Neke ideološke i teorijske pretpostavke orijentacije KPJ na demokratsku socijalističku samoupravnu alternativu
Some Ideological and Theoretical Postulates of the Adoption by CPY of the Democratic Socialist Self-Management Alternative

Summary/Abstract: By means of a comparative analysis of their own and of the Soviet social reality, the leaders of CPY succeeded in discovering the roots of bureaucratic distortions in the sphere of socialist practice and to clarify, in an historically progressive manner, the reasons of Cominform pressure on CPY and Yugoslavia. This specifically means: In the course of a very brief historical period, in the context of turbulent and extremely acute events, compelled to respond to them immediately and directly, the leaders of CPY were able to penetrate below the surface of chaotically intermingled external developments and to reveal not only the roots and the causes but also the laws that govern the manifestation of bureaucratism. Owing to a tendency of independent study of Marxism and to a successful integration of an analysis of social practice in the Soviet Union with the investigation of the character and manifestations of bureaucratism in their own practice, their views on the possible social roots of the appearance of bureaucracy in the socialist society, which only had an anticipatory character at the end of 1949, grew into a relatively clearly conceived ideological platform already during the first two or three months of 1950. The awareness that was obtained at that time: that the motives and the inner logic of the appearance and consolidation of bureaucratism on the soil of socialist social practice are to be found in the actual socio-economic position of the state machinery had a general theoretical validity. By defining bureaucratism, not as the improper functioning of the state apparatus but as the outstanding role of that apparatus in social life, the leaders of CPY exercised sharp criticism of the nations of the state upheld by the leaders of SCP (b), claiming that the only correct and acceptable view for the revolutionary masses was that precisely the withering away of the state, as Lenin puts it, »is fundamental in the Marxist doctrine of the state«. They pointed out, at the same time, that it was a great mistake and an illusion to believe in the identity of the democratic interests of the mass base of the revolution and of the actual activity and interests of the »popular« organs of the government apparatus, and that only by the incessant struggle for the expansion of their direct participation in decision-making on all social affairs can the working masses attain their goals. In endeavouring to comprehend the hegemonistic foreign policy of the Soviet Union, with which they sharply disagreed in part, the leaders of CPY arrived at some very crucial knowledge as to the possible ideological-political and socio-economic implications ot the rule of bureaucracy in a society, i.e. as to the repercussions of such a state on the foreign policy of the given country. This was the identification of Stalinism in some of its essential features. At the same time, it considerably helped towards the conception of an ideological equivalent in guiding their own practice of socialist development in a direction that would entail the criticism of statism, and of stalinistic criteria of socialist revolution in general, and thereby the eradication of the social roots of bureaucratism.

• Details
• Contents