834707441

orientation of thc industrializcd socicty on the other - in othcr words having estab-lished the confrontation of different value orientations on our heterogeneous soil -Dunja Rihtman-AuguStin is somewhat morę cautions than Żupanov in stating that it is now, and perhaps even in a foreseeable futurę, »difficult to talk about any common values in this country, unless we affirm that it is self-management as an ideological project* fn. 11). The author sees the dilemma of our society as the Yugoslav man’s dilemma between traditional culture and present-days values. It is possible to agree with the author that such a dilemma can be resolved by society only if it has madę an assessmcnt of its own traditional culture at a given moment, as well as of the innovation which is being offered, but there undoubtedly remains thc question, what happens if the values of traditional culture have already been forgottcn, in some environments even rejected, before any new values have been adopted? What is to bc done if the contemporary Yugoslav is at the moment on the horns of a dilemma, if he has launched himself away from thc rocky shores of traditional culture, and has not yet arrived at the »promised land* of new values?

It seems that this question leaves broad possibilities for a critical approach to the entire problem. An attempt in this direction was madę by Ivan Kuva£ić in his paper Culture and Politics. His view was that is only in the sphere of social dy-namics that there is a possibility for an intercourse between culture and politics. The author emphasizcs that »if no policy is prepared to renounce manipulation, it does not follow that every policy must be identified with it* (p. 1). At some deter-mined revolutionary moment in the history of nation, when cultural creativeness bccomes a part of the struggle for freedom, as was the case in Yugoslavia, Algeria, Cuba and today in Vietnam, culture and politics go hand in hand. It is tben that cultural creativcness becomes an authentic national consciousness growing out of the struggle for social progress. When this consciousness tums into nationalism, it is the most reliable sign of the crisis and downfall of a revolution.

On the other hand, culture and politics part ways when politics turas into separ-ate ruling sphere which degrades culture, because it turns its institutions into a State apparatus. The so-called »mass culture* is the most powerful instrument of mani-pulation of the masses in contemporary society, because it is operated in the name of the masses and against insular elites. Thus the results of cultural creativeness become consumer goods. On the other hand, authentic cultural values and highest works of art are removed from the key points of a modern industrial society (where thc products of »mass culture* reign sovereign) and repressed into the intimate spheres of mans life. Their inimitable and permanent values escape the rigid rules of standard bureaucratic procedures. Kuva£ić concludes from this that »the policies of the most powerful established systems are in conflict with authentic cultural creativeness. On the one hand they encounter inereasing opposition from cultures of smaller nations, which in the struggle against the hegemony of large centres strengthen the elements of national self-consciousness, and, on the other hand, at home they face the challenge from avant-gardist, non-conformist groups from the ranks of intcllectuals and youth. In order to overcome this opposition, politics even today do not shrink from applying raw physical violence* (pp. 3 and 4).

Out of the three forms of manipulation - fascist, Stalinist and that of the market - Kuvacić believes the last-mcntioned to be the most efficient one: »In place of refreshing expressions of imagination and sensitiveness serving as a basis for criti-cism and revolt, the market introduces pornography and light literaturę, saturated with aggressiveness and violence, designed not only to bring profits but also to protect the existing system of distribution of power, because it thus creates and maintains among the population a condition of psychological and morał repression* (p. 5).

With reference to the question whether the market mechanism can find an ade-quate place in the socialist value orientation. Kuvaćić States: »Notwithstanding many other circumstances, it is sufficient to point out that in the conditions of a free market, unemployment and poverty of a part of the population are a normal phenomenon. The market favours the cunning and the successful, and failure is a personal matter for each individual. When we bear this in mind, it is obvious that it is contrary to the Marxian egalitarian ideology of protection for the poor and the oppressed. Hence it is being openly said in this country that a value orientation such as this constitutes the main obstacle to a faster indusrtial progress, which obstacle is impossible to eliminate without at the same time challenging the entire system of self-management* (p. 7). In place of manipulation by the market, Kuva£ić advances self-management, which is based on the initiative and creativeness of

660