DEMOCRACY
OR ETHOCRCRACY
The role of the intellectuals in the period of transition
in the countries of Former Yugoslavia.
Thank
you very much for the invitation and for the wonderful
opportunity to talk here at the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars and to share with you some of my
views on the role of the intelligentsia in the period
of transition in the countries of Former Yugoslavia.
Not that long ago in some similarly dark times, German
poet, playwright and critic Bertolt Brecht has written:
“In the future, no one will say the times were
dark, but everyone will ask why the poets were silent”?
Well, were the “poets”, the intellectuals,
silent in the countries that appeared after the disintegration
of Yugoslavia?
The
intellectuals or what is broadly considered intelligentsia
in the countries that appeared on the ruins of former
Yugoslavia, had and still has a very prominent role
in the overall everyday life of the broader society.
And as an influential group of prominent public figures
actively involved in arts and humanities, politics,
philosophy, sociology, history, journalism, high education,
they have marked the period of disintegration and they
still mark the on going political and economic transition
in these new “democracies” in a very peculiar
way.
It is important at the beginning of this discussion
to be noted that the new state of affairs in these newly
formed countries – Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia,
Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia - and the radical shift
in their ideologies that made them divided and confronted
nations, makes any discourse on the cultural and political
process of this fragmented world as a one whole, impossible
and ungrateful. It is ungrateful because Yugoslavia
is gone. We have to talk now about Bosnia, Croatia,
Macedonia, Serbia or Montenegro, or the UN Protected
Serbian province of Kosovo. A task that becomes a tongue
twisting exercise for both newcomers and old timers
in that region.
Any attempt to address the remnants of Yugoslav fragmented
body as one whole, or at least as a vibrant landscape
of braiding cultures, is either seen and disqualified
as idealistic utopia, or condemned and cast out as unaccepted
Yugo-nostalgia. And the fear of difference in this context,
different approach or different opinion, is perplexing.
On the other hand, it is impossible because this presentation
can not include and honor all those dissent and highly
ethical voices, artists and scholars, humanists who
courageously contributed to the perseverance of humanity
and dignity in the pervasive history of dishonesty on
the Balkans, or Southeastern Europe, or Western Balkans,
whatever the group name for the countries in that region
is now in place.
However,
the horrifying effects of the war, the ethnic cleansing,
the devastation and isolation, the suffering of the
ordinary people, the political oppression, the crime
and corruption, the poignant life behind the highly
raised walls, urge us to see that region as one braided
world in which the Yugoslav intelligentsia had and still
has crucial role in extremely slow process of transition
and democratic transformation in that part of the world.
Is this just an accident?
But let me clearly state that I am addressing and using
the expressions intellectuals and “intelligentsia”
here as a group of influential people, public figures
(e.g. writers, artists, scholars, university professors,
journalists) men of letters. It is a social group which
can be also seen as a prominent special group of celebrated
individuals who can easily mold and shape public opinion
and beliefs through their creative and intellectual
public work and presence. In so doing the intelligentsia
becomes also a group that fosters a sense of responsibility
for the well being of the community. It becomes, as
well, society’s collective consciousness. As a
consequence this self-confidence often led Eastern European
intelligentsia many times in the past to play a role
of non-existing political opposition. And that particular
and special position of the intelligentsia had more
than often significant consequences to revolutions or
national liberation movements in Central and Eastern
Europe.
In the case of the Post-Yugoslav countries, which is,
as we all well know, an extremely complex and explosive
case, the position and the role of the intelligentsia
in this period was as well very complex, layered, and
very often controversial. I believe there are, as there
are anywhere else, basically two major types of intellectuals
in the post Yugoslav region: one type that have been
a critical voice, lined along the lines of democracy,
rule of law, and establishment of civil society, one
that respects the individual, the civil liberties, and
the individual differences, and the other, that has
lined along the ethnic lines, and who has marked in
an odd way the period of disintegration of Yugoslavia.
This kind of intelligentsia, the later one, is still
significant and unavoidable player in these countries
and in the on going political, judicial, legislative,
and economic transition in the countries that appeared
in Southeastern Europe.
It is well know today that although the nationalistic
intelligentsia did not have political or economic power
at the beginning of the disintegrative processes, it
had however, a wide spread authority that contributed
significantly to the collapse of Yugoslavia. Their ongoing
bickering and bullying along ethnic lines ultimately
brought many of the intellectuals to political power
on highest political and diplomatic positions in their
respective countries. Their grand projects and dreams
of Greater Serbia, Croatia to river Drina, Muslim Bosnia,
Great Albania, United Macedonia, Megali Ellada, or Bulgaria
from Black see to Ohrid Lake, are in fact inspired by
19th century national liberation movements and political
models valid for a time long ago passed by.
These projects and dreams are in fact based on fiction
and romantic myths, on collectivism and tribalism, a
reality that is far from the present time in which we
live, and very distant from the needs for individual
human rights in the everyday life at the beginning of
electronic information age.
In that process of building fictional imaginary national
landscapes, instead encouraging real democratic transition
and tolerance, many intellectuals returned to the national
values, to their ethnic roots, "fought for their
land”, burned down bridges, chose "to belong"
to “their nation”. In their nationalist
enthusiasm these intellectuals built walls to stop the
neighbors, refused the others, and coming center stage,
becoming national tribunes, adversaries and advocates
in their new countries, affirmed in their writings or
productions the romantic idea of nation – ethnos.
In their writings and public appearances they affirmed
collective rights, the right of the ethnic group instead
of the rights of the individuals, of the citizens or
what is know as the rights of the demos.
For the national gurus the rule of the group defined
by the ethnos was more important that the rule [the
cratia] – of the individuals organized as demos.
They paved and are still working on the road of ethoncracy
rather than on the road to democracy.
In
that poignant political rocess the dominance of the
class collectivism – communism - was replaced
by the dominance of ethnic collectivism - nationalism.
It is well known today that the architects of Serbian
nationalism and those who brought Slobodan Milosevic,
the “Butcher form the Balkans” to power
were highly ranked members and officials of the Serbian
Academy of Arts and Sciences, or highly ranked members
and officials of the Serbian Writers Union.
The political cartoon above, in eloquent way describes
what was and how powerful was the engagement, the influence,
and the role of the intellectuals. As we can see it
depicts prominent Serbian writer Dobrica Cosic and his
“companiero” the philosopher Mihailo Markovic
in their efforts to support and keep Slobodan Milosevic
in power.
This kind of wholehearted support of their nationalistic
and corrupt regimes was similar in the other post Yugoslav
countries as well. And the list of contributors to this
process of dominance of ethnicity over civility or the
ethnos over demos on all sides is very long. In that
process of the dominance of the ethnic oligarchy and
“nation building”, the humanism, and the
ethical values disappeared, while the pragmatism and
the world without scruples, the world greedy for money
and fast profit appeared on the war torn map. The civil
and the urban were forced into exile, while everything
rural, primitive, and brutal was welcome and became
standard. The religious and political dogmatism took
over people’s minds, the knowledge was disregarded,
the ignorance was celebrated, the open borders were
closed, the rich and vigorous artistic and intellectual
life was wiped out, the dissident voices were silenced,
towns changed their names. The world was divided in
two camps: traitors and heroes. The “turbo folk”
won in the “Balkan bar ”, and the man again
became wolf to a man.
In the process of ethnic fights for their own new states
and territories what was truth was proclaimed to be
a lie, what was right became wrong, the villains and
criminals proclaimed themselves victims. What was once
history, - and history is, to put it in Ihab Hassan’s
terms, so palimpsest - was obliterated and became part
of people’s individual memory and personal mythology.
As Bosnian writer Dzevad Karahasan wrote in his book
Sarajvo, Exodus of a City “our life was removed
from the real into the ideal.”
In that same process in the name of affirming their
new countries and promoting their ethically pure states
many of this intellectuals becoming political elite
themselves as well, very often denied the horrors of
the war in their writings. Some of these national “gurus”
went even further and denied the massacre in Srebrenica
or the war crimes committed by “their boys”.
And, affirming once again "the ideology of fracture”
and denial of the war in their writings or in their
public life, these type of ethnically lined intelligentsia
dominated and it seems still dominates the new cultural,
socio-political and economic stage in the post Yugoslav
countries. Blending their communist's and nationalist's
sentiments into new breed they try to exclude everything
that is not part of their ethnicity. And they are still
getting away with the intellectual crimes against humanity
they have committed. The question is how long can the
world afford their return to the nationalistic past
instead of their transition to a multicultural democracies
based on rule of law and free market economy.
There is another very important element that the dictatorship
of nationalism brought to this troubled environment
that desperately needs help to civilize itself. That
is the kitsch culture. As Borka Pavicevic from the opposition
Belgrade Circle and director of the Center for Decontamination
says: “The post -Dayton accumulation of capital
by the mafia state is creating a kitsch people. They
don't like modern art, they don't like women, they don't
like the green grass, so they cut down the parks for
their marble villas. Kitsch, turbo-folk, and national
TV. You may look out the window and see students being
beaten up, but half a million people look at the TV
and see nothing, and they don't know what to believe.”
The other group of intellectuals who lined along the
lines of democracy, rule of law and establishment of
civil society that respects the individual freedoms
and rights has been a strong critical voice in the process
of the transfiguration of former Yugoslavia.
There were many writers, theatre artists, scholars and
intellectuals of all ages who fought for decades for
broadening the horizons of democracy and individual
freedoms in former Yugoslavia. Unfortunately after the
wars in the post Yugoslav period, in the process of
“transition”, these people were isolated
and marginalized by the new bogus and quasi political
elites. Many of these strong intellectual voices were
in fact forced by the new very repressive nationalistic
regimes to leave their “new” countries and
to continue their work in exile. Some of them on the
other hand stayed behind in an internal exile - one
may say in a self-imposed exile – or became dissident
voices within their own newly emerged “democracies”.
In spite of all dangers and risks many of these intellectuals
continued to raise their voices in an outcry against
the war, against the violent disintegration, against
the fragmentation, against the walls between them and
their friends from the other parts of their, once common
country. Through their work they tried to critically
see the poignant reality, to expresses their deep discontent
with the violent transfiguration of their once common
country, to raise their voice against the ravaging war
and its effects. They tried to take advantage of any
opportunity to expresses their discontent with the crime
and prostitution, with the arm and people smuggling,
the lawfulness, corruption, and criminalization of their
newly-formed countries. No matter that many of these
authors continued to live in all corners of the world,
they were in fact in the same continuous pursuit of
a new hopeful environment through their works or public
appearances. Their works – essays, plays, novels,
theatre productions, films - can be seen also as creative
attempts to trace new maps and to envision a humane
landscape for the years to come. Their vision was rooted
in the idea of human resistance to any form of militant
extremism, to nationalism's distortion of culture and
history, and the belief in the integrative power of
multiculturalism. That is a world and society based
on the rule of law, modern legal system, democratic
political system, and economic development based on
free market economy. These diverse group of people,
intellectuals from all parts of former Yugoslavia tried
also to suggest their readers and audiences to look
beyond their differences, to a new world based on different
social structures and social justice. They envision
environment that crosses the traditional borders and
attempts tries to remove the newly-raised walls.
The unhappy experience so far – the bickering,
bulling, and political stubbornness - and the life on
the huge walled landscape dominated by ethnocracy, tells
us in some way that there is e serious absence of critical
thought, absence of real intelligentsia which could
turn around the process of stagnation, get the ravaged
space out of the cul d’sac, and put it on a real
road of democratic transition.
Filip David, one of the strongest dissident voices from
Belgrade, as many other authors as well, pointed out
at an ongoing extinguishing of intelligentsia in that
part of the world. There is a process of changing of
the intelligentsia into a class of well adjusted “intellectuals”
or simply well adjusted middle class. That is, the intelligentsia
as a critical consciousness and informal political opposition
does not exist any more. It is corrupted and destroyed.
In that cold environment, where the old ways of life
were destroyed by the war and where the nationalist
kitsch culture took over, while really new cultural
or moral principles, democratic models that should replaced
the old one are not yet in place, there is no new intellectual
force in sight. The generation of young people who appeared
on the literary and intellectual scene are still not
ready to take the responsibility of being critical corrective
and to provide leadership on the road to democracy.
Demos is gone, the ethnos reign.
What is to be done, now? What is to be done in that
passionate part of the world? What can we expect to
see and experience on that ever-changing map in the
next decade or so? The future is very elusive, and the
international community is needed to set the democratic
standards and provide hope for that part of the world.
