834707499

lation lives in villages, all these people have been left out of the def-ined system of self-managing socialism. (Various forms of coopera-tion of individual producers with cooperative farms, the zadrugas, which were developed in the previous years, are diminishing at an ever faster ratę, because the zadrugas have transformed themselves into economic enterprises which operate on the profit basis and are thus less and less capable of performing the functions of social asso-

ciations).

The problem is therefore morę serious than it is usually recognized and labeled - as the »underdevelopment of self-management« or as the »existence of forces which oppose self-management«; the problem consists of the fact that the system does make possible a morę radical change of the social position of »producers« in the sense specified by the notion of self-management.

Closely connected to what was discussed above is the following problem: Does self-management as it is defined in the Yugoslav model secure the abolition of political alienation of individuals, i. e. are there definitions of the basie forms of »power« which will be used to over-come the State as the »abstract form of human community«, to be, sińce it represents political power divorced from society, replaced by an integral system of self-management? In other words, is Yugoslav system defined in a way which will enable the working class, »as an economically developed and politically conscious class, knowing its true interests and historical objectives, to keep the system of the State in the position of a subordinate power, a tool, so that it cannot become bureaucratic and transform itself into the society’s despot«?¹⁷

From what has been said so far one may conclude that Yugoslav system represents a peculiar hybrid which consists of the power of the State and some forms of management which had not been developed in the classical State, and which could only conditionally be taken to be self-managing forms. In all this, organs of the State are dominant, judging not only by the strength of influence, but also by degree of development of the institutions in which political decisions are madę, and by the principles on which political decision-making is based. The existing forms of self-management have not brought political decision-making to the people; principles on which political decision-making is based have not been radically changed. (Decision-making is still unidimensional, directed from the top to the bottom. Decisions that have already been madę are then explained and discussed in the basie units. This principle is only slightly different in the National As-sembly which can influence to a smali extent the decisions madę by the Government, by means of amendments).

Work organizations are defined as self-managing units, but this is not taken to mean »political self-management«,¹⁸ that is the right of

¹⁷    A. Kardelj, »Socijalizam i demokratija« (Socialism and Democracy), in Biro-kratija i tchnokratija (Bureaucracy and technocracy), Vol. II, p. 297.

¹⁸    I place quote-marks around »political self-management« sińce true self-management cannot be exclusively political power, nor can it remain only in the sphere of economy; rather, it presupposes the transcending of such partialized spheres as separatc professions and strata.

412