834707501

Yugoslav system does not secure the exit from the closed circle of power. bccause neither the process nor the forms of the withering away of the State as political power have been defined.

Socialism becomes a qualitativelly new human communłty only if it reaches, in this sense, beyond the limits of classical democracy which remains within the framework of »political power« and is not able to break the shell in a radical manner.²¹ That which is essential for the direct »exercise of power« — an interest on the part of individuals to participate in social decision-making, the need to become political subjects, the consciousness of common objectives and of the inter-rclatedness of the social and individuals interests, the confidence on the part of individuals that they can influence the making of social policies - does not depend primarily on whether or not democratic forms exist, but on the character of the community in which indivi-duals live, i. e. on the degree to which they think of this community as their own, as opposed to an alienated one. (Democracy is freąuent-ly only an addition to the old, alienated forms of power, within the alienated »community«). Therefore, self-management is a purer form of people’s sovereignty, sińce its first and basie premise is the aboli-tion of all forms of alienation in social life. (The absence of democratic tradition is freąuently cited as the reason for the insignificant political influence of the people on social policies in this country. At the same time, the absence of some of the most basie democratic rights of citizens is justified by claims that the people are not maturę enough to »engage in politics«. Both lines of reasoning remain in the closed circle of political reasoning of the classical type which treats politics as a special activity reserved only for certain strata of the society).

Under such circumstances the working class does not have an ade-quate opportunity to become the »ruling class« (it is not adequately represented even in the existing forms of political power and in the parliamentary system).²² Objectively speaking, the working class is not capable of securing for itself such a position for the following reasons:

(1) Its social position is characterized by disadvantageous materiał and economic conditions, which means that the greatest portion of energy of the working class is absorbed in the struggle for elementary existence. This further implies the following:²³

^łl O. Kozomara s differentiation (Op. cit., pp. 1502-9) betwecn democracy and self-management is quite justified, I think. Kozomara points out the limitations of democracy such as the principle of majority’s rule, libcralism which primarily takes into account partial interests, rather than interests of the society as a whole, etc. However, apart from these limitations, democracy in the classical sense radically differs from self-management in that the latter »dissolves« politics as the separate, exclusive, most independent and influcntial sub-system of society, and brings it into the very cells of social life, integrating in this manner different spheres of social activity into a single social whole (wherc each unit represents an integrated, realized sociability in a micro-form).

” Statistical data show that workers are represented in the various chambers of the Assembly by 0.8°/o of members (Federal Assembly), and in the Republic As-semblies by 2.8% of members. (These data are from 1967, according to the men-tioned article by N. Popov, p. 619).

*^s A. KreSić, Kńtika kulła lićnosti (Critique of the Personality Cult), Zodijak, 1968, p. 66.

414