834707490

In an attempt to answer these questions, I shall place the model of self-managing socialism as it is defined in the existing programs⁸ under the analytical magnifying glass. The following questions are also relevant: has Yugoslav model of socialism had a revolu^Łionarv impetus which would make possible the conditions for the realization of the original ideas of socialism? Does it represent the first step on this oath in that it combines to the correct degree the still necessary classical forms of the State with the new forms of self-management? Is it a bridge over which one will cross from the former to the latter and thus create an opportunitv for the formation of a new type of human community?

This approach, which attempts to analyze critically the model itself. is basically different from the usual ones which limit the critique to statements that some elements of the system deviate from the model. Our task is to decide whether the model itself corresponds to the goals of socialism, in order to be able to judge whether the premises of the system should be reexamined, or should corrections of »devia-tions« be sufficient.

The most concise formulation of the essential characteristics of the Yugoslav system can be found in the conclusion to M. Pe£ujlić’s Futurę Which Has Begun (Budućnost koją je poćela):^{1 2 3 4}

»Self-management was developed side by side with economic and political interference of etatism, as the herald of further revolutionary transformation of the society. The very modę of formation, the nest in which it was raised (as well as other cir -cumstances: the level of materiał development; the character of the working class and of the intelligentsia; the naturę of the re-volution), oriented the creation of one of the most complex and interesting historical structures. The developing social system was not »pure« in any sense of the word; it was neither a bu-reaucratic system, nor a self-managing, one which would con-tinue to develop on its own basis. A special historical hybrid (italics are minę) appeared on the scene, a combination of bu-reaucratism that was both centralized and decentralized, and of a partial, autarchic self-management«.

Pećujlić, however, does not provide conclusions which should follow from this linę of reasoning, and does not question the very model of »self-managing socialism« which is based on the mentioned pheno-mena in Yugoslav society. Indeed, the given characterization of the Yugoslav system justifies the following question to be asked: Is self-management which has developed under such circumstances

403

1

* At this moment I do not intend to deal with the new yersion of Yugoslav

2

socialism conceived in the Constitutional Amendments, which is a subjcct worthy

3

of a separatc treatise.

4

M. PeJujlić, Budućnost koją je poćela (Futurę Which Has Begun). Belgrade: Institut za politićke studije, 1970, p. 61.