History of Organized Fascism in Serbia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Library.Anarhija.Net History of Organized Fascism in Serbia Sava Devurić Sava Devurić History of Organized Fascism in Serbia 2013. Scanned from original The text was originally written in February of 2013. forthe anarchist journal Notes from the Steppe, from Salonika, Greece. lib.anarhija.net 2013. Contents 1. Emergence of organized fascism ............. 3 2. Role of fascist groups in WW2, function of fascist ideas in WW2 ........................ 6 3. Re-emergence during the wars in ex Yugoslavia, forms and reasons for the reappearance of fascism post 1989 / today’s scene / street fascism / role in the state apparatus ..................... 8 Appendix I — Antifascism . 14 Appendix II — On the authoritarian political culture in Serbia .......................... 15 2 (for example) also became nationalist. One of them wrote a program 1. Emergence of organized fascism for Milošević’s party, still others were founders of the pro-capitalist opposition Democratic Party. Some of the left-dissidents of the past Although Serbia/Yugoslavia was and still is a generally conser- stayed faithful to anti-nationalist policies, but most of them became vative environment, I think that it could be said fascism, in a strict liberals or social-democrats. definition, was a relatively small movement within it. Early onthere There was a lot of organized dissent against Milošević inthe were proto-fascist groups, like the conspiratorial Black Hand in the nineties, sometimes with huge demos organized daily across the pre-1918 period, and various fascistic groups in the 1920’s (ORJUNA country. But dissent was usually organized by very hierarchical and and others). The first more ideologically well-defined fascist groups nationalist parties who had their own cults of leaders and who often in Serbia and Yugoslavia appeared in the first half of 1930’s (not blamed Milošević, not for starting the wars, but for losing them. counting the Croatian Ustašas, which are a separate issue). These When this opposition came to power in 2000, further economic smaller groups united in 1935, and this is how the Yugoslav Na- destruction followed resulting in growing cynicism and hopeless- tional Movement Zbor (Rally) was formed, led by a Serbian lawyer ness in the population. Part of the population followed Milošević Dimitrije Ljotić. who started and lost the wars while another part followed the op- Zbor was an anti-democratic, anti-communist, anti-Semitic or- position that ushered in the economic destruction of 2000. Many ganization that propagated an idea of an integral Yugoslav nation, hopes were shattered and the shift to neo-liberal capitalism came, consisting of three “tribes” of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (Macedo- but there was no culture of self-organizing among the working- nians, Montenegrins and Bosniaks – Bosnian Muslims, were then class people to fight it. The unions are almost exactly the sameas not recognized as separate ethnic groups), organized in a unitary, they were in the Titoist state-capitalist era. corporatist and monarchist state, dominated by Serbia. Milošević was perceived by many to be a continuation of the As is common in fascist practice, Zbor used a lot of the ideas ‘Communist regime’, this is why so many of the opposition youth that originated in the socialist movement and transformed them became right-wing and reactionary. into tools for a nationalist ideology — into something completely opposite of their original purpose. In the 19th century a movement developed around a figure of a young socialist Svetozar Marković (It is interesting that Ljotić’s father was one of the early followers of Marković, and also the first translator of The Communist Manifesto into Serbian). Marković’s ideas were very much anti-nationalist, he spoke of the danger of aspirations of the Serbian ruling class to cre- ate a Greater Serbia, and of the need to destroy all of the Balkan states (by the means of a social revolution) that oppress all of the peoples of the Balkans in order to form a Balkan federation (he was open to the idea of this federation being a federation of communes, or states – depending on the will of the people, as he said). Marković and other early Serbian socialists rejected the idea of the necessity 18 3 of capitalism and wrote about the possibility of a development of fully isolated the more radical elements and allied themselves with a communist society in Serbia without going through the phase of the more moderate ones, concluding with Comrade Tito dancing capitalism first. In order for this transition to be successful, inthe with the students in the street. opinion of early Serbian socialists, traditional Serbian peasant insti- In the eighties there were more political activities and more at- tutions could be used. One of this institutions was Zadruga, a tradi- tempts of organizing and connecting struggles across the country, tional Serbian economic cooperative usually consisting of a larger there were attempts to organize new unions on the Yugoslav level, family unit but also with members who are not related. These coop- but repression got stronger as well. Some of the more radical ele- eratives sometimes formed larger confederated structures. Social- ments from the sixties (mostly Trotskyist) suffered state repression ists didn’t idolize these institutions, they just saw them as possible and in 1984, four years after Titos death, six of them were arrested starting points for the creation of a new society. Zbor on the other (this was the first Belgrade six) and charged with counter revolu- hand saw Zadrugas as a model how to organize a society and econ- tionary activities. omy in a patriarchal and authoritarian way as the basis for a future So, during the entire state-capitalist period in Yugoslavia there “organic” state in which everyone would be organized in their own was almost no autonomous self-organizing. When I say this I do not professional estate (corporation) as an “organic” part of the State, mean only radical political initiatives, but not even “normal” union and in which the male head of the family will be in the family what activities or cultural/countercultural organizing existed that were the King would be in the State (“and God in the Heavens”). not somehow absorbed by the state. If something more autonomous, Despite being a well organized organization (and very close to especially of political character, appeared, everyone was quickly re- some parts of the Orthodox Church), with a violent youth and stu- minded that this was a Bolshevik regime after all and State repres- dent groups that often clashed with communist and antifascist stu- sion followed. dents at the Belgrade university, Zbor was never a popular move- Then in the end of the eighties the state-capitalist regimes started ment and in elections they got around 1% of the votes or less. to crumble, and parts of the ruling bureaucratic class in Yugoslavia Zbor had a competitor in the figure of Milan Stojadinović, who started to see nationalism as a new card to play. Old ideology was was the Yugoslav prime minister in the 1935–1939 period. Stojadi- dying, but nationalism could provide a new style of populism to nović was the leader of the old Radical party, and during his rule help them stay in power. Milošević successfully combined this strat- he tried to move the party to a more fascist direction. He was not egy with leftist populist politics — “the fight against the fake bu- so obsessed with ideological details as much as he was with the reaucratic communists, and the return to real socialist values” — more superficial imitations of the fascist regimes; for example, he and managed in this way to incorporate a lot of dissatisfaction that introduced the uniformed section of the party called the Grey Shirts. the new workers movement was trying to channel. Ljotić and his followers looked down on Stojadinović as an inferior The population was trained to trust the government and Miloše- fascist, just as an imitator, or as a “fascist apprentice”. They con- vić quickly became popular. Although very early on there was dis- sidered themselves to be an authentic Yugoslav and Serbian move- sent and protests against his rule, most of his opposition was also ment. It is interesting to mention that the Radical party was first very nationalist and authoritarian. Most of the population now had founded in the 1880’s by the followers of Svetozar Marković (after iconic leaders who they followed, some followed Milošević, and oth- his death), when they “realized that a more moderate socialist and ers one of the opposition leaders. Many of the members of Praxis 4 17 and society in general was relatively optimistic about the gradual democratic movement is needed in the backward Serbia”, a move- improvement of their lives. ment that would help to organize Serbia into a modern industrial The services that the State provided were not only social inchar- capitalist society. This was a clear cut separation from the previ- acter (health care, welfare, pensions etc) but also cultural. For exam- ously dominant positions influenced by the Russian Narodniki so- ple, many cultural and youth centers were build across the country. cialists. Some of the founders of the Radical party gave a clearly When Yugoslavia broke its ties with the Eastern Block, a culturally Marxist rationale for this turn into a more reformist direction. One more liberal policy was introduced. Very early on there was a tol- of those who remained true to Marković’s ideas was the revolution- erance and even encouragement of the western style culture, jazz, ary socialist Mita Cenić who became a fierce enemy of the Radical rock, film, etc., but even for this the frame was provided bythe party, prophesying that the party would soon transform from a re- State and its institutions.