Quick viewing(Text Mode)

TITO: Charisma As Political Legitimacy

THE EFFECT

Charisma as political legitimacy TITO: behind an imaginary collective identity – I Charisma as political legitimacy know nothing about Broz while I feel that I know everything. - an excess of memory As for Max Weber, however, it can be said Radonja Leposavić with certainty that he was not aware of Josip Broz. In fact, there is some slight possibility that the two of them may Tito’s results still endure, today in the shape have passed each other by chance in the of the active impact of his revised picture. streets of or before the Todor Kuljić Great War – in the period when Broz was wandering around Germany looking for a Josip Broz never heard of Max Weber. Or job, but this is merely a literary possibility. perhaps he did. Perhaps he even knew, In 1918, Weber would become a consultant perhaps he was acquainted with the social to the German delegation at the Versailles theory of this “Marx of the bourgeoisie”. Peace Conference – the same one at Both possibilities – that he knew and that which the Kingdom of , and he didn’t – are equally likely and unlikely. Slovenians, the future , was And equally insignificant today. But they dealt with as a “state in progress”. He was speak eloquently of the fact that we know then involved in drafting the Constitution virtually nothing about Josip Broz while of the Weimar Republic. He died of the we feel that we know everything – down to consequences of the Spanish Flu on June the smallest detail. Or – not to hide myself 14, 1920, in Munich. He was 56. In May 1920, Josip Broz turned 28. And had a fair amount of union, political, military, war, revolution and – most certainly – life experience. The “black waiter’s suit” – of which, as a teenager, he dreamed – had not yet materialised (don’t let the photograph fool you), and yet it had already become too small. The symbol of a naïve desire from early youth; an unrealised, anecdotal past. It may be assumed that it would have been no different even if Broz had fulfilled this wish of his in time, but we will never know what the history of the international workers’ movement, the history of the communist movement, the history of World War Two or the history of the “second”

Comrade Tito in the village of Veliko Trojstvo, outside Samuel Polak’s mill in 1922 or 1923. Tito is wearing a villager’s hat on his head. (photograph and caption from ’s book Josip Broz Tito – prilozi za biografiju, , 1955) Josip( “Tito” Broz - Appendices to a Biography) Yugoslavia might have been had Broz read, legitimacy may be based on: in 1922, Weber’s posthumously published 1. rational grounds: resting on a belief in book Wirtschaft und Gessellschaft (Economy the legality of enacted rules and the right of and Society), at least the third chapter those elevated to authority under such rules on types of domination. Perhaps even if to issue commands (legal authority) – or he had, everything would have been the 2. traditional grounds: resting on an same, and perhaps it would not have. Both established belief in the sanctity of possibilities – that it would have and that immemorial traditions and the legitimacy it wouldn’t have – are equally likely and of those exercising authority under them unlikely. And equally insignificant today. (traditional authority) – or finally, Unless they are not insignificant. 3. charismatic grounds: resting on devotion In 1976, Belgrade publishing house to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or Prosveta published Weber’s book in a exemplary character of an individual person, translation by Olga and Tihomir Kostrešević and of the normative patterns or order under the title Privreda i društvo. Tito was revealed or ordained by him (charismatic 84 at the time. The book was published authority). in two volumes, in a print run of 5,000, as (...) In the case of charismatic authority, it is part of the series Karijatide (Caryatids). The the charismatically qualified leader as such third chapter, Types of Domination includes who is obeyed by virtue of personal trust in the following: his revelation, his heroism or his exemplary There are three pure types of legitimate qualities so far as they fall within the scope of domination. The validity of the claims to the individual’s belief in his charisma… It doesn’t matter... today it doesn’t matter grounds. The present exhibition how it would have been – because it was demonstrates this well. So how can this how it was, but I think ... in fact I believe contradiction be resolved. Something here that it would have been different had Josip does not add up. Broz read Weber’s book. If he had read it Because I am neither willing nor able to “in time”, soon after it was first published, relinquish my faith in enlightenment, I in the twenties of the last century. Later, it am left with no choice but to consider this would have been too late, later: when Tito other matter: the seriousness of Josip Broz. was already caught up in the machinery of Why, in fact, do I believe that at issue here history, when the battle had begun, when is a serious man. Because I think… because the war had begun, when domination had I know that the project at whose helm “arrived”… he stood – which, as Tito, he symbolised I believe that it all would have – was a very serious project of economic, been different, because I believe in national, class, native, individual and every enlightenment. In spite of everything. other kind of emancipation. Liberational, And I believe that Josip Broz was a serious modernisational… in one word, man. And I cannot imagine a serious man enlightenmental. And so here, once again, who would “agree to” any type of legitimate it’s a matter of faith. I know that something authority other than that based on rational is good and I believe that only serious grounds. And here I am caught in a trap, people stand behind it. There is also a because it is evident that Tito based his Dadaist twist possible here – and this, by authority to a large extent on charismatic the way, is something very dear to me in artistic practice, but this time I’m betting in knowledge and in the seriousness of on dual belief. For Pascalian reasons – but the person who symbolises an important after the death of God. Otherwise I could project. bid you farewell immediately! Because if I Perhaps – having read Max Weber’s book – didn’t believe in this unfortunately unlikely Josip Broz would have headed to America combination – what else would there be for by sometime in 1923 and forged a great me on Planet Earth? acting career based on charisma. Perhaps, So I believe in enlightenment and that but this again is only a literary possibility. Josip Broz was a serious man. And I don’t The real question is: would what we had know how to explain the apparent – here have been possible without the perhaps even the dominant – charismatic charismatic grounds for Tito’s domination? grounds for Tito’s domination. So once But this is a historically impossible again I shall resort to nothing other than question because – as we well know – the enlightenment in which I believe everything is mutually interwoven. But and assume that everything would have theoretically: was it possible in a society been different had Josip Broz read Max such as Yugoslavia after World War Two, Weber’s book in time. Then he would have to implement any emancipatory project known… and he would have endeavoured through domination which wasn’t based not to base his domination on charismatic on charismatic grounds? This is a difficult grounds at all. I believe that he would question and opinions are divided. have made this endeavour because – given In the second edition of the sociological- that I believe in enlightenment – I believe historical study TITO, published in in 2005, Todor Kuljić introduces the an exception). There are more frequently following definition:The presumption examples of imposing modernisation of modernisation is rationalisation and, through the authoritarian exercise of in politics, as in other activities, this is undivided power which relies on traditional separation from religion and then the political culture (one-party socialist regimes acceptance of technological and economic and authoritarian power in undeveloped novelties, the encouragement of horizontal countries) or the cruel consolidation of and vertical mobility, the strengthening capitalism with the help of classical slavery, of legality, the canvassing of broad as in the U.S in the nineteenth century. popular support and the lessened use of compulsion. So, if modernisation presumes So things get more complicated. Without rationalisation, it would be coherent for it the charismatic grounds for domination to be implemented by domination based by Tito or someone else – that is, on the on rational grounds (legal authority). basis of the rational grounds of legitimacy However, in the very next paragraph, Kuljić or by means of legal authority – the writes: Because modernisation is not always project of rapid modernisation could based on a less or more voluntary acceptance have been carried out in Yugoslavia after of new experiences (because of the resistance World War Two only on the very unlikely of tradition or the lack of institutional presumption that it would be exactly here channels, it is thus not always linked with that the historic exception of nineteenth- the strengthening of divided domination century European liberalism would be (nineteenth-century European liberalism is repeated. The chances are that Josip Broz did not believe in such miracles. However, continues Kuljić: Although authoritarian measures can encourage modernisation, the undefeated tradition of authoritarian political culture permits only incomplete modernisation. Which now, in hindsight, indicates the dilemma which the citizens of Yugoslavia never faced politically: slow modernisation with traditional authority or incomplete modernisation with a charismatic leader. Unfortunately the historical and cultural conditions for the third option – the rational one – did not exist.

A photograph of Comrade Tito from December 1937, while he was illegally in Austria. The courier who accompanied Comrade Tito took this photograph in a place called Bischofshofen (photograph and caption from Vladimir Dedijer’s book Josip Broz Tito – prilozi za biografiju, Belgrade, 1955) (Josip “Tito” Broz – Appendices to a Biography) With either rapid or slow modernisation, nationalisms, populisms… after 35 years of it wouldn’t matter. And the dilemma, that rapid – even if incomplete – modernisation? of slow or incomplete modernisation, is Do the items on display at the May 25 essentially false – it was never possible Museum entertain you or frighten you? to establish just one traditional authority Those thousands of embroideries, models, in Yugoslavia, over the entire territory, socks and batons? And what do you think, without great force. So it seems that there how many of the people who made them was in fact no choice: Josip Broz came out would today disown their handicrafts? of the war as a winner, as a hero, he had all How many of them, subsequently, are the prerequisites to become a charismatic ashamed? How many of them would like leader of Yugoslavia, so that is what – as to hide the fact that they were the ones Tito – he became. who sent things to Tito, gave gifts, ran with Over the almost forty years of Tito’s batons, wrote songs and poems? How domination, Yugoslavia became a many of us took part in, encouraged and respectable country. Economically, kept alive the charismatic grounds of Tito’s militarily and internationally. It didn’t seem domination? that way from the inside – one can never In his book Economy and Society, Max have enough freedom, bread and circuses Weber writes: By its very nature, the – but it does seem that way now, when that existence of charismatic authority is country is long gone. specifically unstable. The holder may forego So how were the bloody wars of the his charisma; he may feel ‘forsaken by nineties possible? And all those his God’, as Jesus did on the cross; he may prove to his followers that ‘virtue is gone permitted – even initiated – a debate on the out of him’. It is then that his mission is charismatic grounds of his own domination. extinguished, and hope waits and searches He ought to have worked himself on the for a new holder of charisma. The charismatic deconstruction of his own charisma – this holder is deserted by his following, (only) could be expected of a serious man at the because pure charisma does not know any helm of a serious project. But no – Tito ‘legitimacy’ other than that flowing from became angry whenever these issues were personal strength, that is, one which is raised. constantly being proved. The charismatic hero does not deduce his authority from The word charisma is of Greek origin codes and statutes, as is the case with the (χάρισμα) and means a gift – a divine jurisdiction of office, nor does he deduce his favour. In an as yet unpublished interview authority from traditional custom or feudal on Tito, from 2007, Nebojša Popov says: A vows of faith, as is the case with patrimonial charismatic figure appears – as Weber wrote power. The charismatic leader gains and – in times of grave crisis, even catastrophe. maintains authority solely by proving his Then, under such circumstances, this person strength in life. appears as a saviour, because he possesses It’s a shame that Josip Broz didn’t read extraordinary gifts – special abilities. And this, sometime in the twenties of the last so, here too, in the situation which existed century, before the historic machinery – in unambiguously dramatic historic of Tito was set in motion. Later, it was circumstances, tragic, in the circumstances of too late, but even later he ought to have not only a grave crisis but also a horrendous global and civil war – a figure appeared gift who saves the people and the country. which was given the role of saviour. And This takes the form of nostalgia – what is as time went by, this role was increasingly not being taken into account is the closed expanded. circle of charismatic legitimatisations and In 1971, at the Korčula Summer School, catastrophes – and the debate is about Svetozar Stojanović gave a very serious whether someone is nice or not, whether this presentation, a report – I myself, by catastrophe is bigger than that one, whether coincidence, chaired this session – in which these figures have greater stature than those he drew attention not only to the familiar others. aspects of Max Weber’s idea, but also to one And Svetozar Stojanović, also in an relationship which Weber did not address. unpublished interview on Tito in 2007 says: And this is that a charismatic personality – In 1971, in Tuzla, I defended a poor wretch, a which gives legitimacy to a particular order fighter who had been charged with swearing – may also, at the same time, be a factor about Tito. Some girlfriend of his had in the creation of a new crisis situation, a reported him. There I addressed the judge catastrophe even. and this man was acquitted by the court. There is no need to elaborate any further: we Later the case also came before higher court. have just lived through this. Tito then made his famous statement saying And now, probably because of a new, grave that “Some judges cling to the law as a drunk crisis – a dramatic and tragic situation clings to a fence”. bordering on catastrophe – there is a Then, on Korčula, I presented a paper on renewal of the cult of a man with a special charisma and charismarchy. Later I heard from the historian Ljuba Dimić, that he had legitimacy of his own domination. Had he acquired a copy of this paper of mine from demonstrated this awareness he would Praksis with Tito’s personal remarks and also have demonstrated that he was aware comments in the margins. of the compelling nature of this form of So I too should slowly begin to close the domination as a necessary evil. And in circle, to somehow escape from this never- that case, I believe, it would all have been ending story. I could conclude that Josip different. Because Tito himself – realising “Tito” Broz was a serious man at the helm that the charismatic type of domination is, of a serious project – but he wasn’t serious even when necessary, still an evil – would enough. He ought – while he was still just have worked towards the deconstruction Josip Broz – to have known more. Even of his own charisma. He was, after all, a when – or precisely when – that missing serious man. He would not have stopped knowledge came from “bourgeois” sources. it, he would not have banned it – instead For example, he ought to have learnt about he would have encouraged debate about Max Weber in time and ought to have taken it. And the intellectual public, at home and his knowledge into account. abroad, over the course of Tito’s 35 years And later, when he had become Tito – even of rule, would likely have found a “cure” for if modernisation could not be implemented his charisma. With the help of Tito himself. in socialist Yugoslavia through any means That is, a way would probably have been other than charismatic domination – he found to turn Tito’s charismatic domination ought (at least) to have shown that he into legal domination along with resolving was aware of the principal grounds of how to transfer the energy of charisma to the broadest public. However, as Todor Kuljić would say – Tito was “a skilful statesman who also made mistakes”. So he would be incensed when discussion arose on the nature of the legitimacy of his domination and did not allow debate on this. And so his charisma remained intact until his death. His political successors tried to preserve it – “After Tito, Tito” – but this did not succeed. Death showed that – as Weber wrote – “virtue is gone out of him”: it is then that his mission is extinguished, and hope waits and searches for a new holder. We know how the story ends. With a new holder, with new holders. When I think about Josip Broz not having read Max Weber’s book in time, I could scream. On gifts and gift giving the recipient does not designate it as a Olga Manojlović Pintar gift and thus will not feel obliged to either present a gift in return or be grateful, and Is the giving of gifts a symbolic exchange of that the giver instantly forgets it in order values through which a specific relationship not to develop a feeling of expectation and, is established between the person giving consequently, of frustration if there is no and the person receiving or, conversely, symbolic recognition, acclaim, approval or does the giving of gifts imply precisely the congratulations. A gift loses the character non-existence of reciprocity, of exchange, of a gift as soon as it is recognised as of two-way giving? Do the participants in such by either of the two parties involved the process of gift giving know that a gift because its essence is precisely in the lack of can never be free of cost (Marcel Mauss), or compensation. Gifts and the presentation is the phenomenon of giving gifts based of gifts are impossible and unfeasible. A gift on the presumption that he who gives a remains a gift only with the act of instant gift in return is actually cancelling the act forgetting. as such (Jacques Derrida)? Must a gift be Regardless of the answer chosen to these reciprocated, or must it be not reciprocated? questions, or the explanation accepted or The conclusion offered by Derrida not accepted, the conclusion is the same: presupposes that giving a gift in return there are two sides to the process of gift- is an exchange, not a giving of gifts so, in giving. Thus thinking about presenting order for something to be understood as gifts to Josip “Tito” Broz, which was a gift, it must meet two conditions: that done every May in a virtually ritual way, means thinking not only about Tito – the gifts to Tito were positioned and promoted recipient of the gifts – but primarily about within the socialist community. For the the people and society who for a full giver, the giving of the gift meant a chance three and a half decades preserved the to be in the space of the White Palace and practice of giving gifts to the president have direct contact with the president, and, and who, through this, achieved their own above all the presumption of Tito’s gratitude development. as the ultimate satisfaction for the gift-giver. *** In the month which bore the archetypal Presenting gifts to a ruler, as an established symbolism of spring and youth – the ritual, has always been an important symbolism of renewal, growth, hope and element of the symbolic practice of every joy (Eric J. Hobsbawm), a holiday was state community. By offering a gift, an invented to celebrate the birthday of Josip exchange is initiated whose goal is to “Tito” Broz. More than any other state propitiate and win over the sovereign. holiday, May 25, later proclaimed as Youth Through the act of presenting gifts the Day, gave an illusion of the president’s power of the ruler, as an entity before whom direct contact with the people and the differences were levelled and a community existence of a special emotional bond constituted, entered into the public space. between them. The established practice In socialist Yugoslavia the practice of of presenting gifts to Tito, which lasted all presenting gifts to Josip “Tito” Broz was one year round, reached its climax in the days of the foundations on which social cohesion of his birthday celebration. was built. Those involved in the giving of The precise timetable which, for weeks ahead of May 25, determined the schedule numerous ceremonies and monuments and the kind of reception given to in the public space. Recognisable by the hundreds and hundreds of gift-givers, luxury which surrounded him and which testified to the presentation of gifts clearly set him apart, through his lifestyle of as a politically and socially desirable royal residences, secluded Adriatic islands form of behaviour. The messages which and yachts, Josip “Tito” Broz became the accompanied the giving of gifts expressed materialisation of the future promised to eternal love, devotion, trust and pride. every member of the socialist community. By emphasising the attributes which The slogan “We are all Tito”, among its other earned that love and pride, the givers of meanings, certainly reflected the need for a gifts in fact embellished the image of the substitution of the frustrations imposed by president with attributes the people of day-to-day life. socialist Yugoslavia identified with. Tito became a metaphor of the idealised In the egalitarian society of life of the future but, much more than that, proclaimed at the end of World War Two, he was an icon of the present. Presented the symbol of Marshal and President Josip as one of the most prominent politicians of “Tito” Broz was loaded with the meanings the era, and as the central figure which built the society. Values based of the Non-Aligned Movement, he opened on the image of a president-for-life as for the citizens of Yugoslavia a process of a ruler who clearly stands apart, a thin moving from the margin to the centre. As stratum of the social elite and a mass of the greatest traveller, a man who spoke equal individuals were legitimised with on equal terms with world leaders in the time of the Cold War, as the most valued possible. The giving of gifts to Josip “Tito” guest around the world, Josip “Tito” Broz Broz strengthened social cohesion and so was the fulfilment of a Yugoslav desire for this giving of gifts, while spontaneous at the affirmation outside the borders and clear beginning, became in time a very important recognition. A photograph from Brioni, element of political practice. It was from July 1956, showing Tito standing in practised by individuals who, through their a white suit between Nehru and Nasser gift – their modest handkerchief, their little watching them shake hands, symbolised child’s suit, their embroidered pillowcase, the central position of the “first among engraved box or lamp – wanted to enter an equals”. In the system of post-colonial interactive relationship with the entity with states which comprised the Non-Aligned whom they had identified. However by far Movement, the position of Yugoslavia and the most numerous presenters of gifts to the role of Josip “Tito” Broz were clearly Tito were institutions: schools, hospitals, singled out and, as such, were a powerful work organisations, sports associations, force in building a Yugoslav identity. factories, mines, village and Through constant travel around the country so on. By the act of presenting gifts, work and receptions organised in connection with collectives and associations of citizens the May 25 celebration, an impression was would affirm the authenticity of the socialist created of Tito in constant communication self-management ideology which was with the people who, believing in the based on a network of workers’ councils as political and military strength of Yugoslavia, active subjects of the society. In this way a felt the need to bond as closely to him as relationship was established which, through the presentation of artefacts in exchange for gifts did not cease immediately with the expressions of gratitude, built the system of death of Josip “Tito” Broz. It continued values on which Yugoslavia functioned. for some time in the form of pilgrimages Through their choice of gifts and the form of and the laying of flowers and wreaths on presentation, the gift givers believed they his grave in the House of Flowers. But were creating an image of themselves and everything which had been transposed into emphasising their own exceptional qualities the personality of Josip “Tito” Broz and, in Tito’s eyes. However, by ascribing to them through him, into the Yugoslav community the attributes desired, the process of gift was eventually completely dispersed. giving changed, almost imperceptibly, its What remained was frustration at the loss participants – both the one who received of the feeling of superiority the people the gifts as well as those who gave them. had acquired by looking at themselves From being a metalworker and Communist through Tito, as though through a distorting Party activist, Josip “Tito” Broz was transformed into a symbol of a statesman mirror. Everything which had been beyond of international repute, while the citizens question while the centre existed, became of Yugoslavia – former border guards problematical once it disappeared. That of the most underdeveloped European frustration cried out for a resolution, but empires and peasants from a tiny, marginal failed to find one, even after the bloody Balkan state - were now perceived as the denouement which occurred just a decade champions of global peace politics. after the death of Josip “Tito” Broz. The established practice of presenting

Batons nationalised the geographic space of Olga Manojlović Pintar Yugoslavia, drafting a unique mental map in which the multiple Yugoslav identities were charted. Millions of bodies in motion Every spring from the end of World War presented a metaphor of a dynamic Two until 1987, mass baton relays were society running towards the longed-for held in Yugoslavia. In the 42 years of its and promised future. history, the baton relay involved more As the most recognisable symbol of the than ten million citizens who ran a total practice of presenting gifts to Josip “Tito” of almost 900,000 kilometres. More than Broz, the baton shaped those systems of 22,000 imaginatively designed batons, values on the basis of which the ideology of which contained birthday congratulations was built. The birthday and greetings to Josip “Tito” Broz, were messages conveyed in the baton were passed from hand to hand by millions incorporated into a broader context of of young workers, farmers, children, commemorating certain anniversaries from students, soldiers and sportsmen. They the history of the , the were carried by mountaineers, divers, national struggle and revolution, parachutists and even carrier pigeons. or from the period of the renewal and Carrying the baton through cities and building of a “new” society and state. villages, climbing with it to the highest On the symbolic level, the baton gave mountain peaks and plunging with it into legitimacy to the decision of the political the depths of the Adriatic, the runners elite to promote the central slogan of the historic narrative of socialist Yugoslavia – The passing on of a baton and a book with the slogan of . the signatures of 15,000 young people from The idea of the baton originated in 1945 Šumadija into the hands of Josip “Tito” Broz in Kragujevac, a city with a long tradition in May 1945 was in fact the continuity of of relay races. The people of Kragujevac authority. By employing the same symbolic passed a torch from hand to hand to practice used by those who were once the celebrate the arrival of the first train in fundament of monarchist Yugoslavia, the their city, the opening of the waterworks, transfer of statehood was complete. and they turned out in masses to greet In the first years after the war the the Olympic Flame on its 1936 journey batons would be presented to Tito at from Athens to Berlin. Kragujevac was the White Palace. Over the twelve year also the last stop of the Torch of Freedom history of Tito’s Baton (1945-56), many which, during the time of the Kingdom of companies, schools, army units, societies Yugoslavia, was carried by thousands of and associations sent batons, each of Sokol members from to Oplenac individual design and with individual to light a devotional lamp on the grave contents. From 1957, as part of the of Petar I Karađorđević. The departure celebration of the newly-thought-up of Tito’s first baton from the city whose holiday, May 25 – – Tito would representatives had lit a flame in the receive a unique Youth Baton at a major monument to the Karađorđević dynasty youth rally held at the Yugoslav People’s in Oplenac may also be interpreted as a Army Stadium. Immediately after the symbolic legitimisation of the new regime. death of Iosif Vissarionovich Stalin, Yugoslav communists – the loudest critics of performances in which virtually the of the – attempted whole society was involved, the imagined to introduce changes to the way in unification was realised in the public space. which Tito’s birthday was celebrated. In After the death of Josip “Tito” Broz, the this sense the renaming of May 25 as baton was carried through Yugoslavia Youth Day was also an attempt to affirm for another seven years with the slogan new political realities. The first Youth “After Tito, Tito”. It was in this period that Baton was presented to Tito in 1957 by the baton most clearly became identified , the then secretary of the with a petrified state whose fundamental Central Committee of the People’s Youth symbols had been rendered senseless, of Yugoslavia, and the last baton was thus losing their essential content. And presented to Tito in 1979 by Sania Hiseni, so it was and remained a metaphor for a student from Priština. . From enthusiasm and pride, The journey of the baton through to shame denial and demonization, the Yugoslavia would unite millions of citizens baton closed the circle within which the into a unified collective. In a period of Yugoslav state existed and in which, in the strong affirmation of the idea of working end, it was destroyed. class unity, the baton, in addition to celebrating May 1, “combined public and private merry-making and good cheer with the assertion of loyalty to the movement” (Eric J. Hobsbawm). With regular repetition

Rallies included complex mass choreography as Olga Manojlović Pintar part of the festive ceremony of presenting the baton to Josip “Tito” Broz. “Some people believe that sport is leisure, The rallies which were held every May 25 were preceded by major army parades that it is a luxury. However this is an on May 9 as part of the celebration of outdated concept. I believe that sport the Day of Victory over Fascism and any and the physical education of our citizens number of dawn ceremonies and parades is a general national issue. I believe that celebrating May 1, International Labour at issue here is really new generations of Day. The whole of the month of May was healthy people who will, during their youth, devoted to celebrating the power and be steeled by sport.” vitality of the community. As well as the central celebration in Belgrade, there were Josip “Tito” Broz, May 25, 1957, on events held in all republic centres which receiving the first Youth Baton. supplemented the ceremonial program. In the beginning, the baton presentations The bodies of children, young men and took place in the isolated, almost private women in gymnastic spectacles introduced space of Tito’s residence but, from the into the public space the concept of 1950s the presentations were moved to collective power, the optimistic vision of the public arena. With the participation the future and the interactive bonding of soldiers and sportsmen, Pioneers of the citizens and the president of the and even of preschool children from Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. throughout Yugoslavia, the rallies For more than twenty years (1957-79), in the stadium of the Yugoslav People’s The rallies and mass public gymnastics Army, thousands of disciplined bodies were definitely one of the most expressive assembled themselves choreographically forms of the policy of disciplining the into slogans and symbols of unity masses and creating docile bodies (Michael before Tito’s eyes. Docile young bodies Foucault) typical of the whole twentieth promoted the ideas of social and national century. Regardless of differences in equality and loyalty to an authoritarian political systems and their ideological leader. This continued to be expressed underpinnings, in almost all modern states even after his death in 1980. Over the (from the liberal of the West, course of thirty years, the changing the Nazi and Fascist regimes of Central images on the grassy field of the stadium and Southern Europe, to the socialist were not mere visualisations of the countries of the and the Far ideological and political principles of East), harmonious exercises created the the collective: they were also an active image of the collective as a strong body process of reshaping the participants, the paying tribute to the elevated figure of observers in the stadium grandstands the leader. This was the way in which and everyone else who followed the ideas of an organic union, as a naturally event in front of their radio or television. and historically determined given, were From today’s perspective, analysis of established. Appropriate exercises led by these mass performances reveals a clear Sokol, the youth section of the Red Cross testimony of the process of construction and many youth associations were also and deconstruction of the Yugoslav held in the as part community. of state celebrations and were especially typical of celebrations for the birthdays of staging and stage design testified to an Aleksandar I Karađorđević and the young uncommunicative political system which Petar I Karađorđević. attempted to halt changes in Yugoslavia The slogans attached to the post-World by means of bans. This was especially War Two rallies and the symbols they clear in the years following the death of glorified testified unambiguously to an Josip “Tito” Broz when, with a system of authoritarian political culture although, bans and punishments culminating in over the three decades of their existence adoption of the Law on Protecting the it becomes apparent just how dynamic Name and Persona of Josip “Tito” Broz in Yugoslav society was in the period of 1984, the political elite attempted to set socialism. Times of political liberalisation society in concrete. The stage design of produced rally performances in which the one of the last rallies was an attempt to choreography was not bound to rigid lines. endorse a political culture based on the They created an impression of spontaneity dogmatic glorification of the personality of to which inventive and modish costume Josip “Tito” Broz. The extent to which the designs contributed. The striving for the symbolism of these performance reflected most unusual possible ways of handing political reality is demonstrated most over the batons, which were delivered clearly in the title of the last rally held in to the stadium by parachutists, athletes the stadium of the Yugoslav People’s Army. or artists, were a striving for affirmation It was “Turn on the Light”, and it appears of new frameworks in which the socialist to have heralded the dark events which society would develop. On the other hand, followed just four years later. during years of political conservatism, rigid

Publisher: The Museum of Yugoslav History Editor-in-chief: Katarina Živanović Writers: Radonja Leposavić; Olga Manojlović Pintar Photographs: Marina Dokmanović, Tanjug, Archive MIJ Photography: Rastko Šurdić Catalogue design: Jeroen de Vries Exhibit selection: Marina Dokmanović Exhibition design: Marina Dokmanović, Jeroen de Vries Assistant: Gordana Ćirić Associates: Momo Cvijović, Svetlana Ognjanović, Ivan Manojlović, Ivanka Živadinović, Slav- ica Drobac, Desanka Čavić, Sava Kovačević, Dušan Kovačević, Tihomir Nedeljković, Milomir Pavlović, Mirjana Slavković, Bojana Ćebić, Milorad Stevanović, Slobodan Pajić, Radoš Kostić, Radoslav Opalić, Đorđe Kovačević, Saša Ćirić, Željko Levnaić, Maja Tomić, Zoran Kastratović, Radomir Šubarić, Dejan Zastranović, Milan Vukmanović, Marina Mrđen Petrović, Jovan Raletić, Jovana Timotijević. Translation: Steve Agnew and Jelena Babšek Labudović

Printer: Tipografik Plus Print run: 200 This exhibition is presented in collaboration with the B92 Foundation and the REX Cultural Centre, with the assistance of the Belgrade Cultural Centre, the Historical Museum of , Museum Night Artistic Production Group, , the Program Archives of Televi- sion Belgrade and the Yugoslav Film Archive. The exhibition has been made possible by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Serbia

Media support: www.SEEcult.org, www.politika.rs, www.b92.net, www.queeria.com

The Museum of Yugoslav History thanks all the associates with whose help and understanding it has succeeded in mounting this exhibition. www.mij.rs

Museum of Yugoslav History

Top View