deserve which traditions.Balkans and Ukraine for instance. Because of their specifically common historical This inCentral ‘classical’Europe sense whichthe includes of word, Germany and excludesthe was encompasses Central perspective willbe This European politics Central discussed. European the general context of national liberalism as a distinctive feature of of feature 19 asadistinctive national liberalism of general context the in central “progressive” tothe interwar proceeding camp Before of period topic the Slovene th century largely century influencedby Western the European 14 th and early 20 th century CEU eTD Collection 15 Semantische Displazierung, 21.) 14 13 Europe.” throughout variations and mutations 12 what Jörn Leonhard labeled as “gradual displacement” “gradual as labeled Leonhard Jörn what experienced its history liberalism hasthroughout instance, of for concept the lands In German 19 early from region,European same time the German liberal developments, beinglargely paradigmatic for the whole Central early important tobothliberalcontributions thoughtand liberal At originated. politics the many where alsoGermany, was France and from Britain Great apart ofbirth’ ‘places whose of one liberalism, is example fine A very region. that from originated developments, ‘remodeling’, as many conceptspolitical and models, crucial for European political devaluation” Freeden has it, put fact as to the of Michael landscapeshaveattributed that, political resulting peculiarities later mutations. their as well as different, quite been have regions various throughout movements political for label that of use and liberalism emerging of ‘materializations’ previously, discussed As 1.4. CENTRALEUROPEANNATIONAL LIBERALISMS unique courses. concepts andideologies – temporal,the spatial the and the morphological structural.or political studying when be observed to have aspects three Freeden, Michael to According “Semantische Entwertung” (Ibid.) Entwertung” “Semantische “Schleichende Deplazierung”, what could perhaps also be translated as “gradual as betranslated also perhaps could what Deplazierung”, “Schleichende Ibid. Cf. Freeden, Foreword, x: and philosophical practices that are more recognizable names.” that practices and other under philosophical country: by left squeezed at sometimes right, both and otherto timesout infusing political country from notably differed has liberalism for available space political “the 15 of the term. 12 Moreover, specific socio-cultural contexts, political developments and “What has beengenerally assumed tobe aWest European doctrine has undergone th century on embraced certain distinct features and adopted distinct certain embraced on century 15 14 , which in his view led to “semantic to led view his in which , mis placement”. (Leonhard, placement”. 13 16 The CEU eTD Collection configurations and landscapes, different to those Western Europe. of tothose different landscapes, and configurations impacted the1918 elsewhere) emergenceof inalso political 1871 andupto Germany 1867 in (upto nation Hungary, states andabsence of Differentcontexts rights). socio-cultural historical on based arguments, by joined time same the at (often nation ethnic or cultural of notions on based building, nation of projects with in hand hand went law before equality resisting atleast some of them. which “nationalism occasionally coalesced (…) or nested within” nested or (…) coalesced “nationalism occasionally which with society, civil civilization, individualism, progress, reason, self-determination, trade, Similar could also besaidfor related liberal ideas as limitedcitizenship, free government, unification. and/or emancipation national is that nation”, the for “liberty -as primarily even liberty alsoandcouldliberals. sometimes wasperceived - primarilyIt bearguedthat by the of 19 andunifications “awakenings” national “nation”. The for identity “Liberalism and Nationalism: An Ambiguous Relationship” in IvanZoltan Denes (Ed.), 20 19 18 17 16 19 the for distinctive especially concepts”, “perimeter of one such concept, asits primary core “liberty” liberal with In caseideology of concept. of andtheone a core betweentheir content connection close occasional spatially and temporally contexts.Thisis determined a contingentusually due to and from itseven bealmostbutcan framework) absent actassuchinside nevertheless certain could (or in question ideology tothe importance of necessarily central by are not themselves might be, there are also the ones situated at the “perimeter” of an ideology. of an “perimeter” the at situated ones the are also be, there might content their changeable however core, ideological upthe building concepts the to addition In ideological structure. comprising acertain relations regards concepts between latter This also affected the characteristics of the relation between liberals and conservatives. (Ivan Zoltan Denes, Zoltan (Ivan conservatives. and liberals between relation ofthe characteristics the affected also This Ibid. x. Foreword, Freeden, 61. Concepts, Freeden, 59. Concepts, Freeden, (Budapest: CEU Press, 2006), pp. 1-17; p. 19 The struggle for constitutionalcivil liberties The for and struggle order, th and early andearly 20 6-7.) 16 th century Central Europe, was the th century pursued were projects, century 18 , at some other points also 20 Liberty and the search 17 Such concepts Such CEU eTD Collection 24 ends.” liberal serve thus and identity, of cultural enchancer an as and practices, democratic of arepository as engine, modernizing 23 22 and Southern Eastern Europe.”Central, in (Denes,concepts Liberalism,interchangeable often and 6.) inseparable inter-referential, were identity and progress 21 between liberalism and nationalism evolved in thus 19 the relation Aclose example. serveasaprime can Party” Liberal “National theGerman of which Europe, Central for distinctive movements, ideologies and for of anumber related designation asacommon “national liberalism” of traditions speakabout One could therefore nationalism. connection markedby with a strong after uprisings was especially the factor 1848, of political important increasingly an becoming and arising visibly force, apolitical as liberalism the 19 During liberalism”“national emerged. region adistinctiveargue inof tradition political is that Central European to It possible trade and therefore proponents of economic protectionism. At the same time, however, they however, sametime, the At protectionism. of economic proponents and therefore trade free of opponents statists, wereusually liberals national the modernizers and As nationalists development and national integration – aliberal constitutional nation-state.” social of instrument be the could that state “a needed they which for nothing”, of out it build but to from state, of the anexisting domination emancipate middle-class society excessive the “theCentral foesof Europe absolutism andpromoters of constitutionalism seek not did to role. powerful apeculiarly attributed therefore and modernization, for a means perceived own nationalin their contexts. development economic of level British) (primarily western the reach to and Nationsociety state, as the main nationalist national andculture identity” modern goal, was at thestrongly coincided same with the projects of nation-building. time Being“ also forcemodernization, which for struggling mainpolitical the liberalsNational also represented inparty unified the Germany. become government the to getting Liberals National of case instance by the for asproven one, Denes, Liberalism, 6. Liberalism, Denes, Cf. Freeden, Foreword, x: Ibid., 1. “In the greater part of nineteenthcentury, liberalism and nationalism, constitutionalism and national tradition, “…moderate types of nationalism suggested that the state could be used as a 22 , they also strived tocreate a modern middle-class civil 17 th and early 20 th century the th national party constructing party national century century Central Europe, 21 , albeitalso an uneasy 24 23 In CEU eTD Collection 26 (national) liberalisms. market order, what also free the givesto some hostile less or lightmore to theforce, questions ideological regarding influential very the protectionist and distinct a book policies as of abovementioned Centralthe in European same time both opponents of opponents both time same atthe were List Friedrich and Marx Karl conflict, class and ofnationalism onissues other each to opposed Being University Press, 1988). 25 still clinging to certain liberal ideals - particularly the ones assumed to have been achieved. been have to assumed ones the particularly - ideals liberal certain to clinging still thereby becameconservative, them of Some various courses. adopted environments, political parties, stemming from nationalthe liberal traditions and finding themselves in changing modernity” party the of “reduced to liberalism got This influenced also gradually of nationalprocess liberalnotioncourse parties. As the of the aggressive forms – for instance even ones based on racialist notions. more of favor in nationalism of kind tolerant relatively and moderate liberal, of extinction) an not (although couldinstance, seeagradual one decline casefor the German Examining types. Nationalism was gaining instrength and intensity and wasalso newforms. adopting actual aswell as their in nationalism question, liberalism and between relation the affected general political and social duringdevelopments second the half of 19 The political traditions evolved through time, beinginfluenced by newideasemerging and social andmodernization. to an obstacle supranational institution ‘universalist’ adangernational ideapresented for the primacy of the powerful, the that as itwasbelieved orientation, secularist a strong also moreover List Friedrich of ones the as doctrines, economic neo-mercantilist of adoption to led This efforts. modernizatory general and nation the of consolidation towards step necessary and part important avery national intervention.wasperceived as economy of the Strengthening absence of state by markeda relative states, inside their order economic free relatively often advocated Denes, Liberalism, 1. See: Roman Szporluk, Communism and nationalism: Karl Marx versus FriedrichList 25 . In cases of Catholic lands a distinct feature of national liberalism was liberalism national of feature distinct a lands Catholic of cases In . laissez-faire capitalism. Nationalism, as conceptualized by FriedrichList, is treated 18 26 from the end of the century onwards, the (Oxford: Oxford (Oxford: th century. This also This century. CEU eTD Collection Längsschnittstudie zurWahlenentwicklung in Deutschland 1871-1933 1995), p. 63. sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung der Freien Universität Berlin 29 28 Conze, Reinhart Koselleck eds. (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1992), pp. 113- 133, p. 131-133. Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland See: nationalist”. “radical and a different form after1900 and especially 1918, carrying more specific like meanings “radical right” (or“left”) 27 liberalism. between division lefta larger tothe and right developed,corresponded extent to this developedsocial of context whereamore landscape unified Germany, political diversified more a In label. “liberal” the replace partly to began which observed, be can notions Through the second half of 19 EUROPEAN POLITICS AND “POLITICALCAMPS”ASPECULIAR FEATURES OFCENTRAL 1.5. “PROGRESSIVE” AND“FREEMINDED”AS POLITICAL LABELS social or democracy. Catholicism of political for parties instance than even by might public,the although havebeen illiberalthey less quite liberal inor sense substantial exist,inheritingparties continuedofnational to liberalism the tradition perceivedassuch and ceased to be national termsby of party thepolitics. It may endwell be argued thatof the liberalsthe (in the strict19 sense of the in “heirsliberalism” of word) feasible talk about to more perhaps is itof century therefore on the From turn the force. as liberalism a political of begunfragmentation already to the contributed which modernity), existing the towards hostile turning (sometimes streams nationalist radical Parties and politicians from wing that began toflirtwith newly the socialistemerging or meaning, in ‘left’ regardtothe especially or–generally liberalism. –‘younger’ speaking On the other hand the old opposition between “liberal” and “radical” and “liberal” between opposition old the hand other the On Cf. Denes, Liberalism, 2. The notion “radical” itself started to gradually disappear after 1850 as a special party label only to reappear in reappear to only label party aspecial as 1850 after disappear gradually to started itself “radical” notion The Jürgen R. Winkler, 29 Whereas the latter, united in the National Liberal Party liberal old the retained in Party united National Liberal the latter, Whereasthe Sozialstruktur, politische Traditionen und Liberalismus, Eine empirische PeterWende, “Radikalismus” in: th century an emergence of new, specifically Central European Central specifically of new, an emergence century th century. , 19 Vol.5: Pro-Soz, 4.Auflage, Otto Brunner,Werner Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe : historisches , Band 75 (Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, Westdeutscher (Wiesbaden: 75 Band , 28 But at same time itis also true that , Schriften des Zentralinstituts für 27 also began to lose its CEU eTD Collection other designations as “freedom”/”German freedom” ( as“freedom”/”German designations other ( Party Progressive Czech Masaryk’s official name of Young Czech Party ( Slovene liberals. The same was distinctive for the Czech lands as the latter was also in the national” ( new political strategies and rallying calls ornot. forideologicalnew realities lifeand bethey on of political need shifts, dependent resulting and“liberal”Thementioned“conservative” anymore. newlabelspoint alsoto certain between dichotomy simple tothe correspond not did characterization whose parties, new of introduced types century of 19th the last decades lifein the political diversification of liberal by principles stemmingfrom parties, traditions. Broadeningother and of electorate the All adoption splits liberalism, in as well with as coincided certain this of originally organized Party”. as “Free-minded of thename bore Liberal Party the Hungary by Party ( Progressive Radical adopted the unintentional as well as collective, intentional. and Thatindividual choice, recognition of human is a the keyproduct is to language a liberal that disposition, recognize to also to itis the introductionAnd ofindeterminacy. ofconceptual nature of the because interpretations its and language of malleability the appreciating 32 conditions change, or asknowledge diversifies.”(Freeden, Ideologies, 61.) cultural and social as concepts political ofnew emergence the out rule this does Nor content. agreed its 31 eds. (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1992), pp. sozialen Sprache inDeutschland 30 “progressive”Both ( environments. political diversified less in those visible so not least at was liberalism right and left the between split the although also, lands European Central in other observed be can the left. name, new labels as “progressive” ( “Understanding the past meanings of concepts is a way of shedding light on current concepts, and a means of a means and concepts, current on light of way shedding a is ofconcepts meanings past the “Understanding of not though concept, ofapolitical absence or presence ofthe indicator asa rough acts of usage tradition “the Rudolf Vierhaus,“Liberalismus” in: 30 The term “liberalism” was becoming increasingly unpopular and similar patterns similar and unpopular increasingly becoming was “liberalism” term The deutschnational napreden 31 ) prevailed, although the aforementioned two were also In present. aforementioned two the although ) prevailed, , Vol.3 H-Me, 4. Auflage, Otto Brunner, Werner Conze, Reinhart Koselleck ) and “free-minded” 741-785, pp. 743-744, 782. Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe : historisches Lexikon zur politisch- fortschrittlich ý Národní svobodomyslná strana eská stranapokrokováeská Strana radikaln Szabadelv 20 32 ) and “free-minded” ( ) and“free-minded” (svobodomiseln Ħ Párt deutschfreiheitlich Č , which could also be translated pokroková ) . In Austrian German context, ) labels were adopted by adopted labels were ) ). The former name was freisinnig ) and later by Tomas ) and “German ) appeared on ) CEU eTD Collection - or even the strongest one. Already before the turn of the century, national orientation national century, the of turn the before Already one. strongest the even or - ground common distinctive a be to continued usually idea national the that though, stressed be 19 back to its roots they traced Since “progress”. and “free-mindedness” of notions stressed the but setof doctrines one cling not to they did force, orientations and ideologies. Usually still perceiving themselves as mainmodernization the campslatter includeof liberalism, andvarious factions parties could non-liberal the of political Besides the whichbedefinedstrictly-speaking circles, perhaps could asproponents “national”. to corresponded also very often or“free-minded” usually“progressive” what group, labeledas“liberal”, moreheterogeneous include Roman could Catholic)third, the Marxist the theChristian and conservative, (usually camps principal three The following. broader their and parties political oriented similarly “camps” ( by markedcentury were often political so-called einer odereiner mehrerenParteien vertreten wurde.” (Vierhaus, Liberalismus, 744.) meint vonAnfang an einVerständnis der politischenWelt und ein Konzept ihrer Gestaltung,auch mit derGeschichte das dernichtparteipolitischen bloß vonLiberalismus nicht identisch. ‘Liberalismus’ 62.) als politischer Begriff Concepts, (Freeden, thought.” and 33 language of political pluralism overwhelming transparency into our control of language, and to a suitable modesty, and scholarly restraint, in the face of the the in lifemay be feature new of observed labels, another emergence of political In addition to the ideas. to attitudes different ofalso original emergedthe liberal life andtherefore political realities in newly politics to approaches in different leastnotthis alsoresulted Lastbut alliances. or orientations diversity of aswell as lackof orientation, with “liberals” faced the landscapes issues. concrete on stances and policies certain of political power, the nature and purpose of law and similar, and does not necessarily point to general aboutboundaries Liberalism isidea developments. primarily an about political order, socio-political by affected general liberalism was deeply of The nature organized “Die Geschichte des Begriffs ‘Liberalismus’ ist jedoch mit der Geschichte der Benennung liberaler Parteien, liberaler Benennung der Geschichte der mit jedoch ist ‘Liberalismus’ Begriffs des Geschichte “Die fin-de-siecle Central Central PoliticalEurope. landscapes as they evolved by endof the 19 21 33 New manners of Newmannerspolitics of andchanged party th century national liberalism, it should it liberalism, national century Lager , tabori ), comprising ), th CEU eTD Collection particularly period. in clear interwar particularly the became which stances, and developments in ideological differences also along brought areas, Slavic and German the between orientations national-political Different movements. Marxist or conservative Catholic in case the was as contexts, national the by influenced a much higherwas to degree idea national development the its except itself, fundament, loss in of asolid ideological Lacking disintegration, party policies. and changes orientation continued by accompanied was this heirs, liberal national or camp” “third the of case In obsolete. partly became politics of division tri-partite mentioned the example, for nationalisms right far emergence of new types of political movements and specific ideologies, as agrarianisms and states with respective political landscapes, to namejust the few most important ones. With the and advent of mass politics, as well as dissolution of empires and consolidation of new nation transformation. This happened duetodifferentfactors – introduction the of suffrageuniversal thorough of process a experienced landscapes political The further. situation the changed - onwards century of from turn already the the andcertain - period extent to interwar In the nationalism. nation, on generalpoliticalthe circumstances, depending of asdid degreeandnature the their and nation from varied thereby ‘illiberality’ or ‘liberality’ Their force. political a as liberalism national heirs of “third camp”represented partiesthe of this be It couldargued that therefore denominators. common important Marxismrepresented an towards aversion also sometimes and anticlericalism that, to addition strongest unifying link,central ideological and concept mainpointidentification. of In to the nationalin contrast Nevertheless, also. movements socialist liberals and conservative Christian distinguished and their heirs the appeal to national idea still did not represent the 22 CEU eTD Collection underground organized Communists began to gain mentionable influence. mentionable 36 gain to began Communists organized underground order inAustria in 1933/34. Only after February the events of 1934 and banthe Social on Democratic Party the be treated as the identical to the strong Social Democratic Party and its following up to the end of parliamentary 35 zu verbreitern versuchten.” (Ibid.) beeinflusst, sich mit Hilfe vonVorfeldorganisationen zwar nicht zu Volksparteien, aber dochzu Wählerparteien Denken entsprach, während die Konservativen, auch vonder or 1914 entstehenden radikalenRechten “Vorallem die Liberalen hielten amkonsequentesten an diesem Prinzip fest,das ihrem individualistischen Weltkriegenden (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer,2001), p. 150. 34 “2limping ½ ( Marxist and Catholic the to addition Austrian In interwarrepublic. in caseof the can be camp observed division A tri-partite clear been closely examined by historiography. alsoAshave they such liberal traditions. national of oldthe successors at least heirs or the representing as bythepublic by or themselves either perceived were which political parties, existed still there Nevertheless, level. a high to atmosphere political the impacted regimes respective of establishment and Socialism National and fascism bolshevism, as ideologies between alliance fivemain the emergencethe Furthermore, of political aggressive parties. even inthat country, was democraticbeing bymeans order securedonly of permanent in And time.a certain at point rule forms of authoritarian by ruled different Czechoslovakia, except countries, the of all with atmosphere anti-individualist overall and tendencies illiberal marked by particularly politics wasmoreover time of that European The caseof Central popularor although parties, they do to strived so. ( elite parties liberal and conservative parties of Western, Northern and Central Europe still bore traits of systems themselves developing tothe realities of life political gradual and of transformation party the inadapting challenges and troublesome by great facedespecially were Liberal politics Although the existence of Austrian Communist Party cannot be left ignored, this camp can be to a large extent be toalarge can camp this ignored, be left cannot Party Communist of Austrian existence the Although zwischen Politik Lebensweisen, Mentalitäten, Staaten, und Gesellschaften 1918-1939, Europa Mai, Gunther Lexikon zur Geschichte derParteien in Europa . Despite the already begun process of reorganization 1914thetraditional reorganization before begun of process Despite already the Honoratiorenparteien hinkend ) party system” ). 35 34 camps, politicalforces farstrongest the Austrian in the As such they hardly transformed themselves into mass into themselves transformed hardly they such As 36 , also a third, much weaker one was present. Most (Stuttgart: Kröner, 1981), p. 442. 23 CEU eTD Collection members of the former Czech Progressive Party. formerProgressive Czech members of the pre-WWIthe Czech Young Party (National Liberal thereby Party), also uniting some heirto most direct the asrepresenting labelled be could party This coalition. “petka” ruling Czechoslovak National Democrats ( Democrats National Czechoslovak form “camp”.a uniform In National addition to the farweaker andAgrarians, Socialists non-Catholicmore espoused various leanings parties numerous, political not were anddid diversified and one more – landscapewas political the itspart could Czech more precisely – Czechoslovakia In interwar hardly treat it asclericalism and oppositiondivided to Marxism. intoanti- orientation, nationalist three German were parties both for Common GdVP. camps.mentioned The non-Marxistmorelessat having its or ownspecialagendabutsametime the anally acting as of above the and ( Party People’s Greater-German wasthe thirdthe camp of The main representative 38 Österreichische Gesellschaft fürMitteleuropäische Studien/Humanior, 1997), p. 160. in Socialistagrarianistparty, 1930’s.the existed anindependent Therealso the but tookagradual group finally farthe path to toward right align itself with National the classes camp” ( camp” classes 37 ( camp” nationalist often namedoften camp” byhistoriographers“the third simply ( Grossdeutsche Volkspartei Ibid., 183. Krzysztof Glass, Barbara Serloth, bürgerliches Lager bürgerliches Lager derDeutschnationalen ), whichloosely 17Germanunited nationalist and liberal national Das Selbstverständnis des österreichischen Liberalismus ) 37 ý or “national liberal camp” ( eskoslovenská národnídemokracie eskoslovenská 24 ), it has been also referred to as the “middle das dritteLager national-liberales ), existed as part of (Wien/Pozna ) or “German Landbund Lager Ĕ : ). 38 , CEU eTD Collection mentioned divisions into camps differed from nation to nation and from land to land in their land to land from and nation to nation from differed camps into divisions mentioned matter, although Habsburg Empire.therefore inthat nothe landswere Slovene exception early 20 representedfollowing. a structures feature of political Such distinctivethe nazorski was marked by division into three so-called political or ideological ( ideological camps or political so-called three into by division was marked Slovene political landscape, as it developed towards the end of the 19 ASONEOFITS COMPONENTS PROGRESSIVE CAMP MAIN LANDSCAPEOFSLOVENELANDSAND 2.1. POLITICAL in camp era. observed the nationalism, which acted -asitwill be- asan exposedlater importantunifying factor of that Atcamp. same the time they mostwere alsothe vocal and of proponents principled Yugoslav andKramer.Albert Duringfaction 1920’sand30’s the this grouprepresented core the of their Žerjav ledby Gregor ‘young’my progressives, largercircle the of of devote to attention part follow. will thereby I to whicharegoing inchapters discussed issues the understanding for necessary development, its interwar on information some general andprovide thesis of Themain is historiographers. my this chapter subject tointroduce the purpose therefore of “progressive”provide ageneral IintendOn following the concerning Slovene to pages account political forces, commonly referred to as “liberal” on part of the Slovene 2. SLOVENE “PROGRESSIVE” CAMP, SLOVENE “PROGRESSIVE” ITS GROUPS 2. AND th tabori century century inCentral especiallypolitics CisleithanianEurope, the part of (ex-) PARTIES DURING INTERWARTHE PERIOD ), which comprised similarly oriented political parties, circles and their broader 25 th century and thereafter, Gesinnungslager fin desiecle fin and ; CEU eTD Collection movement. agriculture 55% of in livingin Slovene werepopulation of 1940about employedYugoslavia part in population (even towardsthemajority peasant social primarily which solidarity,was oriented Party represented one of the strongest proponents of democracy until the end of 1920’s, but began drifting began but of1920’s, end the until ofdemocracy proponents strongest ofthe one represented Party People’s of Slovene mainstream the Austria in as Similarly other. each resembled degree certain a to politics Catholic Slovene and in Austrian developments the circumstances, political new essentially created states ofnew emergence when war, the after even Moreover, social”. of “Christian label the employed commonly also one, dominant the became gradually which conservatives, Christian of Slovene strain A large counterpart. Austro-German of its part on influence of degree great a enjoyed indeed Catholicism political Slovene 441.) p. 2005), zgodovino, 42 novejšo za Inštitut Knjiga, Mladinska (Ljubljana: International Recognition of Republic of Slovenia: 1848-1992), Vol. 1:1848-1945, Jasna Fischeret al eds. priznanja Republike Slovenije : 1848-1992 stood atroughly 60%. ( 41 1918 prefixthe “All-“ was abandoned. Gradisca,Styria and Carinthia into “All-Slovene People’s Party” ( “Slovene People’s Party” in1905. Initially only a Carniolan party, it merged with its sister parties from Görz- ljudska stranka Party ( People’s – the byasinglepolitical Slovene organization history represented its throughout was opponents, their by “clericals” as labeled commonly group, first The “liberals”. as“clericals” and other and socialists started collaborating with each other against the far stronger Catholic party. Catholic stronger far the against other each 40 with collaborating started socialists and 39 but at the same time engaging in a bitter in a engaging sametime the at but Marxists weaker the resenting both camps, progressive and of Catholic in case characteristic a struggle between verybeginning.the wasespecially from groups, wentThis on them social also extent acertain well as to as ideological positions, different represented Since they camp. Marxist and the “liberals” or “progressives” the conservatives, Catholic War,were the The largelymain Slovene the SecondWorld which up three camps, distinguished politics to War. World First the after their developments in to regard more andeven aspects particular various form, actual In its formative moments and up to the First World War and the following collapse of Austria Hungary, the population peasant Slovene interwar the all in All 66%). (around higher even was proportion this 1918, In Founded in 1892 as “Catholic National Party” ( progressives 1935 after especially and period interwar the in that though, bementioned, should it regard this In 41 42 ), could to a large extent be paralleled to that of the Austrian Christian Social Since the introduction of universal male suffrage in People’s 1907,Slovene malesuffrage introduction Since the universal of – SLS Slovenska novejša zgodovina: od programa Zedinjena Slovenija do mednarodnega ) 40 . Its politics, embracing the ideals of Christian faith, tradition and tradition faith, Christian of ideals the embracing politics, Its . (Slovene Modern History: from United Slovenia Program to the to Program Slovenia United from History: Modern (Slovene Katoliška narodna stranka Kulturkampf 26 Vseslovenska ljudska stranka on almost every issue, labeling each ), the party adopted the name the adopted party ), the ) in 1909.In Slovenska 39 CEU eTD Collection from the regime party. ofpressure forms different to be subjected could sector public in employed andthose areas rural in particularly voters, and ballot secret no was There participate. could districts electoral the inall candidates appointing camp. 47 of progressive part as be treated conditionally can it camps, Catholic and Marxist the outside ‘Masarykian realist’ DragotinLon 46 mildly criticizing ‘clericalism’, it is listed under the category of “other”. Party leader Ivan Šušterši 45 national minority lists are listed under this category. (Ibid.) 1.23% of votes in1920), StjepanRadi 44 1941, Marjan DrnovšekDrago and Bajt eds. (Ljubljana: Nova Revija,1997), p. 329. Election Results in Slovenia) in 43 differences in internal and external political situations. towards authoritariancorporatism in the following decade, although perhaps to a lesserdegree,due to a attitudes. as bepopular of being not treated highly they representative can order curtailed parliamentarian andaheavily generally circumstances Due to undemocratic isblurry. more picture the where results, 1938electoral nextpage showsthe The indexon the (when the governmental list represented the list(when Slovene option)only andCatholics represented 1935(when governmental the 1931 of ones tothe Incontrast mentioning. leastrelevant 1938 elections areat that stressed Index 1: Voting results of 1920’s parliamentary elections in Slovene partof Yugoslavia interwar and period its electoral stood atsupport roughly from60% of votes the 1923 on. in more the increased even power Its force. political Slovene strongest the Party represented 1927 1925 1923 Assembly) (Constitutient 1920 During 1930’s all religious, “tribal” (ethnic) and regional parties were banned and only parties and lists 4139 (1.78%) votes went to “Slovene RepublicanParty of Peasants and Workers”, led by Slovene 879 (0.49%) votes went to “National People’s Party”,a conservative party led by Slovenepre-1918 People’s In addition to parties and lists representing regional interests (for instance “Transmura List” which gained which List” “Transmura instance (for interests regional representing lists and parties to addition In Summarized on the basis of: BojanBalkovec, “Rezultati parlamentarnih volitev v Sloveniji” (Parliamentary (106247) 59.94% (105303) 56.32% (107976 (108855)) (60.96%) 60.46% (58971 votes) 37.265% conservatives Catholic þ . Since the main aim of the party was to counter Slovene People’s Party, thereby also 45 Slovenska kronika XX. Stoletja þ ar. Due to the Slovene realists’ intellectual origins and the party’s positioning ü ’s “CroatianPeasants’ Party” (gained 16404 votes in1925) and German (42237) 23.83% (47390 (43251)) (23.13%) 25.35% (34525) 19.34% (51484 votes) 32.53% Progressives 27 (Slovene XX. Century Chronicle), vol.1: 1900- 46 (17988) 10.15% (12562) 6.72% (19030) 10.65% (45830 votes) 28.96% Marxists (10783) 6.08% (21712 (25851)) (13.82%) 11.61% (17046 (16167)) (9.05%) 9.545% (1960 votes) 1.23% Others 47 Still,it be should 44 43 CEU eTD Collection more than around 10%. around than more of the Marxist camp diminishedpower as socialists electoral the and Afterwards legal organizations vote. Slovene of29% the almost of the bannedgathered communists together Communists and neverattained Democrats 24. p. 1995), 51 zgodovino, novejšo za Inštitut (Ljubljana: 1955 :znanstveno poro 50 49 359.). 48 lacked andclear definite ideological foundations (Catholicism, Marxism) and included it two, other the to In contrast three. ofthe heterogeneous most itself,was the to referring when “national” or“free-minded” “national-progressive”, using as“progressive”, names The third camp, commonly as “liberal” to referred –especially by opponentsits -butusually factor. a major political represent not camps anddidthree weakestof the wasbyfarthe this fragmentation, mentioned the causes, especially different from Dueto underground. to operate the beingbannedin which, 1921,continued despite Party Communist the and groups) splinter of a number into splitting (themselves Socialists reformist between division internal constant by marked was workers, industrial towards less During the interwar period, Marxist camp, the ‘youngest’ of the three and oriented more or Index 2: 1938electoral results in Slovene partof Yugoslavia participated. camps thepolitical of all andrepresentatives elections the attended ofvoters 67.61% did not participatedidnot in andthe overall turnout Slovene landswas only 46.96%) Radical Union) ofYugoslav part as (Slovene People’s Party Catholic conservatives (Milan Stojadinovi list Governmental As it can be seenfrom the table on the previous page, at the 1920 elections to the Constituent Assembly Social Summarized on the basis of: ibid. and Zdenko Ibid., 390. zgodovina, novejša (Slovenska 30%. around was turnout the estimation Party’s People’s Slovene to According 78.60% 49 ü ) þ ilo (Key Characteristics of Slovene Politics in years 1929-1955: a Scientific Report) of Yugoslavia) of Socialists National Party) Progressives app. 14% (Socialist Party (Yugoslav and United Opposition list Opposition United (Vladko Ma ý epi þ et al., 28 groups from all camps) (dissident fringe leftist Opposition Slovene Popular Front/United þ Klju ek) þ app. 7% ne zna 51 50 þ ilnosti slovenske politike v letih 1929- Dimitrije Ljoti ZBOR movement ZBOR of section Slovene 0.52% 48 , in 1938 ü ’s list CEU eTD Collection Vodopivec,Mahni Joža in Ideas) and State 53 (Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997), pp. 194-201, p.199. ( Slovenes” “Young the by followed Slovenska trideseta leta: simpozij 1995 52 the nationally oriented literary,intellectual and political circles of the first half of 19 could roots be back progressive traced to camp,of liberal Development whose Slovene the or autonomists. different camps politics.framing the state impacting Asignificantnovelty, also degree the for of support was therebycrucial difference in Slovenes that Yugoslavia possessed anincomparably larger in power the divisionmany nationalin pre-warAustrianthe frame which traditions evolved –with political the betweenbea limited to and paralleled inthissense politicscan affected divisionsto degree these only Yugoslav developed,largely distinguished by into three ideologicaldivision unitarist camps. All-Yugoslav forces internalin describedpolitical landscape adistinct preceding additionally paragraphs, the and Slovene and chapter in previous the stressed asalready Nevertheless, time. at that unit administrative even an not was Slovenia landscapes, political andperspective communities political existing contexts political Czech also and Austrian German, Whereas the case. an ingrate lands represent Slovene interwar that be that out pointed hasIt to the atleasttwenties) or groups (during thirties) the with agendas anddistinct goals. campinintowhen fourso period, interwar partiesthat to regard to the three (in wasdivided especially is This case. in their liberalism about speak to proper conditionally only is it case, revolution andpolitical general European of developments 18 the constitutional clericalism order, civicFrench to of and devotedness achievements the anti- were denominators common The socialism. non-Marxist moderate to conservatism factions of various orientations, which could be described as ranging from secular Cf. Janko Pleterski, “Politika naroda v krizi dužbe, države in idej” (Politics of a Nation inCrisis of Society, Cf. ErvinDolenc, “Slovenski intelektualci in njihove delitve” (Slovene Intellectuals and TheirDivisions) in 53 Slovenska trideseta leta: simpozij 1995 þ eds. (Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997), pp. 43-57, p.47. (Slovene Thirties: Simposium 1995), PeterVodopivec, Mahni Joža Mladoslovenci 29 (Slovene Thirties: Simposium 1995), Peter in one or other way correspond to legally to way incorrespond other one or ) in the second half, and - in the strict the in - and half, second in the ) th and 19 th centuries th 52 century, . In any þ eds. CEU eTD Collection zgodovino Political and Ideal Characterof Slovene Liberalism During Yearsthe 1894-1918), 55 (1982): pp. 19-24, p.23.) (Slovene Liberal Camp and razpadanje” its in njegovo Disintegration), tabor liberalni “Slovenski Melik, (Vasilij revenues. oftax quarters three representing opposed, the party leader, lawyer and writer Ivan Tav 54 evolved and became visible. This can atleast partly be attributed to differences in social and developmentcouldbe observed inthe progressive camp,as specific different groupings During the interwarstrong period elements ofcleavage and resultingof distinct courses ones. and Catholic socialist tothe comparison industrialstrongly.Among unions progressivethe workers werevery trade in weak liberal professions and small entrepreneurs. peopleof of the most as aswell elites, intellectual and major of economic part the attracted indeed camp,asit progressive the be to could ascribed character ‘bourgeois’ predominantly strata andProgressive politics found followers amongand supporters people coming from all social belongingunitingstrongest andfactors. guiding toother hand, the national idea was emphasizedvarious especially and therefore represented one of the were stillprofessional politics resting their orientation, national Slovene embraced primarily strongly movements Democrat Social on other even and ideological Catholic the also Although idea. national the namely – period interwar the during foundations. groups. In case ofcommon presentfrom ground, verythe beginnings anduniting also all progressive groups the progressives, Nevertheless, on the Kranjsko ( for Carniola” Party “National of founding -tothe partisan sense to a certain extent bourgeoisie’ (storekeepers, innkeepers, lawyers and innkeepers,lawyers teachers) bourgeoisie’ (storekeepers, and‘petty wealthierrural peasants limited to wasmostly for progressives support gainunable in amajority municipalities. tovotes other of In countryside,the wherethe evenretain itmanaged whereas was Ljubljana, whereitamajority to 1907, support after Cf.Jurij Perovšek,“Socialni, politi Three years after the introduction of universal suffrage in 1907, to whichNational Progressive Party was , Yr. 32, No. 1-2 (1992): pp. 3-14, p. 5. ) in There anotherdistinguishing 1894,presentsus ) feature. was distinctivewith one þ ni inni idejni zna Prispevki za zgodovino delavskega gibanja þ þ aj slovenskega liberalizma vletih 1894-1918” (Social, ar boasted about one quarter of votes at the same time 54 30 Its strongholds were the cities, particularly 55 , the Catholics were leading were Catholics , the Prispevki zanovejšo Prispevki Narodna stranka za , vol. 1-2/yr. 22 CEU eTD Collection between1868 1945. and 56 identifyinglabel. with themselves that Theirnewspaper The ‘elders’ “liberalism” – explicitlysometimes although – still rarely spoke about thereby political stage. interwar the left completely never ‘youths’, prominent most the ‘outliving’ even them of state, remaining political strength of the older circle swiftly diminished. Still, the elders, some circle of liberal ‘youths’ ( these politicians officially still held but the leadingalready posts had toshare powerwith the KarelHribar (1851-1941), andVladimir In (1862-1926) Triller (1871-1954). 1918 Ravnihar war prominent progressive political figures,most notably Ivan Tav roughly be defined. Thefirst and oldest group were the‘elders’ ( can politics liberal Slovene forming the actively circles generational important as three Among progressive markedpoliticians divisions also profoundly generational the interwar era with economicmoregroups, latter aboutspecific countryside. the concerned issuesof two these between partly leastdifferent at were for certain parties support or engagement Motives lawyers political for strata propertied of and the supporters. rural progressive like and teachers groups andhalf-educated educated be between could discerned divide middle class progressive urban-based between one importantly the most of differences, such a result a certain extent to core and its ruralthe end of First World War, a following.topic beto more precisely presented in the next subchapter, was In the at parties a number of into politics progressive of fragmentation context mentioned already The not. of countrysidepolitics. Sometimes views mutually of and interests groups these concurred and sometimes another progressive interests, beingvoicedprofessional The sameapplies distinct through alsotothe cultural milieus from which these originated orwhichgroupings they claimed torepresent. Slovenski narod (Slovene Nation) was aSlovene daily newspaper with the longest tradition, being published mladini ). During the first five first newly). Duringyearsof established the Yugoslav 31 Slovenski narod starini þ ), comprising pre- the ), 56 ar (1851-1923), Ivan ar (1851-1923), published anarticle CEU eTD Collection 61 ( Co-operative” Press Slovenski narod including press, progressive the all 1930’s During newspapers. Slovene allthe among circulation highest wing of progressivesby it mid-1920’s became the leading progressive newspaper, thereby also having the way there through academic movement of “national radicals”. During the firstdecade this During the “national of radicals”. movement academic way through there party entered The Kramer-Žerjav in1909and,asitgroup was mentioned,politics made their theleft”. towards leaderscentury of “national movementradical students” –provided amuch necessary “shift supposedly from suffered abovementionedand errors ‘youths’ the beginning– atthe 20 of 60 youths’ credits for “regeneration” of Tav camp.Under youths’ of for “regeneration” progressive credits farewell itinfact spokeaboutand the memory praise the deadpolitician,the of aboveall 59 58 leaderTav Ivan World liberal beforeWar.When the occasion of of the on ‘elder’ death already “decadence” liberalism”. “sterile German itwith and who AlbertKramer almost (1882-1943), entirely label, theliberal abandoned associating Žerjav (1882-1929) Gregor around gathered ‘youths’ of with circle the The casewasdifferent Europe”. for life political after long centuries inof slavish subservience feudaland absolutistic erasof were parliamentarism and as democratism same the field intellectual the “in being progress” basis factual cultural of and possible the itserious, only becauserepresents appropriate, such and no typeother ofliberalism had been advocated in Slovene lands“and is still only that stressed was It conscience”. personal of laws free to according life original for will freedom in intellectual sense, love freedom for internal of thought and independence” and“a of “love“abeing political meant hackneyed catchword somehow our life” essentially for 57 with a title “Some Notice” (“ “Some Notice” with a title “Umrl Ivan Tav Ivan “Umrl “Umrl Ivan Tav Ivan “Umrl Ibid. “Malo poduka” (Some Notice), Jutro (Morning) was published between1920 and 1945. Originally founded as a party paper of the ‘young’ 58 , was concentrated and published by “Jutro Consortium” ( þ þ þ ar” (Ivan Tav (Ivan ar” ar” (Ivan Tav (Ivan ar” ar an article appeared in their daily newspaper in daily their appeared ar an article 61 Zadruga napredni tisk þ þ ar Died), ar ar Died), ar Slovenski narod Malo poduka Jutro Jutro ). 59 , February 20 1923. , February 20 1923. “Liberalism” in their view entered a state of astate view entered in their “Liberalism” , August, 23 1924. ”) 57 32 where it was stated that “The word liberalism” word “The that stated was it where Konzorcij Jutra Jutro 60 inmourn, bid to order þ ) and “Progressive ) and ar’s leadership itar’s th CEU eTD Collection Slovene Liberalism in Years 1891-1921) (Ljubljana: Nova revija, 2000), pp. 138-139.). zna 64 36 (1982): pp. 219-230, p.220. 63 Masarykianism in Slovene Lands: 1895-1914) (Ljubljana: Slovenska Matica, 1987), p. 80. 62 figure nextKramer. to inmost second the wereunited progressive prominent politicians represented a single party, also bementioned. not Although amember of ‘youths’the circle, Pucelj during 1930’s, when 1920’sleadermovement, the Pucelj independent should(1879-1945), of agrarianist Slovene Ivan of name the point this At politics. party of view of point the from subchapter next the core of progressive in politics interwarthe period, what will be ingreaterdetail in described of the instance.politiciansfor represented Thisgroup MilkoBrezigar andPavel Pestotnik Ribnikar, Adolf Puc, Dinko Pirkmajer, Otmar as politicians important locally other many andfrequent most Slovene progressive in ministers interwar Yugoslav includedgovernments, The group Kramerof around and ‘youths’,progressive gathered Žerjav as theleadingfigures perceivingits own progress in developmentthe of all individual good forces”. a way individual of an seeing hissuccess happiness inthe own and group of the the group already in youth bewant the that 1905stated “doesto not liberal,but social-individualistic in newspaper, by edited Žerjav Kramer,and radicals national – the future progressive ‘youths’ – in national spirit and contribute to the “all-round emancipation” of Slovene nation. Slovene of emancipation” “all-round the to contribute and spirit national in peoplethe lectures toeducate andlibraries anumber of national organized traveling radicals among popularmasses and broad “From adopting the slogan the nation the nation”to the work” “small about ideas Masaryk’s by Influenced circumstances. existing the ignoring Slovene politicians and ingeneralforindolent, lacking intellectuals being program a true and “solving national question” Slovene the reform incultural and political, economic in toattain main spheres theirorder goal of ‘inner aprogressive thatpushedfor young radical opposition’ group represented of students Cf. Irena GantarGodina, “Narodno radikalno dijaštvo” (National Radical Students), Godina, Gantar Irena Omladina þ aj slovenskega liberalizma v letih 1891-1921 , nr. 11/yr. 1 (1905) (Quoted from: Zvonko Bergant, T.G. Masarykmasarykovstvo in naSlovenskem : 1895-1914 (Slovene Classical Liberalism, Ideal and Political Character of Character Political and Ideal Liberalism, Classical (Slovene 62 . They criticized the liberal leaders as well as well as leaders liberal the criticized They . 33 Slovenski klasi þ ni liberalizem, idejno-politi (T. G. Masaryk and Zgodovinski 64 þ asopis, 63 In their nr. þ ni CEU eTD Collection Socialisti (Archive of Republic the of Slovenia, dislocated unit III, AS1931: Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve of the Yugoslav National Party Youth inLjubljana 1937) (Ljubljana: 1937), pp. 9-15; p. 14. and more populism [ more dynamics spirit, fighting “fresh with party the strengthen to determined lands, Slovene in National Party Yugoslav of youth wing formed the “Adriatic”), they Academic Society Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke: Banovinska skupš 65 as societies academic from emerging and unknown) Andrej and Urši Jože Rus(1904-1992) old around Empire. Habsburg Gathered which and grew upinnewcircumstances state posses did of Yugoslav memories not of the a generation, to belonging nationalists, Yugoslav – themselves called commonly most they - as or progressives young werethe These newideas. and spirit fresh bringing of half thirties, In ‘elders’addition to generation‘youths’, and another of appearedinthe progressives second 27 2010.) (Source: Albert Kramer (in the middle) and Ivan Pucelj (on his right) http://www.dlib.si/v2/StreamDb.aspx?URN=URN:NBN:SI:img-1FNUNYQ1 Jože Rus, “Naša pota, gledanja in težnje” (Our Ways, Viewpoints and Aspirations) in þ ne Republikene Slovenije 1918-1982, t.e. 933, 600-19 OJNS.) Digitalna Knjižnica Slovenije ljudskost ]“ 65 . Theiras anindependent development political wasin group (Digital Library of Slovenia), þ ina 12. septembra 1937 v Ljubljani 34 JNAD Jadran JNAD (Yugoslav Progressive (Yugoslav Omladina (Provincial conference (Provincial , accessed May accessed , þ (1908- CEU eTD Collection progressive press it was represented as an essentially centrist party and moreover a most a moreover party and centrist asanessentially represented itwas press progressive as well as the most vocal and radical proponent of Yugoslav national idea. In Slovene Radicals” from the former Kingdom February 1919 andfinally also with “National Liberals”, the “Progressives” and “Independent of Serbia in May of the same Coalition” and other some Yugoslav nationalistyear. andliberal from groups lands in ex-Habsburg “Serb-Croat with the first itself connected quickly moreover Party Democratic Yugoslav united in a singleparty. Serbian liberal politician Ljuba Davidovi Ljuba politician liberal Serbian led by Party, newDemocratic the Yugoslav name Slovene sameasits predecessor Bearing the party inall-state and Serbs, Croats of Kingdom newlyfounded the wasformed. Slovenes stranka ( Party” “Yugoslav Democratic form joint the to Gradisca”) andfor Görz Party for Styria” “National Progressive and “National Party the notably merged with other similarly oriented political organizations from other Slovene lands (most (Liberalism and the Question of Slovenehood: National Politics of the Liberal Camp During the Years 1918- Years the During Camp 1929) (Ljubljana: Modrijan, Liberal 1996.), pp. of the 129-130. Politics National of Slovenehood: Question the and (Liberalism 66 “National Progressive Party” ( Party” Progressive “National its ownpolitical “Nationalorganization - the Party for Carniola”. This party to was renamed national liberal independentlycircles, the entered political in stage 1894 with foundingthe of As already mentioned, stemmingfrom the of tradition 19 politics, progressive THE INTERWARERA OFDURING 2.2. PARTIES THE SLOVENEPROGRESSIVE CAMP succeededin political andexpressingattaining prominence ideas theirparty through politics. endthe hindered by beginning of Second Worldthe the War. this reason they never For Jurij Perovšek, Jurij - JDS ). For a short time at the end of the WWI Slovene progressives were therefore Liberalizem in vprašanje slovenstva :nacionalna politika liberalnega tabora v letih 1918-1929 Narodno napredna stranka Narodno napredna ü , became the strongest political force in the country, in the force political strongest the became , 35 – NNS Jugoslovanska demokratskaJugoslovanska ) inin 1905and) June 1918 66 This way the first the way This th century CEU eTD Collection 70 69 68 andright demagogues on extreme left, aswellas tribal separatists and tribal extreme hegemonists.” (Ibid.) on the reactionaries both balance in held Party Democratic has power solid its and program its “With the joined finally 1928 in NSS weakened entirely then the differences, these all Despite time. cultural autonomy for each of the ‘tribes’ and federal administrative organization atin also the treatmentthe of nationality the being nationalistsquestion, but Yugoslav demandingsame demagoguery from the left.” (“Uvodnik” (Editorial), (…) incitement of the masses frombelow, (…) debauchery from above,reaction from the andright 67 JDS ‘bourgeois’ inthe saw they representative main whose liberalism, economic as well as internationalism, and Marxism attacked counterparts Slovene Yugoslav ofsocialismtype socialisti ( Party” “National Socialist wasthe democrats, social former disappointed as some unions aswell progressive trade from partly newThe originating party, second coreprogressives’the views,it as started embracing ideas of Slovene national individuality. Party” ( Peasants’ oriented movement. agrarianist itsspecial, essentially becoming a own course but adopted peasantry quickly was foundedoriginally byrural members ofJDS weaken to for SLSamongsupport the ( Party” Agrarian “Independent the them, of First JDS. of those to opposed sometimes different positions, which introduced policiesbut adopted and as“liberal”,Marxists were inleastfounded in labeled tradition,1919. They at partly rooted byCatholics and were that On the other hand, the Slovene progressive camp started to fragment, as two new parties were extremes. building, agentimportant state of safeguard aswellanecessary instabilities against and all Samostojna kmetijska stranka Ibid., 118. Cf. ibid., 117. Cf . Perovšek, Liberalizem in vprašanje in Liberalizem .Perovšek, Cf “Political work of the Democratic Party has constantly been aimed towards hindering the dangerous extremes, dangerous the hindering towards aimed been constantly has Party Democratic of the work “Political þ 67 na stranka Slovenska kmetska stranka Slovenska kmetska 68 – In yearsthe 1926-1929,after ithad transformeditself into “Slovene NSS 69 ), which strived to pursue a gradual path towards distinctly pursue agradual towards strivedpath to ), which . Following the example of the Czech National Socialists, their – SKS , 115-116. ), led byawealthy), landowner andbutcher Ivan Pucelj, Jutro ), it also stepped into direct confrontation with confrontation direct into stepped also it ), 36 , Jan17 1923.) 70 . They differed from from latter the . They differed Narodno CEU eTD Collection and adopted a new course, leading away from strict Yugoslav national unitarism. After that unitarism. national Yugoslav leading from strict away anew course, andadopted and Gregor Žerjav. Davidovi Žerjav. and Gregor the party party the leader Davidovi around Serbianpart its between JDS whole level the on the of occurred The secondquarrel camp. progressive the of wing class middle urban-based, the as well comprisedmost and persistent of the proponents uncompromising national idea,Yugoslav as same the time at it more,since it even deserves It in my analysis. of attention degree mainstream largest andwill the progressives receive part of Slovenethus circle represented to the very end of Slovene in campafter 1918.Up establish the progressive leadinggroup managed asthe themselves to party politics after‘young’ liberal aroundwing, gathered Gregor Žerjav AlbertKramer,and whoswiftly the outbreak of bythe the conducted financialmalversations, certain happeneddueto The mentioned dispute Second World War, this itAfter that possessceased to any mentionable in prominence politics. year. joining “National 1923 elections, Party” inthefollowing fiasco Radical Serbian the at experiencedbut briefly Party a awakened Vladimir Ravnihar, Progressive old National the 71 Ljubljana ‘ mainly well-to-do the representing Party, WWIProgressive National inFirst so-called1923, the liberal‘elders’, most them of figuresalready prominent pre- of the political second quarrels, of which actually led foundation. its to two itcame to 1923-24 Inyears - participated. liberal tradition national heirsthe of direct important could one Slovene most saythe –or in also progressive core politicians whichthe was the Party Independent Democratic (1924-1929) political JDS, second after organization Party” ( Party” mainstream Sloveneforces, progressive thus“Independent merging with Democratic the Ibid., 245. Samostalna demokratska stranka 71 , got into quarrel with the ‘youths’ and departed the JDS. This group, led the by JDS. departed This group, intoquarrel with and ‘youths’the , got ü and politicians from andpoliticianslands,led from Pribi by ex-Habsburg Svetozar ü started searching for a settlement between Yugoslav nations asettlementYugoslav between searching for started – SDS 37 ). Burghers þ ’ of evi ü CEU eTD Collection followinginternal agreat abolishturmoil, decidedto democracy forcefullyandto try ‘unite’ who, Alexander, king of policies the implementing for atool as functioning party, a regime renamed itself JNS into in 1933. list in 1931. They formed a party, called Yugoslav Radical Peasant Democracy, the next year, which in turn 76 ally. The latter officially dissolved itself to merge withSDS in 1928. 75 Democratic Party (Davidovi 74 73 72 stranka ( Party” National the“Yugoslav joined ‘elders’, the some of as well SKS, and former SDS from leading progressives exist, the to allowed were parties all-state only where order, parliamentarian curtailed heavily by later and I. Alexander king In differentpolitical ofmarkedcircumstances first1930’s, by dictatorshipa straightforward of Index 3: Proportions of votes between the parties inside the progressive camp camp. that main of the became thus representative progressives of Slovene generation well by as majority the SDS,of Slovene progressive comprising voters. theyounger limited more orless to the ex-Habsburg lands, where it was supported mainly by the Serbs, as Independent Democratic Party (SDS) under the leadership of leadershipDemocratic underthe Party Pribi Independent of (SDS) unitaristthe wingincluding party, of the all Sloveneof the politicians, seceded andformed 1927 1925 1923 Assembly) (Constitutient 1920 Yugoslav National Party evolved from a ruling group of politicians, who stood as candidates on governmental on candidates as stood who of politicians, group a ruling from evolved Party National Yugoslav Independent Democratic Party achieved 65%in1927 togetherwith theNational Socialist Party electoralas its National Socialists collaborated with liberal ‘elders’ (members of National Radical Party) Under and this Yugoslavsection independent regional and local lists, as well as the National Radical Party, arelisted. Summarized on basis of: Balkovec, Rezultati. – JNS ). Being the only politicalpermitted organization until 1935 (27460) 65,01% (23669) 54.72% (14661) 42.46% (12288 votes) 23.87% Party (1925, 1927) Democratic Independent (1920, 1923) Party, Yugoslav Democratic 75 ü ) in1925. (Balkovec, Rezultati.) (9900) 23.44% (12332) 28.51% (11023) 31.93% (33010 votes) 64.12% (1927) Slovene Peasants’ Party (1920,1923,Party 1925) Agrarian Independent 38 - (3834) 8.86% (3898) 11.29% (6186 votes) 12.015% Party Socialist National Jugoslovenska nacionalna Jugoslovenska þ evi 74 ü . The new party newparty . The was 76 , this was basically 72 (4877) 11.55% (3416) 7.99% (4943) 14.32% - Others 73 CEU eTD Collection reflected well in the self confident attitude of their Catholic opponents whose main attitude newspaper whose wellinof Catholic selfconfident theirreflected the opponents Weakness memory half the campinthe thirties second the progressive of deadking.of the of Alexander’sin coup 1929) and proclaiming the themselves as only betray whodidnot ones, 77 which they clang until to course, nationalist duetotheYugoslav risingof unpopularity especially internal cleavages, the end, praising the Kingdom Yugoslavia” ( of “traditions of JanuaryDomovina Slovenski Narod, the 6 due totheir entrenched positions and in connections newspapersinfluential economy, ( Kramer and Ivan Pucelj, retained a comparatively small degree of political power more or less by Albert Slovene composed led progressives of itself 1936.Its after part, asaparty again JNS landed in opposition and its quickly power eroded, although itmanaged to consolidate power in 1935. zajednica asnewturned, governmental “Yugoslavparty Radical Union” ( tables the assassinated, King was Alexander after Soon Party. People’s dissolved Slovene various formsof upon political and put economic followersthe pressure of officially Province in thepower succeed, despite concentration Drava did all of The latter not administrative all. for and once lands in Slovene Catholicism political of power foundation of a single regimeideology, nationalist whereasthe Yugoslav in were progressives’ with Slovene accordance party coincided“Unifier”, the as also labeled king, the of Aims nation. homogenous wella single, into Yugoslavia with their common goal of crushing the Drava Province (or Province Drava 77 – in hands of progressives, dissolution of major Catholic organizations, as well as major aswell organizations, Catholic of dissolution inhands of progressives, JRZ ), which included Slovene Catholic conservatives, wasformed and took Banovina ) encompassed the entire Slovene part ofYugoslavia. part Slovene entire the ) encompassed Sokol Kraljevine Jugoslavije Sokol ) and mass organizations as the gymnastic society of “Falcon society asthegymnastic mass ) and organizations 39 ). They were encountering increasing They wereencountering ). Jugoslovenska radikalna th “(the date of “(theof date king Jutro, CEU eTD Collection In that program their vision about needed social and political changes was outlined. was changes political and social needed about vision their program that In Socialisti (Archive of Republic the of Slovenia, dislocated unit III, AS1931: Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve 80 79 (1918-1941)), Time Interwar the in Classes Middle Slovene of Views Political National and Socio-economic (Ideal, 1941)” socialnogospodarski in narodnopoliti 78 in 1940. main sources for this decade. this for sources main viewsexpressed whichwereand not limited only (semi)dictatorship to under its creators. camp Iwill thus liberal use Slovene it, alongthe with in the newspapers, developments as one1930’s of the reflected program Principles” Social and Economic “Political, title the bearing manifesto own their publishing independencesecure level it managing and acertain themselves to of stances towards though, of the Yugoslav behind program leading politiciansandstood official the the generation progressive supported National Party.youngest Officially, the thewarstarted. itsbefore conclusion notreach leadership did JNS the from By Youth Party National Yugoslav the of emancipation of process the Similarly, endthough. of the decadeWar and Axis attack on Yugoslavia came tooearly for these parties consolidateto they themselves beganWorld Second The parties. Radical National and Democratic Independent old ofthe branches embracing criticalits connected to illdictatorial National repute Slovene and beganorganizing theorigins, Party easier ones old of awakening or parties new whichmadefoundation process, of of Due tobeginnings a gradual democratization to communismthe certainlybut not totheJNS. Slovenec Slovenska novejša zgodovina, 393. zgodovina, novejša Slovenska “Kje je sovražnik?” (Where is the Enemy), the is (Where sovražnik?” je “Kje Politi þ na, gospodarska in socialna na þ ne Republikene Slovenije 1918-1982, t.e. 933, 600-19 OJNS.) argued in argued 1936 that Slovenethe was future goingbelong to either to Catholicism or Zgodovinski þ asopis , Vol. 51, No. 4(1997): pp. 529-554, p. 541.). þ ni slovenskegani nazori meš þ ela (Ljubljana: banovinski odborOJNS, 1940). Slovenec 79 , groups ofpoliticians, the, groups Yugoslav dissatisfied with , Jul, 26 1936 (Quote from: Jurij Perovšek, 40 78 þ anstva v anstva þ asu med svetovnimaasu med vojnama (1918- It could be that argued their “Idejni, 80 , CEU eTD Collection vprašanje, everything else should be subordinated” ( the Party Democratic nationwas Yugoslav “everything” for that and that emphasized the “cultivationRavnihar of nationality” Vladimir was “the assembly first and founding main task, JDS the to which During Kingdom (1918-1929)), Jurij Perovšek ed. (Ljubljana: Arhivsko of SHS društvo Times Slovenije, the 1998), during pp. 23-28, p. Lands 23. inSlovene Associations and Organizations Parties, Political ofthe (Programs Programi politi 81 still widely employed “progressive” label. “progressive” employed widely still otherwise the overshadowed extent a certain to and then prevalent quite became “nationalists” leading of as Self-denomination National Yugoslav SloveneParty. formed part progressives when 1930’s during distinctive more even became orientation national accentuated an Such ordinances.” social and in legal administration, in public implementation, in policy literature, art, in science, upbringing, social in common education, in family, in life: private and public the all in itself assert must which power creative we therefore demand thatbe they Tousnationality considered andfostered. isliving a [ folk the that and existence material and moral its nation our to guarantee particularities These centuries. particularities social and cultural of community is language“J.D.S. from of anational nationality Apart party. our weperceive community as program of Yugoslav Democratic Party, where the very first point proclaimed that: importantmost founding for stones their can be policies, well seen in already 1918 the the aswell valuesas espoused by ideanational core progressives, beingthe The nation and the most faithful and radical proponents of Yugoslav nationalism in Slovene lands. whenit period, interwar the united acentral thisrole inpolitics, assumed group progressive During youth”. Kramer,by “national radical Albert begantheircareers organizing political and Žerjav Gregor by led wing, liberal ‘young’ so-called the Moreover, Socialists). National Germans aswell andother third groups, camp as toCzechoslovak National (and Democrats common ground in the national idea, what can be generally attributed also toAustrian Greater distinctive their had camp progressive Slovene the of strains all mentioned, already As “Program Jugoslovanske demokratske stranke” (Program of the Yugoslav Democratic Party (June 1918)) in 3. TREATMENT OF NATIONALITY QUESTION AND THE 35.).) þ nih strank, organizacij in združenj na Slovenskem v NATIONALIST DISCOURSES Domovina , July 5 1918 (Quoted from: Perovšek, Liberalizem in 41 81 þ asu Kraljevine SHS (1918-1929) ljudstvo ] created through ] created CEU eTD Collection was based on natural rights exclusively and thus evolved jointly with development of a of development with jointly evolved thus and exclusively rights natural on based was to Slovene lands, where quite adifferentlanguage was and is spoken, and where national idea dialect (literary tradition of central Croatia was Kajkavian before that). But this did not apply languageonShtokavian basedwhich the inSerbo-Croatian 1850agreement the culminated language,one which into unite these dialects to attempts successful quite There were also. rights historical on building nation- their basing both therefore and statehood of a tradition having Serbs, and Croats of in case divisions political historical to correspond not did also differences This divisions. number of dialects,whichdifferent not correspond did tothereligious (andlater national) a religions and lands different three – of andMontenegro Serbia Herzegovina, Bosnia and lands, between which nowadays linguistic Croatia, tiescomprise cultural the and especially examplesit, hadinfluence of movement, especially Illyrian the astrong onstrengtheningthe in after Early creation the state 1918. of implemented politically century a common and was political -had evolvedethnically the during factors 19 for centuriesdueto divided but one, linguistically and perceived and asculturally, to-be-created usually or already existent nationalYugoslav idea basically the notion –centered nation,around oneof Yugoslav either PROGRESSIVES’ CENTRAL POINTOFIDENTIFICATION 3.1. YUGOSLAV NATIONALIDEAASTHEINTERWAR SLOVENE beof will discussed. their nationalism extent and type the where discourse, nationalist progressives’ of analysis short a by followed by being understood its Slovene champions and their reasonsforadopting it. This be will Yugoslav idea, the roleprovideprogressives’firstintroduction will nationalism. subchapter Thethe an aim to to it had inside the of andelements features certain into contextinsight deeper offer a to intends This chapter of progressive politics, the manner it was 42 th CEU eTD Collection 83 Filozofske fakultete, 1994). 82 Although directly not they did pursue apolitical union, Žerjavleaders Gregor theirAlbert and identity, asintheir Slovenes own werewords Yugoslavs and first just secondly Slavs Yugoslav distinct of notion in the brought They Austria-Hungary). outside and (inside Slavs all between Southern reconciliation and cooperation also cultural among seeking other liberal clubs formed the Nationalacademic movementRadical Youth between 1901 and 1914, which moved into direction of nationalYugoslav idea in fuller its sense. Studentsfrom the Among the university high and school students, on otherthe movements hand, emerged, German nationalist threat. rising the to solution aconvenient - seemed distinct but related as Slavs –perceived Southern other with Connection themselves. by pressure German the withstand not could Slovenes building nation. upanew grew mainly cultural It of Sloveneout belief politicians' that for aspirations include not did and though, union, political of idea an only was It century. andin politicsbecame duringthefirstdecadeof Croats Slovene 20th prominent - Serbs Habsburg of Monarchy into politicalthree units of instead with only two, thirdthe uniting one Slovenes, transformation is that - trialism of Idea practical. primarily were motives butthe indecade of century 20th foreground first the the actually southern entered Slavs forces with other joining Serbia. of or Ideas in Dalmatia than different Croatia, extent certain In any motivescase, the and behind reasons idea theYugoslav in a Slovene lands, wereto politics then. impacthave on did agreater not but intellectuals, strand some among emerged a Neoillyrian In century half second the of the ideas. such time rejected that language,at literary Slovene creating on concentrating writers, Slovene majority of Vraz. Butthe Stanko poet was the representative visible its most where in Slovenia, influence brief certain had movement Illyrian language. literary Slovene distinct Gantar Godina,Narodno radikalno,220. See: Irena Gantar Godina, Gantar Irena See: Neoslavizem in Slovenci (Neoslavism and Slovenes) (Ljubljana: Znanstveni inštitut 82 43 83 . CEU eTD Collection monarchy - among others also the Styrian progressive Bogumil Vošnjak. It already included the notion of One notion the included YugoslavIt already nation, composed of tribes.three Vošnjak. Bogumil progressive Styrian the also others among - monarchy Committee, led by Ante Trumbi 85 though. contrast to the National Radical Youth, members of this movement did not have prominent roles in politicsthem later, fought and died as volunteers in Serbian army in the Balkan Wars of 1912 and1913, as wellas in WWI. In Serbia, Montenegro and eventually Bulgaria. They also embraced the notion of newspapers) one and Yugoslav clearhad goals – destruction ofnation. Austria-Hungary Manyand unificationof South published of Slavic lands it also with (although society asecret as partly functioned It eveofWWI. onthe students school 84 progressives from verythe a beginning adopted Yugoslav unitarist and outlook arguedfor a In contrast to Slovene People’s Party, which advocated political autonomy for Slovenes, unified Yugoslav nation on other.the into side andmerging one of on idea leastpartly nation the Slovene at between retaining namely – nationality of question the on views in their differed also They state). centralized future statecommunity the likeformshould look what and should (federation, it take how on views different having thereby then, unification favoring were forces political Slovene unification, as importantwell nuancesas in understanding theidea of nation.All Yugoslav existedmajor in differences views regarding the forms, means and dynamics of Yugoslav common political perhaps(and also national) from community, there verythe beginning coming the for enthusiasm shared commonly Despite politics. pervaded entire Slovene fervor, which nationalist the distinguished nation largely one Yugoslav rhetoric about establishment independent and of “State Croats of Serbs”Slovenes, on 29 In 1918,when Habsburgthe Empire rashly its was approaching end,leading tothe Corfu Declaration Corfu with nationalist and“YugoslavCzech underground Committee”, thewhich émigré signed the in 1909. National Party Progressive Kramer alsobegan embracing the idea of Yugoslavunitary nation, after they had joined the The Corfu declarationwas signed in1917 by the representatives of Serbian government and Yugoslav It is important to mention that another movement, called “Rebirth” ( “Rebirth” called movement, another that mention to important is It 85 in 1917, paving wayfor realization of Yugoslav statehood. ü and comprising émigré politicians from Southern Slavic parts of Habsburg 84 During the First World War they also had connections 44 Preporod ), was formed among high among formed was ), th of October, CEU eTD Collection Agrarian deputy Bogumil Vošnjak during session of the Constitutional Board, which took place on 18 on place took which Board, Constitutional of the session during Vošnjak Bogumil deputy Agrarian 87 86 88 1998). breaking anation: literature and cultural politics in Yugoslavia Wachtel, Baruch Andrew see: of Yugoslavs amalgamation cultural of onprojects more For Nova Revija, 1997), p. 257.) Stoletja ‘srbsko-hrvaško-slovenski’ jezik” (Bogumil Vošnjak and “Serbo-Croato-Slovene”the Language) in successful constitution and the inthe end included Vošnjak’s formulation. (Jurij Perovšek,“Bogumil Vošnjak in proposed “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” ( and protested Vošnjak bevalid. to was dialect” “Slovene where lands Slovene regarding clause additional an February 1921. governmentalThe proposal statedthat officiallanguage of kingdomthe be Serbo-Croatian with territorial aspirations for territory settled by Slovenes and Croats but also due to political Furthermore, there was also abelief in necessity a of strong state, especially because of Italian saw greatopportunities ina market. unified common camp in progressive as the entrepreneurs joinedthe motives, wereby economic considerations state party to partake all- strongest far the asmembersof progressives enabled moreover advocated, they strongly in governments and by these means control local matters also. demand but acceptwhatshegratefully offers. from shouldone not anything Serbia situation the and statingunconditional wasurgent that Kingdom Serbia, with unification of as meansits for implementation.centralist aquick bestfor state, They the pushed thus and become“papal aprovince” hegemony of politicalFearing the weakness. political relative from arising progressives’ reasons, practical political Catholicism if Slovenia andReasons weremotives for such different a course andmutually were There intertwined. gained autonomy, they argued that it would amongovercoming differences all caused them. historically the amalgamation, of a process gradually thereby “tribes”,three whichshould undergo named nation”. According to the latter conception, Yugoslavs were one nation composed of Vidovdan votingunification centralistthe of infavor they 1921 state, supported the of organization One of the best examples of eagerness for rash national unification was the intervention made by by Independent made intervention the was unification national rash for ofeagerness examples best ofthe One Perovšek,Liberalizem in vprašanje,80-83. Perovšek, Liberalizem in vprašanje, 254. vprašanje, in Liberalizem Perovšek, (Slovene XX. Century Chronicle), vol.1: 1900-1941, Marjan Drnovšek Drago and Bajt eds. (Ljubljana: constitution, and strictly pursued the then official idea of Yugoslavs as “three- as Yugoslavs of idea official then the pursued strictly and constitution, 88 in such a case. Centralist organization of Centralist insuch acase. which organization kingdom, of the srbsko-hrvaško-slovenski 45 ) as the name for official language. The action was (Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press, University Stanford CA : (Stanford, 87 Making a nation, 86 kronika XX. After the th of These CEU eTD Collection on the March: Magnificent Gathering of JDS Trustees in Ljubljana), in of JDSTrustees Gathering Magnificent March: the on 91 Arhivsko društvo Slovenije,1998), pp. 44-46, p.46. Associations in Slovene Lands during the Times of SHS Kingdom (1918-1929)), Jurij Perovšek ed.(Ljubljana: Slovenskem v Congress on 30 on Congress oktobra 1921 v Beogradu” (From the Program of All-state Yugoslav Democratic Party Adopted atthe Party 90 89 Radical Party and its Great-Serbian orientation, although they shared devotion to centralist to devotion shared they although orientation, Great-Serbian its and Party Radical hegemonyincluding and byany criticizedthus threetribesthethe of Serbs, theNational danger of the against idea Yugoslavthe national They strictly warned and persistently. followed 1924, after Democratic Party assembledintheIndependent Progressive politicians, in be fornation would theSlovenes.” solved way a favorable for action this Slovene– thisiswhatthe longs democracy for. way problem This the small of that we grow intoinseparable Yugoslav whole, to unite all the creative forces among Slovenes speech, delivered by necessary higher forand evolutive stage Slovenefrom people. Thefollowing passage a Gregor Žerjavnew, a represented nation Yugoslav into atintegration that JDSgeneration, younger from ones assembly in Ljubljana the especially progressives, among present belief a sincere also was there least, not but Last on 3 democratic order. perceivedto ascontrary Yugoslav Democraticthan people from different Yugoslav lands. Party, dissimilar more much aspects in all being although order, administrative same the anyenjoyed kind of special Frenchthe inhabitants model,1918 referred of Gascoigne toBretagnethat and arguing status for in October instance, already for generation, liberal ‘elder’ from the here.Triller Karel nations any part of the integrationstate and centralized administration. They followed examples of western European state was also national bymeans couldonly of viewsbeachieved state in A paragons. progressives’ strong “To convert the Slovene part of the nation into Yugoslavness [ Yugoslavness into nation the of part Slovene the convert “To well: quite touching upon Slovenethe national providingit, thatand question illustrates an answer to “Jugoslovenska demokracija na pohodu; Veli “Izprograma vsedržavne Jugoslovanske demokratske stranke sprejetega na strankinem kongresu 30. in 31. Ibid., 60. þ asu KraljevineSHS (1918-1929) th and 31 st of October1921 Belgrade)in in þ (Programs of the Political Parties, Organizations and astni zborzaupnikov JDS v Ljubljani” (Yugoslav Democracy 90 89 46 As it was stressed in the 1921 program Asit stressed in 1921 program the of was Programi politi Jutro 91 þ , Feb 5 1924. nih strank, organizacij in združenj na jugoslovenstvo rd of February ofFebruary 1924, ], (…)in order CEU eTD Collection Party), community” of consciousness and extinct a never and fate experience historical equal tendencies, an uniform nation”,Yugoslav distinguished by common “origins, language, lasting andliving Slovenes, on continuous territory as geographic andethnographic whole (…)form thus even notionthe of three“tribes”. The party program from 1933 stated that “Serbs, Croats Yugoslavs represented a homogenoussingle, ethnicallyandculturally nation, abandoning morestance radical byadopting theideaof“integral claimed which that Yugoslavism”, During the 1930’sSlovene progressives, an united inYugoslav National even took Party, autonomies. of federalist restructuring national party opposingYugoslavia andcreation continued of Belgrade, and startedunitarism in 1927,noticing that theidea had been constantly abused by ruling circles in connecting SDS with Croatian autonomists, the Slovene wing of his 94 93 joining the regime Yugoslav exception, National anotable Party. represented progressives Slovene Party. Peasants’ Croatian with collaborate to continued and JRZregimes and toJNS opponents were informally, operate to continued ofYugoslavia parts other and persecuted and imprisoned during early 1930’s and had to emigrate. Major part of followers his in Croatian lands adversaries as enemies of the state. Good example Good from adversaries ofthis arefollowingthe lines state. the asenemies of Ivan political tarnishing publicly of level the reached sometimes This power. administrative complete inSloveniapossessed and central the regime represented progressive camp when even“tribally narrow-minded”halfof “separatists”during first 1930’s the or conservatives,labeled press could get by “only-Slovenes” ( as progressive most integral the Everyone notably outlook, disagreeing Catholic the Yugoslavist to fact”. natural 92 administrative order with it. After Svetozar Pribi withit. Svetozar After order administrative “Na 333. zgodovina, novejša Slovenska from: Quoted Due to his persistent opposition to the royal dictatorship the Independent Democrat leader Pribi þ Slovenski narod ela in smernice Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke” (Principles and Guidelines of the Yugoslav National Yugoslav ofthe Guidelines and (Principles stranke” nacionalne Jugoslovenske in smernice ela 92 93 94 . Therefore the “Yugoslav national unity” was seen as an “undisputed and “undisputed an as seen was unity” national “Yugoslav the Therefore . , Jul 21 1933. 47 þ evi ü became disillusioned with Yugoslav with disillusioned became samoslovenci þ evi ü was ), CEU eTD Collection 99 p. 132. Conference of Yugoslav National Party in Ljubljana), in Party National of Yugoslav Conference 98 97 96 ofHvar. island trial, imprisoning or interning some of the supposed authors confiningand Catholicthe leaderAnton Korošec to rearrangement of Yugoslaviaand creation of self-governing national entities. Regime reacted by organizing a inYugoslavia and solidarity regime undemocratic withCroatian the against autonomistcriticism movement, expressed They containing Party. People’s a demand Slovene of forfederal representatives by leading 95 of allbasis the as ourproclaimed policy, national sincere and “pure implementing national was time the of crisis and in nation one sense”. ethnic state life includingJNS, and Banjanin,announced“comprised thatSerbs,Croats Slovenes Jovan they by the king rhetoric. “PohorjeIn Unifier”. Declaration”, written by Albert Kramer and other prominentmembers of losingAfter in power 1935 the progressives even theirradicalized nationalist Yugoslav come to their senses. When, however, they did not wantto do that, justice had to be done.” our own state thenfun pest, Andthis isnowthe then ends, we here. reckoning(…) In the arrives. reckoning did not the of persecuteexistence the state and againsteverything the nation hadagainst wonforitself.When, statehits the however, its directly striking were our declamations, only are they own that say many people, wefor wantpunctations, which to obey. Their not (…) did children exhortingBut these them. gave them time upon looked mother itsforbearinghad“Like thestate a and children,disobedient pardoning so that they could of “Ljubljana punctations”. autonomist authors measures the against other taken legaland issue of the whenheaddressed rally, party ataJNS place speech, taking Pucelj’s force for anybody in this country.” auxiliary an as serve never will and ends own “its had army this that thereby circles ruling the warning army”, national “Yugoslav the as idea national Yugoslav of followers the to referring instance, Kramer,Albert in for concludedhis speechesin senate one of Yugoslav 1937, by tones. militant employed sometimes leaders progressive in Slovenia, domination Catholic existing factually then as well as policies, national vague its and Union Radical Yugoslav “O politi Darko Darko Friš “Banovinska konferenca Jugoslovanske strankenacionalne leta 1937 v Ljubljani” (1937 Provincial 370. zgodovina, novejša Slovenska “Dolenjska v taboru vsedržavne stranke” (LowerCarniola in the All-State Party Camp), Ljubljana punctations ( þ nih razmerah v Sloveniji” (About the Political Circumstances in Slovenia), ljubljanske punktacije 97 It was stated that the only way out of political and economic and political of out way only the that stated was It 99 ), also known as the “Slovene declaration”, were written in 1932 written were declaration”, “Slovene as the known also ), Zgodovinski 48 þ asopis 98 In their struggle against ruling , Yr. 59, Vol. 1-2 (2005): pp. 129-146, Domovina Jutro 95 , May 1 1933. , April 1 1937. 1 , April 96 CEU eTD Collection 102 1937. 101 1937), leta 1937” (Tour by Petar Živkovi damage national symbol attempt the to asadeliberate leaders nationalists. back befinally byYugoslav wrested cockades to bearing by Slovene ‘conquered’ a mob which and tattered got national Yugoslav tricolor, aggression. and Falcons Members of National Yugoslav Party took an Youth essential part militantthat nationalist Yugoslav fuelled rhetoric perhapsadditionally theeruptingof acts be well argued nevertheless could essayit this of From perspective it.the aspectof only one internal ‘liberal-clerical’ nationalist-Slovene ‘Yugoslav and autonomist’ quarrels represented The international,late 1930’s explainin Slovenia. of occurring violence thepolitical point extent when tryingto theThere are various kinds of reasons and motives, politicalYugoslav as well as social,to which one could symbolical asact of reprisal from the other side. well as domesticJNS followers, atmosphereby murdered was society academic a Catholic Memberof Slovenia. across all taking place what ( “Eagle” society gymnastic was Catholic was of successors (1930’s Boys and Slovene followedelectrified by arson and theagainst Falcons’ pavilionProvince in June 1937. in Ljubljana as a 100 occasion of Yugoslav National Party president’s, general Petar Živkovi Petar general president’s, occasion of National Yugoslav Party which JNS followers werefor blastedSlovene Duringacross were countryside, crosses leftists. year1936eucharistic the accused. The culminating campsboth -as of as between supporters the with well inexpressing itself bloody encounters point of violencewide-spread political violence, reaching over thelevels usual politicalof struggle and was reached on theThe second half of the thirties was a time of increased tensions with the ruling ‘clericals’ and Friš, Turneja, 63. Friš, Banovinska konferenca, 138-139; “Petar Živkovi Cf.Darko Friš, “Turneja Petra Živkovi Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino 100 Riots erupted in Riots erupted Ljubljana, symbolicallymarkedforfight by a ü andYugoslav National Party Leadership Across Slovene Lands in Year , Yr. 45, No. 1(2005): pp. 61-78, p. 63. ü a in vodstvaa in Jugoslovanske nacionalne stranke po slovenskih krajih 49 ü v Sloveniji” (Petar Živkovi 101 102 The act was labeled by JNS by labeled was act The and fights between Falcons between fights and ü ü inSlovenia), , tour through Drava through , tour Orel Jutro )) were , Jun 8 CEU eTD Collection (Politi primarily practicalthe meaning of Yugoslav strong a“real good”state, as of “all Slovenes, and Serbs”. Croats By youth,1940 the althoughstill having aYugoslav unitarist orientation, began use to mildertones, stressing context. Slovene special to made thereby are references Many problem. nationality and order social and economic provide mainpoints of the Yugoslav speeches The National Youth. PartyParty program, National especially Yugoslav of regardin to its official representatives positions leading by on speeches of mainly consisted is Report course. own its pursuing started wing youth the before well place took conference provincial The Socialisti (Archive of Republic the of Slovenia, dislocated unit III, AS 1931: Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve Ljubljana 1937) (Ljubljana: 1937), pp.9-15, p. 18. skupš Program of Yugoslav National Party and itsYouth) in 103 national elements’ Iwill inside state. illustrate by this Yugoslav the to try German using thecaseof minorityregarding foreign, their attitudes non-Yugoslav nationstowards ‘foreign - especially as nationalism, is thedegreeof progressives’ be concerning one inthis discussed to subchapter it was treated Slovene inner andpartly contextof politicalalso Yugoslav struggle. The and arising question of bypolitical progressive wasalsoaccompanied by level reached what ahigh acts militancy quite of and aggressiveness violence.subchapter, previous of half second the in presented as rhetorics, nationalist Progressive Still, press. the discussed Secondly, RHETORIC PROGRESSIVES’ utterances3.2. THEDEGREEANDTYPE AS OFNATIONALISM, REFLECTED IN actedalso essentially the typehas byitself andtriggered incited all disintegratingthe separatist tendencies.” as an nation, idea, mostitsagainst Yugoslav the powerful our for bearers, force andagainst uniting ofaspecttimes of whenthe much during than arenot treated nationalists differently Yugoslav nowadays Yugoslavia they wereis to thesay againstonly of idea,that view Yugoslav crimethis spoke totheir the against subject‘graceful nations’.In ourbearers nation, our Yugoslavthe nation but nations in about of Yugoslavia, thesamemanner as Habsburgs the historyof the andstruggle our Yugoslav nationalism and Yugoslav nationalists! Today itisfuture, notbeing spoken anymore about the for ones“Only corruption Catholicand cynicismof our press Yugoslaviaare abletocall: protect from areour right liberation. who claim that in as party the leadership: (…) The treason during these andleadersbattles were of latter viewsexpressing similarthe issue on nationality Andrej Urši Andrej þ þ ina 12. septembra 1937 v Ljubljani na, gospodarska na, in socialna, 14. (See: footnote 78)) þ ne Republikene Slovenije 1918-1982, t.e. 933, 600-19 OJNS.) þ , “Naš “Naš , þ as, program Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke in njena mladina” (Our Time, the Time, (Our mladina” njena in stranke nacionalne Jugoslovenske program as, (Provincial conference of the Yugoslav National Party Youth in Youth Party National Yugoslav of the conference (Provincial Omladina Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke: Banovinska 50 103 CEU eTD Collection “solely “solely language” official the language their and nation” the of “sons be should officials public all that stated and minorities Although 1918Yugoslavthe Democratic Party program didnot even mention non-Yugoslav parties. political and authorities administrative Slovene by Germans of treatment post-war the also influenced region, what in that severe been had had Duringinterethnic decades monarchy struggle been confiscated. the last of Habsburg societies national German to belonging property the of much and war world first the after closed most hadbeen German schools of the where Styria Lower regarding actual, especially During minority early question 1920’s the of for German rights was very speaking population townspeople. well-to-do of communities werepredominantly these peasants Party – as well as the ones which followed it throughout -formally period interwar the throughout it Party whichfollowed as – as ones the well (Slovenska novejša zgodovina Germans was in reality higher (some estimates reached the numberof 70.000). of number the and conducted were ofpressure forms different was made, census When 4%. to corresponded 104 Styria ( Lower across all living minority mentionable a represented also speakers German that from hadGerman speaking peasants been homogenously settled from 14 105 A very small but economically strong German community was also present in Ljubljana. Maribor ( region undeveloped sparsely Koinhabitedof and economically notably in themost interwar Yugoslavia, minorities of national major ofthe one Banate. represented Germans In Slovenia the main area“race”. of German settlementbased national wasbeingdiscourse replaced by one based on notionsthe of “blood” and was nationalism, by namely bebriefly will extentculturally espoused examinedprogressives – the the wooded, According to 1921 census approximately Germans41.500 residedSlovene in part of Yugoslavia,which Program JDS, 24. Untersteiermark Marburg a.d. Drau ) and Yugoslav part of of ) andYugoslav inCarinthia, notably most part andtowns cities as , 397-399.) ), Celje ( 105 , progressive politicians gathered in gathered , progressivepoliticians Yugoslav Democratic Cilli ) and Ptuj ( 51 Pettau ). Incontrast to the þ th evje evje ( century onwards. Apart Gottschee 104 Gottscheer ), where CEU eTD Collection aggressive tones and could also reach the point of expressing straightforward hostility. Franjo hostility. expressing and straightforward the of could point aggressive tones also reach and intolerant by pretty wasdistinguished Styrian Germans regarding The discourse non-existent here.” however is question German the therewith and Germandom consequences. the pseudo-Germansimmigrants, the real Germans are not numerous enough to be given rights of wea minority, but to do not concede any right, they will have to realize that or bear the more renegadeslive, to pull out by thewant would which we error the is This exactly (:..) farmerroots. Gottscheer or Swabian Vojvodina In the former Lower Styria a couple of hundred Germans and a few “They wantimposed from outside,for instanceto by the state, and – if needed – also forcefully:place be could which criteria objective supposedly on resting something as they were perceived the pseudo-German manner in anilliberal quite contrary the and feelings. On and decision of matters personal [ 110 beGerman”. to or “want imitator” “German “pseudo-German”, as in English expressed be roughly could meaning Its culture. German embraced or identity 109 108 107 Celje. in riots interethnic 1907 the recalling Styria, in organization political of German threat discussed editorial The 106 nemškutar Austria” by bred “artificially as labeled presstheStyrian In progressive wereeven speakers theirGerman denied being Germandom, nation.” household,his inside nationality isGerman of who individual, on war of a declaration not is “This his civil body a foreign rights, ineven live scattered.” wherethey places, inas participate politics allowWe Germans the to however under cannot (…) Habsburgs. the but on all Theydeserve that. are equal isand their safety guaranteed, although us they differently treated those live in usand among can peacefully asfartheyareautochtonous Yugoslavia, “Germans, who want to act written during the hot debate aboutGerman cultural gathering, taking place in Celje in1923: as a group against the state quite selective. This ambiguous attitude is well illustrated in selective.quite from iswellillustrated attitude following ambiguous This excerpts be to proved they however, Germans, of case In rights. minority of principle the supported Ibid. The word Ibid. “Uvodnik” (Editorial), “Uvodnik” (Editorial), 110 107 . 109 nemškutar Determination of nationality and national consciousness were not treated as treated not were consciousness national and nationality of Determination emerged during 19 Jutro Jutro but the Germandom there webut theGermandom there donotrecognize to them , Feb 4 1923. , Feb 3 1923. th century to denote people of Slovene ancestry who adopted German adopted who ancestry Slovene of people denote to century 108 or called by the common orcalledname by of derogatory common the 52 nemškutarja 106 ] of Celje in the same line with line same in the Celje of ] . Scattered Jutro , CEU eTD Collection ideology had taken place. In the discussed context the mere presence of mentioned words can mentioned words of merethe presence context discussed In hadthe ideology taken place. introduction Especially since turn. this of degree concerning the isone arising question therefore and usage perhaps from ones LinzProgram German Austrian the of the specific The 1882 onwards. of certainbeing example best the liberalism, national of heirs European Central for common very notions does leadingthe wholesometimes full-blown way racially This based nationalism. was shiftto not necessarilyintroducingcentury, the of“blood” notions and “race”into and nationality discourse mean 19th late inthe starting by paradigm-change the affected it was whether –namely nationalism that a real of nature question the progressives’ forth This brings the regarding bear overtones. racialist shift in didnot aboveclearly presented rhetorics nationalist the aggressive, asvery appearing Despite Democrats. National Czechoslovak Germans or Greater Austrian the instance for heirs, national liberal European among Central no exception theyrepresented perspective progressives espouseda nationalism. aggressiveandvariantof exclusive quite From this onecouldin Slovenerhetoricnationalist subchapter, arguethat discussed previous the certain of to aspects their Yugoslav progressive wellasinregard andpoliticians, as press On basisthe minority of German case and the manneritbeing was publiclyby addressed numbers and innerof resisting strength. Itwill away die of by itself an as uprooted thistle.”in terms day, every be weaker will circumstances innew up grow to going is which no roots in our land. “GermansWe decimated in our lands at all do notthem represent already nothing else thanwith a dying-away the caste,overthrow, which has the second generation, by dr. F. Lipold, Maribor), 111 lines from 112 of nation”.our as“degenerates hereditary and“pseudo-Germans” enemies” worst instance Germans as“our denominated for National parties) Democratic Yugoslav and Independent also (later Party Democratic of Yugoslav section Styrian leader of the Lipold, “Borbenost demokracije – referat dr. F. Lipolda, Maribor” (The Fighting Spirit of Democracy – a Report – of Democracy Spirit Fighting (The Maribor” Lipolda, F. dr. – referat demokracije “Borbenost Article without a title (p. 2), Jutro are in this sense telling as well: as telling sense in this are Jutro Jutro , Feb 20 1923 , Feb 4 1923. 53 111 The following The 112 CEU eTD Collection 117 116 (Ljubljana: Slovenska Matica, 1997), pp. 97-109, p. 98. Slovenska trideseta leta: simpozij 1995 1941” (The Role and Organization of Youthin Yugoslavthe Part of Slovenia during Yearsthe 1929-1941) in 115 114 113 mention of a “common language, territory, feelings feelings interests”. and living language, territory,“common mention of a considered to be onein also1921 clearly“by blood”, stated interwar Thepolitical program period. Party adopted of the Democratic Yugoslav throughout whichin its firstwas stressed point thatin politics of indeed present progressive case Slovene were The aforementioned terms in thethe “nation first place,of Serbs, biological categories. preceding Croats of introduction the to andnot and nationalism Slovenes” romantic the of elements older to attributed be also was indeed created or adopted an essentially new nationalist ideology. Sporadic use of terms as terms useof ideology. Sporadic newnationalist an adopted essentially or indeed created pointto a paradigmaticmeant shift progressives, that including the youngest generation, had Neither the aggressive nationalist rhetoric nor introduction of certain notions which could presence fascist-like ideology nationalof any program racially-based of or palingenesis. the reflect not did whole a as taken program Youth Party National Yugoslav the Nevertheless national concluded wasneeded. that rejuvenation race”. Yugoslav the of representative “new immemorial” Yugoslavsargued that were“one existing nation “from byblood”, united time them of some although generation, nationalist Yugoslav younger of representatives political alsotothe applies it.ideological Similar behind be were there grounds hardly argued that During the Yugoslav National Party era this became more common butit could still very to had been quite sporadic, especially 1920’s. the during employment of notions as “blood”, “race” and similar on part of progressive politicians seems nation was “a fact of cultural, social, economic, biological and spiritual community” spiritual and biological economic, social, cultural, of fact “a was nation Ibid., 70. Anka Vidovi Urši 44. JDS, vsedržavne programa Iz Politi þ , Naš þ na, gospodarskana, in socialna, 25. þ as, 20-21. 114 þ Miklav , and even flirted with racial rhetorics about “forming a new Yugoslav” as þLþ , “Vloga, in organiziranost mladine v jugoslovanskem delu Slovenije v letih 1929- (Slovene Thirties: Simposium 1995), PeterVodopivec, Mahni Joža 115 54 In their 1940 program it was written that the 117 113 Despite that, the 116 þ and eds. CEU eTD Collection the Independent Democratic Party. Democratic Independent the Yugoslav Nationalists),which in Slovene lands a‘field 1920’sduring represented army’ of special organism which is to execute the ethical mission of the nation.” ofa creation the nation to and individual of functions life all subordinates therefore race and by our nation “Out values of givenby all past,only haveour for future,those the which value were given as a specific race. (…) Doctrineas it can beracialist, its seenfrom program: of nationalism clearly was ideology nationalist ORJUNA’s separatists”. “tribal and involvesCommunists being above all the cult common targets most the Party, Democratic Independent later and Democratic Yugoslav of of enemies political against acts violent by distinguished movement, nationalist all-Yugoslav territories, annexed or claimed by Italy after the First World War. It gradually evolved intoan Yugoslav-settled andother Istria Dalmatia, in irredentism Italian against national defense of as movements supported nevertheless they that mentioned be should it nationalism, racialist embrace not did politicians progressive leading the Although internationalism.” every and every cosmopolitanism ‘Jadran’ J.n.a.d. Onlyfactors. in lives them Alienhumanity.them and is through and the repulsive to therefore self-enclosed natural – units whole be inorder to ablea homogenous todirectlyform itsrealize is It goals. divided along not unique marksinto does mankind The thought. national of bearer is the ‘Jadran’ “J.n.a.d. Party.National tothe Yugoslav which was connected closely “Adriatic”), in 120 119 Academic Club “Jadran”) (Ljubljana: 1937), pp. 14-16; pp. 14-15. 118 also be seenfrom of far 19 sharpened andbore traits, those different from the views wasindeed of young progressives program. discourse national a worked-out Still the reflect of interwar Thesetheir and period. of atmosphere only discourse features not supplemented did intellectual and general political tothe adjustment also asrhetoric beinterpreted could “biological” even unit as a“natural” or nation of and andoccasional treating “blood” “race” “Program organizacije jugoslovenskih nacionalista” (Program of Organizationthe of Yugoslav Nationalists) Cf. Perovšek, Liberalizem in vprašanje, 255. “Naša misel” (Our Thought) in Thought) (Our misel” “Naša Programi politi þ nih strank, organizacij in združenj na Slovenskem v nations Petnajst let J.N.A.D. »Jadrana« JNAD Jadran JNAD 119 , which are mostthe powerful cultural, social and political This organization foundedwas originally for purposes 55 (Yugoslav Progressive Academic Academic Society (Yugoslav Progressive (Fifteen Years of Yugoslav Progressive of Yugoslav Years (Fifteen th century liberal nationalism, as it can it as nationalism, liberal century þ asu Kraljevine SHS (1918-1929) ORJUNA 118 120 (Organization of (Organization CEU eTD Collection troops’, at the same never sincerely adopting their ideas to implement them in real politics. less more these they or supported groups Modernisierungsverständnis eines tschechischen Politikers Czechoslovak National Democrat leader Karel Krama leaderKarel Democrat National Czechoslovak denounced bothfascism and National Socialism. 125 124 ZBOR society academic beforepolitics. party entering of Yugoslavthe leaders National Youth Party had members been of these organizations Youth), which in their style and rhetoric a to certain degree imitated the fascists. 123 (Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997), pp. 69-74, p.72. Narodna odbrana thecreation fringe as movements of alsosupported politicians During 1930’sprogressive of national organism.” itself shouldinservice develop prove into asthe function Yugoslav them aracial which type, Slovenska trideseta leta: simpozij 1995 122 121 Kingdom (1918-1929)), Jurij Perovšek ed. (Ljubljana: Arhivsko ofSHS društvo Times Slovenije, the 1998), during pp. 49-51, p. Lands 49. inSlovene Associations and Organizations Parties, Political ofthe (Programs into a combative and ideal fighter, uncover particular energies from from it[ energies uncover particular a combative andideal fighter, into by the national youth and psychical preparation positiveeducate physical should: work (…) (…)Our sense. socio-economic ethical and perfect Yugoslav physical, incultural, type “Internal is work intended of first formembersall themselves and in exists bringing upa See: Martina Winkler,. Martina See: Vidovi Janko Prunk, “Liberalni tabor med Ljubljano in Zagrebom” (Liberal Camp between Ljubljana and Zagreb) in Zagreb) and Ljubljana between Camp (Liberal Zagrebom” in Ljubljano med tabor “Liberalni Prunk, Janko Ibid., 50. Perovšek, movement, led by Dimitrije Ljoti þ Miklav Idejni, socialnogospodarski, 536-537. þLþ Edinstvo , Vloga inorganiziranost, 98. (National Defense) and Defense) (National Karel Kramá 121 (Unity), even started to represent the Slovene section of filo-fascist of section Slovene the represent to started even (Unity), 123 (Slovene Thirties: Simposium 1995), PeterVodopivec, Mahni Joža Ĝ (1860 Part of inuniversity students, united Partof progressive the í 1937). Selbstbild,Fremdwahrnehmungen und as means of political struggle using them as a ‘field a as them using struggle political of means as Omladina narodneodbrane Omladina ü . On the other hand the leading politicians 56 (Munich: Oldenbourg, 2002), pp. 327-340. 124 Ĝ treated the Czech fascist movement Czechfascist the treated In a quite similar manner as the the nationalyouth (National Defense (National 122 Also some Also þ ] and eds. 125 , CEU eTD Collection on the March: Magnificent Gathering of JDS Trustees in Ljubljana), in of JDSTrustees Gathering Magnificent March: the on 126 amalgamation intoYugoslav whole would solve the Slovene “problem of small nation” the whereas nation, Slovene of existence continued the wouldsecure state nation Slovene Astrong for people. stage anew, necessary higher evolutional nation and represented intointegration Yugoslav believed that ŽerjavKramer, whosincerely andAlbert Gregor gatheredaround circles ‘younger’ especially the in progressives, of projects Slovene case intertwined It couldtwo andmodernization nation-building berepresented arguedthat AND“PROGRESS” MINDEDNESS” 4.1. YUGOSLAVANTI-CLERICALISM, “FREE NATIONALISM, National Socialism, fascism and bolshevism will be briefly touched upon. towards In theend with bewhich attitudes ‘anti-modernism’. associated progressives’ could elements, emerged newly certain discern to try also will I this By doing order. economic and onsocial changingviews to bedevoted will A subchapter Special modernization. shifts, during which occurred and 1930’sandregardedgeneral modelspatterns of visible certain to pointing be will I Moreover projects. secularization and building nation with these of intertwinement the as well as policies, and visions respective their of features general focus on the Iwill marked modernity”. thereby anera by of “crisis period, the interwar the political of“progressive” camp during byrepresentatives Slovene espoused society, intendfollowing I modernizationIn provide for of to of the chapter an overview perspectives “Jugoslovenska demokracija na pohodu; Veli MODERNITY MODERNITY PARAGONSAND THE OF POLITICAL AND 4. PROGRESSIVES’ PROGRESSIVES’ 4. ON MODERNIZATIONVIEWS AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC ORDER SOCIO-ECONOMIC þ astni zborzaupnikov JDS v Ljubljani” (Yugoslav Democracy 57 Jutro , Feb 5 1924. 126 and CEU eTD Collection 131 130 129 128 127 progressives, their Yugoslav nation building project and their anti-clericalism represented anti-clericalism their and project building nation Yugoslav their progressives, I would arguethat therefore strivings formodernization, progress and by asunderstood the the for Yugoslavs, election Slovenes, overthrow butinof their time heartsthe at always the sameAustrians, cold Latins.”earlier overnight: fronts changing identity was bemany to going suppressed, takenin by were clericalswhohad the been intelligentsia knowingly or unknowingly drew water on clerical mill.Fearing that ourSlovene fearfor“In cultural senseless heightof language, many literary Slovenes and our members of own monopoly: They also denied political Catholicism the national orientation, which they claimed as their our that peasantwould rid ever get of hopelessness clerical wardship.” and stick curved the under intelligentsia the all and teachers schools, dictatorship subjugation bannerin the Ljubljana, Slovene of our Pope, centralism the under of “Every political lastingperspectives: a modernization tothe progressives’ threat apprentice knows nowadaysteeth into Slovene thattribe” ‘autonomyif its the‘clerical’believed had “beast whichhas that receivedautonomy Slovenia gotten of Slovenia’ as interpreted integral important and part of their viewsonmodernizing Slovene society. They be also could ‘anti-clericalism’ their and orientation means secularist genuine progressives’ the with clericalmore popular party politicalof Again Catholicism. these ‘tactical’ coincidedconsiderations of this stance during 1930’sstemmedfrom alsopractical motives of combating the much idea national and radicalization Yugoslav the to persistentclinging especially Adherence and due developments to “historical misfortune”. mutually enrich all three the “tribes”, which had previously experienced separate security security under “thecommandbishops of politicizing and clergy” would haveled“bishops’ government” to “Uvodnik” (Editorial), “Uvodnik” (Editorial), Jutro Domovina Jutro , Jan 23 1926 (Quoted from: ibid.). , Jul 1 1924 (Quoted from: Perovšek, Liberalizem in vprašanje, 253-254.). , Mar, 251926 (Quoted from: ibid., 254.). Jutro Jutro 127 , Feb 2 1924. , Feb 6 1923. would have won the political power also. Such a development 128 58 with all the administrative powers and public 130 129 131 , what certainly presented certainly , what CEU eTD Collection 137 136 (Ibid.) matter.” the of out it forming history, human in 135 force moving and source original the as spirit, also against Marxism: “Above pointed were all turns JNAD“Adriatic” Society Jadran Academic against Progressive the ofYugoslav materialistic members by leading world written view, lines, These whichdenies the 134 133 132 nature.” political or dogma of religious basic on founded be they (…) truth discover to entitled be primarily to claim fundaments, progressive world warned camp “authoritarian buildingagainst views, which, dogmatic on of and representatives “free-mindedness” “progress” thephrasesof andingredient coining educational system. Believinginmodern, national enlightened education with strong the interference within Church’s the about progressives were the worried Especially bolsheviks” faith” the abuses power, andeconomic political its interests and of forclergy acting who, clique like“criminal labels received People’s Party national thought in Slovene context represented “also the only certain sanctuary for freedom for sanctuary certain only the “also represented context in Slovene thought national times, perceived as critical by the liberal camp, it used to be stressed even more that Yugoslav about “spoiltprogressives spoke medieval practicingreactionaries methods” of any nation” When political Catholicism, designated also as “the greatest evil for free cultural development Church itsupporting as “anachronisms”. and unhinderedscientific intellectual and they progress perceived ‘clericalism’and also the of a “ inclusion the achieved liberalallies Serb their with and together state and Church between the separation complete demanded persistently they sametime the At traditions. of Slovene part Catholic religion a role of an important and positive moral force, recognizing it as an essential Roman concededthe The progressives andstances. endeavors interdependent andconnected Urši Rus, Naša pota, 14. “Uvodnik” (Editorial), Naša misel, 14. “Uvodnik” (Editorial), “Uvodnik” (Editorial), kanzelparagraf þ , Naš 133 þ as, 17. 136 , got into power andintoruled, got de-facto Slovene partof Yugoslavia 1935, after ”, banning priests from from ”, banning 1921 constitution. priests intopolitical work, Slovene Jutro Jutro Jutro , Feb 20 1924. 1924. 6 June , Mar, 16 1924. 134 135 Advocating free spiritual development of the youth 59 132 and even the one of “Catholic of one the even and 137 . In those . In CEU eTD Collection Slavic 140 Socialisti 1938). OJNS, odbor (Archive ofBanovinski Republic the of Slovenia, dislocated unit III, AS1931: (Ljubljana: Republiški sekretariat Youth) za notranje Party zadeve National Yugoslav ofthe Assembly Provincial 139 10 1937. in outlooks, especially regarding the path to modernity (like most of the Central modernity European Central the especially most of (like in pathto the outlooks, regarding this inprogressives looked general for developmental mostly patterns in Thisvaried the West. model by community peasant of adopting( the consequences and difficulties of industrialization individualismand western be could avoided idealizing RussianandSouthSlaviccollectivism peasant andthought undesirable that Already in half second the 19 of BY EMBRACED PROGRESSIVES 4.2. MODELS,PARAGONSANDPATTERNS OFDEVELOPMENT problem. that to subchapter next the ignored question the models,of espousedby actual Slovene liberal Iam politicians, devoting “progress”. andaround Since notionsthe Ihaveuptothis of“free-mindedness” largely point centered endeavor, modernization progressives’ meansof political andpractical elements mutually -can themselves alsoimportantifbeconnected not as understood crucial ideological As it hasbeen shown, Yugoslav national idea, as well as attitudesanti-clerical - being parish clerks”. the mentality of Slovene culture beenin would have a sadstate, “hadbeen it by commanded education and 138 littlefor credit its cultural and generalprogress. Andrej Urši bearing relatively sametime peopleat the soleSlovene of of representative usurping role the and progress” See: Peter Vodopivec, Peter See: “Zaklju Poro Zadruga þ ilo odrugi banovinski skupš þ ne Republikene Slovenije 1918-1982, t.e. 933, 600-19 OJNS.) þ ek Živkovi and Slovene Liberals), Slovene and 138 . Yugoslav National Party Youth reproached the Slovene People’s Party for ü evega obiska v Sloveniji” ( Conclusion of the Živkovi “ Ruski ‘mir’,južnoslovanska zadrugaslovenski in liberalci” (Russian ‘Peace’,South 139 þ ini Omladine Jugoslovanske Nacionalne Stranke Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino th century certain 60 zadruga Young Slovenes ) and socializing the labor. , Yr. 46, No. 1(2006): pp. 65-78. þ thereby thereby argued in 1938 that ü ’s Visit to Slovenia), embraced romantic ideas embracedromantic (Report on the Second the on (Report 140 Jutro Despite , Jun CEU eTD Collection 144 143 142 141 European country with European customs”. with European country European Habsburg lands were “on a higher level of civilization” and that Yugoslavia should become “a ex-the that stressed press liberal the late 1920’s the During state. ofthe parts southeastern criticized thestrivings for Serbian hegemony backwardnessthereby also pointing to of Yugoslav innation, nonewhich of “tribes”the orpartswould prevail overthey others, of creation in gradual believing idea, national Yugoslav of followers consistent most the youth” “educational of the torepresentYugoslav mostcenter appropriate Heidelberg”, become “Yugoslav university should city, Ljubljana, westernmost argued that the forprospects Yugoslavia werethey for, hoping pleading and asfor instance it when was The 1920’s ‘occidentalist’ orientation Sloveneof progressives can be seen in future the “home-grown” solutions. more towards moved stress itself,the also West although inthe evolved political courses tonewideas connected againpartly in which and observablewere the1930’sdevelopment, –the imitated Germans. This largely during so remained slightchanges the 1920’s with inspiration Czechsalso the stressed notin and aloud –usually in but reality many ways of sources more direct closer, the of and France and England thereby were main paragons society. The western and plural secularized theoneofindustrialized, urbanized, throughout was main model the but for instance), protectionists wereeconomic they liberals, national west under the spiritual leadership of west under thespiritual east”was“unnatural”. leadership the economicmodel anyone” “the or push an andto effort more to administrative that cultured the as serving orient of examples historical have beenno “there arguedthat West”, of culture the could becreated. Jutro Jutro Domovina Jutro , Apr.7 1928 (Quoted from: ibid.). , Nov 12 1927 (Quted from: ibid.). , Sept. 10 1927 (Quoted from: Perovšek, Liberalizem in vprašanje, 272.). , Dec., 6 1928 (Quoted from: ibid., 263.). 143 The progressive leader Gregor Žerjav, speaking in favor of of “ideas Žerjav,speaking infavor and leaderGregor The progressive 142 61 Thisway modern a “genuine civilization” 144 141 . As . CEU eTD Collection thirties were years of royal‘stance’ dictatorship can and forcefulof and nationof focal point state newYugoslav the lies.” course attempts be toexplained integrate anymoreresolved inCentral in butEurope Balkans, wherethe natural the andhistorical center Serbs, by Croats the andchanged political situation at that time. Early to the foreground andforeground to the came Balkans of role the primarily stressing rhetoric, New Party. National Yugoslav all-state This changed slightly during progressive 1930’s inwhen Slovene politicians collaborated the tooccidentalization. largelyview corresponded an 1920’s western-orientedrepresented groupingmodernizationessentially and in that their On basisthe of examples the itcited above,could wellbe arguedthatprogressivesthe during democrat or a member of liberal party.” Macdonald, whose speech has been followed by spoke, aspraise: You you had been a the rights of all its citizens. This is uswhat teaches She leading today. before the French one did, and as she led from …As the withEngland led the her developmentof place revolution,Europe long which took Magna Carta hither, in this way is she still democracy get enbourgeoised [ get by ‘fourth the estate’, nor by ‘dictatorship of but proletariat’, the working the people should revolution is revolution formulated: 146 145 labor, and capital between home, appeasement at peace and balance; warthreat, of elimination peace, assuringEurope, to policy: Peace instate asslogan hold‘peace’ true Let foot. living still slogans the Beside government. the over taken and arisen resolutely time first ofthe for ‘protective theconservatives andlong centuriesAfter government, a liberals. the two has third party now customs’“Up untiland ‘free nowtrade’ in Britain: Englandgovernment Labour a first of new establishment the on commenting slogan ‘work,for longbread, peace’generations has set knew the rotation of two major parties in can well be observed in the following excerpt from progressive daily newspaper daily from progressive following in excerpt the can wellbeobserved progress general and asparagons in culture political of terms weretreated countries Which “Ob obletnici prevrata” (On the Anniversary of the Overthrow), of the Anniversary the (On prevrata” “Obobletnici “Uvodnik”( Editorial), entry of theworking life classesintocivic , a parliamentarydemocracy naj sepomeš Jutro Jutro Le TiersEtat , Jan 23 1924. proclaimed that “it is clear now that our destiny can not be common sense þ ani common sense are not only the middle classes, they are not followed not are they classes, middle the arenotonly 145 . (…) ]. The leading slogan of new Macdonald’s era is era new slogan leading Macdonald’s of ]. The 62 permeates the inaugural statement of socialist of statement inaugural the permeates - a common sense for the country and for . Thus final the of consequence French 146 Jutro Such a shift or adoption a new of adoption or Suchashift , Oct 29 1931. Jutro , CEU eTD Collection 149 home-grown solutions risingfrom “own behadpowers” introduced. toYoung progressives and to“livinga nation, space”of andliving adapted circumstances imported successfully found.be neededto individual society and the the between of concord newforms therefore andthat and societies for states destructive fashionliberal – theyargued“liberalindividualism”had itself proven harmfulas and one” noimitate but to in world, the developments to regard west can inbe observed their Coininga “lesson” writings. that they “boundpay were to in for societal progress the from away seeking models totheleft aturn also considerable turn in developments camp under(semi)dictatorship. liberal Slovene the manifestoinown 1940, about whichitit bearguedthat 1930’s could reflected general models As adopted. have mentionedI already earlier, party’s the youth wing published their duringmodernization occurred in progressives’ perspectives especially the 1930’s, regard to Still, signspointing were strong present, possibility tothe a considerable that in shift accordingly. directed at shiftedis theirviews, hardly most of since answerable, their energy during 1930’s was fighting really they whether question, The dictatorship. of circumstances in the political positions their retain Catholicismprogressives as prominent proponents of the regime by all means had to embrace itin order to Slovene and time that at Serb-centered quite was ideology Yugoslav state-sponsored official and the leftistsitself. The for legitimacy of providedemocratic to atrapping usedby regime legal the parties and only werethe which Party, National Yugoslav and Democracy Peasant Radical Yugoslav theirthe rhetoric were formed 148 147 Slovene progressives werethencooperatingsecondinSlovene Živkovi the progressives manner. in aswift nation into one nationalities) non-recognized as other, (as well Slovenes Ibid., 20. Politi of JNS. members rural the of part on reception warm especially an received program The þ na, gospodarskana, in socialna, 9. 63 149 Since foreign models could not be 148 – one formulated in a still fairly in astill formulated –one ü government andinlater government 147 Along with a CEU eTD Collection most of the big industry in Slovene territory was in foreign hands. foreign in was territory Slovene in industry big of the most It should be added that this was at least partly due to the progressives’ protectionist and nationalist stances, as 152 151 150 strongly stressed theimportance propertyof private and free individual economic initiative andinfrastructure big industry vital nationalization Democraticdemanded Although Party of 1918program the Yugoslav of liberalviewsDuring relatively advocated order. 1920’s on economic progressives the attention. in which views some socialspecial andeconomicorder, theirdeserve andstances on 1930’s.This wasaccompanied by changes from progressives anextent1920’s to changed to inAs observed developmental models,the by embraced chapter previous Slovene ORDER 4.3. 1930’s SHIFT IN PROGRESSIVES’ VIEWS ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC healthy and successful - development.” only the its organic therefore -and only could serve itself for –onethat society and economy of system a proper form to capability the nation hisown denies that, does Who elsewhere. foundations,“We mustimprove and build our economic and social frame of the nation on the unique society academic originating in by in ideas,embraced of new leadersof Thiswasapparentthe already the 1937 notions. accompaniedby a modelintroduction hadindeed of style different and occurred, also rhetoric from ourviews (what was stressed by the authors themselves), an enduring shift away from nationalthe western mentioned above the influenced a degree to definitely circumstances uncertain and special the and started, already had war life. world second the when written, were lines these Although We must man”. social “morally renewed not blindly transfer it from saw suchsolutions and in ideas “Slavicsocial brotherhood of cooperation [ Program JDS, 26. Naša misel, 16. Ibid., 21. JNAD Jadran 150 152 : and the party spoke in favor of progressive taxation, they taxation, progressive of favor in spoke party the and 151 64 zadruga ]” and in a CEU eTD Collection system and categorically stated that “liberal democracy” was “from political, economic and economic “from political, was “liberal democracy” that stated categorically and system 157 published in journalprogressive theobsoleteabandoned liberal on views social and problems” economic 156 culture and progress.” (“Uvodnik” (Editorial), represent a simple phrase and that the Yugoslav nation becomes internally externallyand a sturdy bearer of of protection with and strata the the all economically of weaker agreement from mutual the exploitation through “only by thethat big capital is concluded it possible was it that the harmony” national thoughtnational ceases to init was accentuated daily newspaper program, the socio-economic inits included in corporatism July1933and constituted National was Party After Yugoslav economy. national of model corporatist of adoption the was thereby novelty striking most The right”. economy planned and policies interventionist refutingstarted liberal and arguingprinciples infavorof“disciplined democracy”, state They changedsubstantially. liberal social and economic order towards Slovene progressives most of countriesthe and profoundly solutionsdifferent being were tested, attitudethe of During the 1930’s, whenliberal economic principles were being in abandoned of policies ‘neo-liberal’. already andin others perhapsconservative – in elements orientation certain 155 154 153 solidarism national of marks predominance”. had“exclusive strata” weaker “economically live at other classes’ expense” classes’ other live at citizens.At the same time they rejected “any kind of politics, which would aim at one class to weaker for economically standing as themselves declared and of population strata all the for in economic standard increase favor of equable in Theyalsoargued for general progress. “Po kongresu JNS” (After the JNS Congress), (After the JNS” “Po kongresu Cf. In February of 1923 when Ibid., 26. Ibid., 23. Perovšek,Idejni,socialnogospodarski, 537-538. Jutro 155 wrote on the Yugoslav Democratic Party as “the leading champion for champion leading “the as Party Democratic Yugoslav the on wrote 153 , this could belabeled still as essentially an (national)liberal Misel indelo . Inview,not be couldtheir democracy “pure”,in case the Jutro Jutro , Feb 18 1923.) 156 , July 23 1933. 65 , the author analyzed the Italian socio-economic Italian the analyzed author , the , stressing that private property was a“limited 154 Although bearing some 157 Jutro . In an article, that “JNS CEU eTD Collection of the of the Yugoslav National Party Youth inLjubljana 1937) (Ljubljana: 1937), pp. 29-37; p. 31. Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke: Banovinska skupš 163 162 161 160 538.). 159 socialnogospodarski, Idejni, Perovšek, from: (quoted 158 do not exist.“do not forwhichprescriptions lawful in or anticipated advance are not which conflicts, into interfere the inside stay must lessmore or They bureaucratic way. boundaries lawsina of executing formernarrow not can agencies executive State matters. economic and social into intervening itissince itjustcare of andpeace notenoughfor totake inthe country order without of be to thebygone administration viewpoints police order, guidedcan not “State according Nachtwachterstaat asa in aliberal whichperceivedmanner on wasnot new of the state, commented the role A prominent member of Slovene JNS and OJNS Branko Alujevi citizen are guaranteed only through harmony of creative forces of all the estates.” each for every and favorable conditions the Therefore, forestate. every in lifeis defined with the hand of an official and an intellectual. A special range of activities hardenedand by plough,the scythe andhoe, shovela specialand hammer,greet themselves infriendship role “On every occasion shouldmilieu.” different entirely the handsfor theof generationsa peasant, be asitunderstand modern time the can to andcontemporary circumstances, certainly easier brought new resistof spirit For herisit eraandtried its national natural youth] (…) to [the demands. the ancomprehend not did youth artisannational the if sin fatal be a would upIt follow. order beforesocial and the a of demands for certain war popular of Asalogical masses. remedies broader that, of consequence worker, in entirely larger forward onpart brought of newprogress demands “Thecivilization – era–of great blistered different andcircumstances andsolidarity.” in an policy economic its is levelingof [ principles leading the of One opposition. irreconcilable in are branches be interests supporterof can an ideanot National of “Yugoslav various that Party economic clearly: the new quite 1937 illustrate attitudes Rus Jože in Youth from Party National made leaderof Yugoslav bythe excerpts a speech, anymore.actas “bearersof not progress” andliberality”,could “initiative viewpointsocial buried” Branko Alujevi Branko Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Rus, Naša pota, 12. M.G.V., “Korporacijska država v Italiji” (Corporative State inItaly), 160 163 nivelizacija ü , “Naš socialni in gospodarski program” (Our Social and Economic Program) in Program) Economic and Social (Our program” gospodarski in socialni “Naš , : ] of economic interests of all strata in the spirit of national 161 158 . A “new era” was being. A“new individual era”was proclaimed, inwhich þ ina 12. septembra 1937 v Ljubljani 66 Misel delo in ü on the same occasion also , vol.I (1935): p.123 (Provincial conference (Provincial 159 162 Following Omladina CEU eTD Collection 168 167 166 165 1978), pp. 117–173. Debate onDevelopment in a European Nation in Europe” Western of Periphery onthe Development Dependent 164 Socialisti (Archive Republicof the of Slovenia, dislocatedSI III, unit AS1931: Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve insociety. andrights of equality life,defend individual inalienable freedom to mindliberty,rights of andconscience personal personality favoring free market order was Andrej Gosar (interestingly belonging to the to belonging (interestingly Gosar Andrej was order market free favoring personality political visible only The liberalism. economic espoused forces political major the of meansfor stillliberal Even moreends. if one considers thefact in that 1930’s none Slovenia the general trends of the intoaccount thethat mannerof elements bytheprogressivesemploying corporatist –taking time – could also essentially “evolutional andenableand to right” of progress”. pursuit mean an adoption of certaindeter “the left social to extremes of intended advocated National by was Party Yugoslav the illiberalas corporatism, (partial) as well as dirigisme, and interventionism state solidarism, National did. years late in his asManoilescu corporatism of establishment towards initiative andfree self-developmentandin alsodidnot for any revolutionary way push action decision.” free restrain not do which means, all by formation their “accelerating state only the with beformedvoluntarily meant to were corporations The rule. authoritarian and fixedhierarchy forestates, rights” of“differential concepts Manoilescu Mihail theoretician Romanian by advocated ideas solidarist national forward-looking similarly otherwise the from instance for substantially differed they case any In era. the of developments general political the to conformity expressing complete and secluded system and it could alsobe argued that they were more orless phrases, forwardpresentCorporatista by not put solutions politicians Slovene progressive did still Alujevi Schmitter, Reflections, 131. Politi Alujevi of Delayed Consequences National the and Manoilescu Mihail on “Reflections Schmitter, Philippe See: þ þ na, gospodarskana, in socialna, 22. ne Republikene Slovenije 1918-1982, t.e. 933, 600-19 OJNS.) ü ü , Našsocialni, 36-37. , Naš socialni, 33. 166 They continued to stress They importancethe ofindividual to stress continued , KennethJowitt ed. (Berkeley: Institute of International Studies, 67 SocialChange inRomania,1860-1940: A 168 On basis it beargued this could 165 Progressives did not cease to not did Progressives 164 167 and did not includenot and did CEU eTD Collection Party), 172 171 International Studies, 1978), pp. 31–52. 1860-1940: ADebate onDevelopment ina European Nation Concerning Romania’s Prospects inthe 1920's and Its Contemporary Importance” in 170 169 In interwar though. period some has slightly during was modernization the aspects changed for of perspectives these content The ideas. social andprogressive values cultural their self-presentation from may wellbediscerned modernization. This mainforceas of perceivethe themselves as being the main continuedprogressives to the interwar Slovene major population, the well-to-do the partof (or even only) nation progress andfree-mindedness andbeingmainly party the city of and town-dwellers, aswell as builders and bearers Stemming from Slovenethe liberal national traditions, stressing the notions of reason, of high economic unit as the crucial condition for economical progress of the Yugoslav nation.” national whole, sees the party [ party the sees whole, national Standing be property, on principlethe of detrimentof whichshouldthe not used private the to which Co-operatives should especiallybesupported. are aform organization, economic of agriculture andits profitability, which guarantees the peasantpeople aproper existence. (…) of branches the all of advancement for concern bethe therefore must economic policy state Yugoslav nation is predominantly a nation of peasants. The first andfundamental of task our “ of thereby stressing importance the industrialization, agriculture. imposed toforcedly wereopposed and autarchy and pursuit closure economic of advocate not differedfrom the ideas of another Romanian theorist Slovene in liberal manyas camp, although protectionist well aspects as ‘neo-liberal’, also As an ending remark it should alsoliberals. young be stated that the modernizatoryCatholic and economic camp) views and of the ones closest to his views on merely upgrading capitalism were the The social structure of our country is of crucial importance for our economic policy. economic our for importance crucial of is country our of structure social The “Na Rus, Naša Pota, 12-13. Debate Zeletin-Voinea The ofDevelopment: Theories Democratic Social and “Neoliberal Chirot, Daniel See: 480-481. zgodovina, novejša Slovenska þ Slovenski narod ela in smernice Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke” (Principles and Guidelines of the Yugoslav National Yugoslav ofthe Guidelines and (Principles stranke” nacionalne Jugoslovenske in smernice ela 169 , Jul 21 1933. JNS ] the advancement and support for personal effort of every of effort personal for support and advancement the ] ------68 , Kenneth Jowitt ed. (Berkeley: Institute of ù tefan Zeletin. 171 170 Social Change inRomania, The progressives did progressives The 172 CEU eTD Collection Slovene progressive politicians. to alien all – bolshevism as well as Socialism, National fascism, - period interwar the of 174 173 leftists the by fascism of accused themselves destroy inmodernity tobuild order anew existing Although the one. they were often to werecompeting which ideologies, aggressive contemporary camp all the that denounced Slovene Yugoslav nationalists to filofascist to nationalists Yugoslav Slovene as andsimilar organizations liberals ORJUNA for their 1920’s the general weretaking.the support during course Despite appear frequently.“race” started Againto havenot this didfor consequences anysubstantial part of progressives’the nationalist discourse during the 1930’s, notions when of“blood” and As shown inlatter can second the partof the previousthe chapter, be as observed as emerging expressions, usually with associated anti-modernist discourses, canindeed be traced. employed sporadically and of as“perspectives formulated certain modernity” also alternative any of kind substantial although‘anti-modernist’ turn, certain elements of couldwhat be best meant this that beargued hardly very itcould Still order. socio-economic concerning ideas from liberal wellas away bea turn as can observed, model modernization of occidentalist the internal andpolitics by partly international general developments.A political from departure by provoked partly which were shifts, madedrastic certain they Thereby interwar period. Slovene perceived progressives themselves asmodernizers of Slovene society the throughout alternative models and solutions. an existing waspointingthat to modernity extent attitudes andto unfoldingcritical towards expressing least at or “anti-modernist” as labeled be well could which elements, new certain of emergence the notice can one general, in politics interwar Yugoslav and Slovene of nature the from arising from peculiarities Apart less. in others and morechange perceptible that Slovenska novejša zgodovina, 370. zgodovina, novejša Slovenska Friš, Banovinska, 137. Narodna Odbrana 174 Itis worthmentioningin end progressivethat the press ZBOR 69 173 , were totalitarian ideologies and movements and ideologies totalitarian were , during 1930’s as well as adherence of some adherenceof as 1930’saswell during movement, the leading representatives of leading representatives movement, the CEU eTD Collection novejšo zgodovino življenja v Sloveniji” (Spanish Civil War as the Factorof Differentiation in Slovene Political Life), 175 thereby expressing support for therepublican for expressingthereby side. support also partook in inflamed polemics with on Catholics the issue the of Spanishcivilwar, the Janko Prunk and Anka Vidovi Anka and Prunk Janko , Yr., 27,Vol. 1-2 (1987): pp.64-80, p. 65,75-76. þ Miklav þLþ , “Španska državljanska vojna kot dejavnik difereciacije politi difereciacije dejavnik kot vojna državljanska “Španska , 70 175 Prispevki za Prispevki þ nega CEU eTD Collection never-ending domestic strugglemore political with substantial Slovene People’s to Party, and Their for adoptingitit reasons fromclinging ranged and to totheir connected practical ones, lands. in Slovene idea national Yugoslav of advocates vocal most and prime the were Kramer gathered GregorŽerjavmore group around Albert precisely thecore and Progressives, group. Kramer circle” joined in 1930’s by Ivan Pucelj represented the politically farmost significant “Žerjav- the whereby lines, generational along one the was divides major the of One party. renewed butpolitically conditioned unity all of major strains of progressive politics inside one surmounted during 1930’sdespitethe not which wasalso faced 1918, after disintegration progressive the camp by party. persistently course, followed Moreover, unitarist weaker the evenitself broadenedinterwar era–among also other during duetotheunpopular Yugoslav laggedpolitical force farbehinditin of andterms popular thegapbetween support two the in as campmost second Party.the embodied Progressives People’s important Slovene the inof by the predominance 1907wasdistinguished of suffrageuniversal Catholic conservative itparties Political forming landscapewere introduced. of after Slovene lands introduction the its interwarpolitics of andthe camp, In thesecondfeatures progressive general the chapter remaining ones. excavate vanishedandliberal the topointto the wereanalyzedinelements to order discourses framework, the political forces of Slovene “liberalism” and their policies, stances and Understoodas period. heirs the national tradition to liberal respective andputinto contextual The aim my of thesis was presentto the politics Sloveneof progressive camp during interwar CONCLUSIONS 71 CEU eTD Collection of of andCentral Europe broader, since classical liberalism had been vanishing everywhere from forces political liberal among unique not were they view this In overtones. solidarist national by marked were and liberalism economic from far were views socio-economic Progressives’ for ‘home-grown’ solutions. paragons changed by1930’s,turning search from occidentalist a clearly orientation towards modelsand actual developmental the that, to In contrast era. observed the throughout elements and practical political means of their vision of modernizing the Slovene society well as their nation-bulding Yugoslav perspective as acted important if crucialnot ideological as orientation secularist emphasized Their politics. in force Slovene main modernizing the perceive themselves as progressives continuedAs shown andpresent inthechapter, fourth to anymore. nationalists liberal not also were they but far-rightists, into themselves transform not did They nationalism. of versions more byradical a degreeaffected newerand the heirs wereto liberal Slovene discourse showed that nationalistof in such notions and“blood” as “race” progressives’ the increasing sporadicbutthe emergence region.for Furthermore distinctive Central European generally nationalism, of by radicalization fin-de-siecle means they the were byall affected that andindicated partof progressives the nationalist on rhetoric aggressive andexclusivist ahighly demonstrated problem minority national German the of treating The caseexample decade. for half that thesecond of distinctive violence political the to contributed whatperhaps leaders, by beprogressive employed beganto tones Slovenes. During the 1930’s Yugoslav nationalism became radicalized and highly militant unified nation anew, Yugoslav necessary forand higherevolutive represented stage the examples of westernlong-term ones. These included thestate belief in necessitya of a strong state, where they followed nations, as well as a sincere belief that amalgamation into a 72 CEU eTD Collection of critical reflection. critical of a degree without be employed not should it that meaning valid, conditionally therefore view my in is parties political progressive interwar of parties political for label liberal of usage which I wouldit argue that still didnot representa complete and irreversible onethough.The pointa process to of gradual vanishing of nationalthe liberal in fortraditions Slovene politics, camp, affected by the social and political contexts of the time. These phenomena furthermore liberal of the disintegration and disorientation a general reveal thereby discourse, nationalist as radical partly aswell the perspectives, anddevelopmental matters in economical courses “liberalism” and “proggresivism” essentially meantin interwar what Slovenia. to The changingcorresponded state, the by protection their of necessity the and rights political also be argued that these two features, together with a never vanished basicbelief in civic and points could intensifiedmanner.of andtheirpolitics expressedthemselvesinan therefore It central two the represented They anti-clericalism. and benationalism to continued period briefly To of twomaindenominators sum up, the Slovene duringthe progressives interwar ends. means liberal for still of illiberal certain essentially their onit, own itcomments could alsobe the shift arguedthat in meant an question adoption thebasis judgingof on Moreover, trends. general political tothe asanadjustment interpreted be and system could present andsecluded nota complete did politicians, Slovene progressive be as interpreted a drastic On shift. handcorporatism, other the as itforward being by put was least national model whichcould social superficially at of and broader economy organization, During 1930’sthis however,changed,flirt progressives Slovene began withto corporatist the politics. moderate and centrist designating term, that of sense broader in the liberals as labeled be hesitation without still the mainstream party politics. As far as the 1920’s are concerned, progressives could therefore 73 CEU eTD Collection “Adriatic”), Ljubljana: Jadran, J.n.a.d. 1937. Petnajst letJ.N.A.D.»Jadrana« Perovšek ed., Ljubljana:Arhivsko društvo Slovenije, 1998,pp.49-51. Associations in Slovene Lands during of the Times Jurij SHS Kingdom (1918-1929)). þ Yugoslav Nationalists) in Nationalists) Yugoslav (Program nacionalista” of of Organization jugoslovenskih “Program the organizacije Perovšek ed., Ljubljana:Arhivsko društvo Slovenije, 1998,pp.44-46. Associations in Slovene Lands during of the Times Jurij SHS Kingdom (1918-1929)). Kraljevine (1918-1929) SHS Belgrade) in Democratic Party Adopted at the Party Congress on30 Congress at Party the Adopted Party Democratic kongresu 30.in 1921v Beogradu” All-state 31. oktobra (From Yugoslav Program the of stranke nastrankinem sprejetega demokratske Jugoslovanske vsedržavne “Iz programa Perovšek ed., Ljubljana:Arhivsko društvo Slovenije, 1998, pp.23-28. Associations in Slovene Lands during of the Times Jurij SHS Kingdom (1918-1929)). Kraljevine (1918-1929) SHS (June 1918))in “Program Jugoslovanske stranke”demokratske (Program Yugoslavthe of Democratic Party SOURCESII. PUBLISHED notranje zadeve Socialisti (Archive of Republicof the SIAS1931: dislocatedunitSlovenia, RepubliškiIII, za sekretariat Ljubljana: Banovinski OJNS,1940. odbor Politi notranje zadeve Socialisti (Archive of Republicof the SIAS1931: dislocatedunitSlovenia, RepubliškiIII, za sekretariat Banovinski OJNS,1938. odbor on SecondProvincialthe Assembly Yugoslav the National of Ljubljana:Youth). Party Poro notranje zadeve Socialisti (Archive of Republicof the SIAS1931: dislocatedunitSlovenia, RepubliškiIII, za sekretariat 12 Ljubljani Omladina Jugoslovenske nacionalne stranke: Banovinskaskupš Omladina Jugoslovenskenacionalnestranke: SOURCES I. ARCHIVAL asu KraljevineSHS(1918-1929) th 1937 in 1937 Ljubljana). Ljubljana: BanovinskiOJNS, 1937. odbor þ þ ilo o drugi banovinski skupš banovinski ilo odrugi na, gospodarskainsocialna na (Youth of the Yugoslav National Party: Provincial Conference on September the September on Conference Provincial Party: National Yugoslav the of (Youth Programi politi Programi politi SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY SOURCES AND þ þ þ Programi politi ne republike Slovenije t.e.933,600-19 1918-1982, OJNS.) ne t.e.933,600-19OJNS.) 1918-1982, Republike Slovenije ne t.e.933,600-19OJNS.) 1918-1982, Republike Slovenije þ nih strank, organizacij inzdruženj naSlovenskem v nih strank,organizacij þ (Programs of the Political Parties, Organizations and Organizations Parties, Political the of (Programs (Programs of the Political Parties, Organizations and Organizations Parties, Political the of (Programs (Fifteen Years of Yugoslav Progressive Academic Club nih strank, organizacij inzdruženj naSlovenskem v nih strank,organizacij þ ini Omladine Jugoslovanske NacionalneStranke ini Omladine (Programs of the Political Parties, Organizations and Organizations Parties, Political the of (Programs þ þ ela nih strank,organizacij inzdruženj na Slovenskem v 74 (Political, Economic and Social Principles). Social and Economic (Political, th and 31 þ ina 12. septembra 1937 v septembra1937 ina 12. st of 1921in of October (Report þ þ asu asu CEU eTD Collection 75, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1995. Zentralinstituts fürsozialwissenschaftliche derFreien Forschung Universität Berlin Längsschnittstudie zurWahlenentwicklung inDeutschland 1871-1933 R.. Winkler, Jürgen in Yugoslavia Wachtel, Andrew Baruch. Oxford University 1988. Press, Szporluk, Roman. Liberal Camp DuringLjubljana: Years the 1918-1929). Modrijan, 1996. v letih1918-1929 Jurij.Perovšek, Politik zwischen denWeltkriegen Gunther. Mai, Deutungsmusters Leonhard, Jörn. Wien/Pozna Barbara. Serloth Krzysztof. Glass, inštitut FilozofskeZnanstveni 1994. fakultete, Gantar Godina, Irena. Gantar 1987. Ljubljana: inMasaryk SloveneMatica, andMasarykianism Lands: 1895-1914). Slovenska Gantar Godina, Irena. Gantar Press, 1996. Michael. Freeden, Slovene Liberalism in 1891-1921).Ljubljana:Years Novarevija, 2000. liberalizma vletih1891-1921 Bergant, Zvonko. Bergant, MONOGRAPHIES III Domovina Slovenski Narod Jutro PERIODICALS . SECONDARY WORKS . SECONDARY (Published in(Published Ljubljana 1920-1945)–1923, 1924, 1931,1933, 1937 (Publishedin Ljubljana 1918-1944) -1937 Ĕ : Österreichische Gesellschaftfür Studien/Humaniora, Mitteleuropäische 1997. . Stanford, CA : Stanford University Press, 1998. Europa 1918-1939,Gesellschaften und Staaten,Mentalitäten,Lebensweisen, Liberalizem invprašanje :nacionalnapolitikaliberalnegaLiberalizem slovenstva tabora (Published inLjubljana 1868-1945)–1924, 1933 , München: Oldenbourg, 2001. , München: Oldenbourg, Ideologies andpoliticaltheory:aconceptualapproach Communism andnationalism:KarlMarx versus Friedrich List (Liberalism and the Question of Slovenehood: National Politics of the Sozialstruktur, undLiberalismus, Eineempirische politischeTraditionen Slovenski klasi Liberalismus, ZurhistorischenSemantikeineseuropäischen T. G. Masaryk inmasarykovstvo naSlovenskem :1895-1914 Neoslavizem inSlovenci Making a nation, breaking a nation: literatureMaking anation,breakingnation: andcultural politics (Slovene Classical Liberalism, Ideal and Political Character of Character Political and Ideal Liberalism, Classical (Slovene , Stuttgart: Verlag, Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer,2001. Das Selbstverständnis desösterreichischen Liberalismus þ ni liberalizem. idejno-politi ni liberalizem. 75 (Neoslavism and Slovenes). Ljubljana: þ ni zna . Oxford: Clarendon . Oxford: þ . aj slovenskega Schriften des Schriften , Oxford: (T.G. . Band . . CEU eTD Collection Delayed Dependent Development on the Periphery of Western Europe” in Europe” Western of Periphery the on Development Dependent Delayed of Consequences National the and Manoilescu onMihail Philip.“Reflections Schmitter, pp. 69-74. MahniSimposium Vodopivec,Peter Joža 1995). Ljubljana and inZagreb) medin “Liberalni Prunk, Janko. Ljubljano (Liberal Zagrebom” tabor between Camp pp. 43-57. MahniSimposium Vodopivec,Peter Joža 1995). in and Ideas) of State Society, “Politika v naroda Pleterski, inidej” Janko. krizi of države dužbe, (Politics in a Nation Crisis Begriffsgeschichte. ideology Freeden, Michael.and“Concepts, theory” in political Peter Vodopivec,Peter JožaMahni in Divisions) Dolenc,“Slovenski intelektualci in Ervin. delitve” njihove Intellectuals(Slovene and Their 31–52. European Nation in Importance” Contemporary in andIts 1920's the Prospects ConcerningRomania’s Voinea Debate Chirot, Daniel.“Neoliberal and Social Democratic Theories of Development: The Zeletin- IN ACOLLECTION STUDIES Lexikon zurGeschichte Europa derParteienin Fischer, Jasna et al eds.,Ljubljana: Mladinska Knjiga, Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino, 2005. Vol. InternationalRepublic1:1848-1945. the Recognition 1848-1992), Slovenia: of of Slovenije:1848-1992 Republike ZedinjenaSlovenijadomednarodnegapriznanja Slovenskazgodovina: odprograma novejša Denes, Ivan Zoltan (ed.). Ljubljana: Inštitut zanovejšo zgodovino, 1995. poro ý GENERALLITERATURE AND COLLECTIONS einestschechischenPolitikers Modernisierungsverständnis Winkler, Martina. Winkler, epi þ þ ilo , Zdenko et al.. (Key of Characteristics in yearsSlovene Politics 1929-1955:aScientific Report). Slovenska tridesetaleta:simpozij 1995 Social Change in Romania, 1860-1940: ADebateonDevelopmentChange ina Social inRomania,1860-1940: , Kenneth Jowitt ed., Berkeley: Institute Berkeley: Institute of ed., 1978,pp. Studies, International , Kenneth Jowitt CarstenDutted., Heidelberg: pp. Winter, 51-63. 2003, Karel Kramá Klju Liberty and the search for identity þ ne zna þ Slovenska tridesetaleta:simpozij1995 eds., Ljubljana: eds., Slovenska matica, 1997,pp.194-201. Slovenska tridesetaleta:simpozij1995 (Slovene Modern History: from United Slovenia Program to Program Slovenia United from History: Modern (Slovene þ Ĝ ilnosti slovenske politike v letih 1929-1955 :znanstveno politikevletih1929-1955 slovenske ilnosti (1860 í 1937). Selbstbild,Fremdwahrnehmungen und 76 . Peter Wende ed., Stuttgart: Kröner, 1981. þ þ eds.,Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997, eds.,Ljubljana: Slovenska matica, 1997, (Slovene Thirties: Simposium 1995). . Munich: Oldenbourg, 2002.. Munich: Oldenbourg, , Budapest:CEU Press, 2006. Herausforderungen der Herausforderungen (Slovene Thirties: (Slovene (Slovene Thirties: (Slovene Social Change in CEU eTD Collection (1987): pp.(1987): 64-80. Life). Political Slovene in Differentiation difereciacije politi difereciacije meš Prunk, Janko. Vidovi Zgodovinski National Political of Views Slovene Middle Classes in Time Interwar the (1918-1941)). Perovšek, Jurij.Perovšek, 1918). 1918” (Social, Political and Ideal Character of Slovene Liberalism the YearsDuring 1894- Perovšek, Perovšek, Jurij.“Socialni, politi 24. Melik, Vasilij. “Slovenski liberalni tabor in njegovo razpadanje” (Slovene Liberal Camp and Disintegration). its Camp Liberal (Slovene razpadanje” in njegovo tabor liberalni “Slovenski Vasilij. Melik, Zeitschrift HistorischeGesellschaft, Sozialwissenschaftfür nach‘liberal’im 1850 europäischen Vergleich.” und‘liberalismus’ “SemantischeLeonhard, Jörn. von DeplazierungundEntwertung: Deutsche Deutungen History andTheory theGerman Sonderweg.” TheCaseof Comparison: Historical “Asymmetrical Jürgen. Kocka, þ (National Radical Students). radikalno“Narodno dijaštvo” Godina, Gantar Irena. pp. 61-78. Across Slovene Landsin Year1937). slovenskih krajih by leta 1937”(Tour Živkovi Petar Friš, Darko. “Turneja Petra Živkovi “Turneja Petra Friš, Darko. Yr. 59,Vol. (2005):pp. 1-2 129-146. (1937 Provincial Conference of inNational Yugoslav Ljubljana).Party Friš, Darko.“Banovinska konferenca Jugoslovanske nacionalne stranke leta1937v Ljubljani” ARTICLES JOURNAL pp. 97-109. Simposium 1995). Peter Vodopivec,Simposium Peter 1995). JožaMahni during thein Years 1929-1941) v letih 1929-1941” (The Role and Organization inof Youth Yugoslavthe Part of Slovenia Vidovi Berkeley: of International Institute 1978,pp.117–173. Studies, 1860-1940: ADebateonDevelopmentNationRomania, in aEuropean asopis. þ anstva v þ Prispevki zanovejšo zgodovino Miklav vol. pp. 36(1982): 219-230. þ asopis þ þLþ asu med svetovnima vojnama (1918-1941)” (Ideal, med and asu Socio-economic svetovnima vojnama (1918-1941)” , Anka. “Vloga, in mladineorganiziranost v jugoslovanskem delu Slovenije “Idejni, socialnogospodarski in“Idejni, socialnogospodarski narodnopoliti þ Prispevki zazgodovino delavskega gibanja . Vol. 38, No. 1 (Feb., 1999): pp. 40-50. . Vol. 51, No.. Vol. 51, 4(1997):pp. 529-554. nega življenja v Sloveniji” (Spanish Civil War as the Factor of Factor the as War Civil (Spanish v Sloveniji” življenja nega þ Miklav þ þLþ Slovenska tridesetaleta:simpozij1995 ni in zna idejni , Anka.“Španska vojnadejavnik, državljanska kot . Yr. 32,No.. Yr. 1-2 (1992): pp.3-14. ü Prispevki novejšo za zgodovino a in vodstva Jugoslovanske nacionalne stranke po nacionalne Jugoslovanske stranke a invodstva Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino 77 þ þ eds.,Ljubljana: Matica, 1997, Slovenska ü aj aj liberalizmav letihslovenskega 1894- and Yugoslav andYugoslav National Leadership Party . No.29 (2003): pp. 5-39. . vol. 1-2/yr.22 (1982):pp.19- þ ni nazori slovenskega . Yr. 45, No. 1(2005): 45, . Yr. . Kenneth Jowitt ed., . Kenneth Jowitt Zgodovinski . Yr. 27, Vol. 1-2 (Slovene Thirties: (Slovene Geschichte und Geschichte Zgodovinski þ asopis . CEU eTD Collection politisch-sozialen Sprache inDeutschland politisch-sozialen Sprache in: “Radikalismus” Peter. Wende, Conze, Reinhart Koselleck eds., Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1992, pp. http://www.dlib.si/v2/StreamDb.aspx?URN=URN:NBN:SI:img-1FNUNYQ1 Digitalna Knjižnica Slovenije Photograph of KramerAlbert and Ivan Pucelj (193?). IV. OTHER Conze, ReinhartKoselleck Klett-Cotta, eds.,Stuttgart: 1992,pp. 113-133. politisch-sozialen SpracheinDeutschland in “Liberalismus” Rudolf. Vierhaus, 1997, p.257. Chronicle), Marjan vol.1: 1900-1941. Bajt andDrnovšek eds., Ljubljana: Drago Nova Revija, and the “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” Language) in Language) and “Serbo-Croato-Slovene” the Jurij.Perovšek, “Bogumil in Vošnjak ‘srbsko-hrvaško-slovenski’ jezik” (Bogumil Vošnjak 329. vol.1: Marjan 1900-1941. DrnovšekBajt and Drago eds., Ljubljana: Nova Revija,p. 1997, Balkovec, Bojan. “Rezultati parlamentarnih volitev v Sloveniji” (Parliamentary Election (Parliamentary Sloveniji” v in volitev in Slovenia) Results parlamentarnih “Rezultati Bojan. Balkovec, ARTICLES ANDMISCELLANEOUS ENCYCLOPEDICAL LEXICAL, 1 No. (2006): pp.65-78. 27 2010. ‘Peace’, South Slavic South ‘Peace’, Peter. Vodopivec, “ Ruski Ruski južnoslovanska‘mir’,zadruga in liberalci”slovenski (Russian Zadruga Slovenska kronika XX. Stoletja Slovenska kronikaXX. (Digital Library of Slovenia), of Library (Digital and Slovene Liberals). Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe :historischesGeschichtliche Grundbegriffe Lexikon zur Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe Grundbegriffe : historisches Geschichtliche Lexikon zur , , Vol.5: Pro-Soz, 4. Auflage. Otto Brunner, Werner Vol.3 H-Me, 4. Auflage. Otto Brunner, Werner Brunner, Auflage.Otto 4. H-Me, Vol.3 78 kronika XX. Stoletja kronika XX. Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino (Slovene XX. Century Chronicle), 741-785. (Slovene XX. Century XX. (Slovene . accessed May accessed . . Yr. 46, CEU eTD Collection 79