The reason why communists are obliged to participate in the current struggle against the regime in Serbia is because the struggle itself serves as a catalyst for more clearly defining class divisions in society and because the current democratic movement is an ally of the socialist-revolutionary one. By removing the so-called “democratic” issue from the agenda, space is created for the revival of the class question, the question of the very organization of the social system, societal norms, and relations.
We are not fighting for partial-liberal and bourgeoisie democracy, but full, socialist and proletarian democracy.
At this moment, the democratic movement and the democratic question are connected to the working class. The first ranks of this movement, it is clear, are not filled with the industrial proletariat, although, in a broader sense, the main mass of the movement consists of workers of various profiles, the petty bourgeoisie, and the intelligentsia. The intelligentsia is not a class, but at this moment, it plays a significant role in the political movement. Although it is itself divided into petty-bourgeois and proletarian segments, it shows its own characteristics within this specific movement.
The mass participation, organization, and blockades are a clear imprint of proletarian influence.
Liberal demands, legality, and social pacifism are clear markers of the petty bourgeoisie. The ideological backbone of the movement, the teaching intelligentsia, is present with its dominant moral concept of good and bad, culture and unculture, which fits into the broader liberal ideological spectrum. The front ranks are filled with students, and other members of the intelligentsia who seek the establishment of a modern bourgeois society and so-called “stability.” This is not just the cry of a local struggle in Serbia, but the echo of the general decline of European middle classes, which has found its expression and its own form in Serbia. Despite this, the inevitable spillover of this movement to the working class, which is itself pressed by material and cultural poverty, is unavoidable. Therefore, it is not a coincidence that this movement has advanced the furthest in modern history, because while on one side the main mass consists of youth, who play a specific role in society and carry their own specific characteristics, on the other side, the main force of this movement is the need for change, in which the working class also has its own erspective and position. The greater energy, as an inherent characteristic of youth, the relative cultural and class homogeneity, and the mass social life in schools and universities have clearly re-emerged as the fundamental material precondition for the mass movement.
The blows to the regime were not dealt by the most reformist demands, although even those, at this moment, represent something unachievable for the regime, but by a combination of mass participation, organization, and violence. Despite the cries for non-violence, the student movement stood out with its almost militant discipline and organization, and the main method of action – blockades – was not an act of pacifism but a denial of the regime’s positions. The regime’s influence at the universities was broken by institutions of broad democracy, which were realized this time in the form of plenums.
So, at the organizational and political level, it has been shown that the winning combination of mass organization and democratic centralism still holds as true!
The institutions of broad democracy at the universities can achieve their full and proper form by further connecting between the faculties, and in that case, they will stand as a political island in the sea of Serbian liberalism. This movement, by its form of action, not only reminds one of the historical labor movement but is also a sort of formal manifestation of that movement in the given historical circumstances. All reformist mistakes in tactics and program can only be criticized as infantile errors, which the course of history will sooner or later erase.
This is not a list of wishes from Marxist-Leninists, but an objective reality.
A corrupt mafia regime, with its autocratic imprint, at this moment acts as a political representative of large multinational capital and the local oligarchy, which itself shows elements of economic monopoly. The armed support of this class consists of criminal structures, along with parts of the military and police, who, because of their comprador position, cannot be fully trusted. Therefore, at this moment, this regime represents the watchdog of multinational capital, and its collapse, in a political sense, would represent a victory for the workers’ movement in its resurgence.
The collapse of the regime would also force all bourgeois parties to more clearly define their position in favor of compradorism and colonial slavery to foreign capital, rather than the current situation where their position allows them to invoke ‘patriotism’ and the defense of national resources. At the same time, the direct alignment of all comprador elites on one side would have to be marked as the worst form of political tyranny, which will have to be enforced by those very ‘oppositional’ and liberal parties. The era of liberal fascism necessarily encompasses all of Europe, and this process will become even clearer on the Balkans than in the heart of the imperialist center.
That’s why it’s important for us, as a Party, to understand the significance of the current movement and to gain positions among the youth, the progressive-minded intellectuals, and the working class, which, in economic terms, is the only one guaranteed to have a tendency for growth. Therefore, the political question cannot be reduced to the mere existence and legal functioning of institutions (which are already ‘doing their job’ for the interests of the ruling class), but also to the character of
those institutions.
And it will precisely be the question of the character of institutions that will be the dividing point between the liberals, fascists, and nationalists on one side, and us, the communists and class conscious workers, on the other.
The illusion of equality, whatever form of government is adopted in the upcoming period, will last only as long as the ruling class needs to recover from the blows it as endured. We know that it is not individuals who make history, but classes. The current state is a product of irreconcilable class contradictions; it cannot be otherwise. With the change of power, no class will fundamentally disappear or emerge from the historical scene. However, at the end of this process, monopolies will effectively receive a slap in the face, and the working class and petty-bourgeois layers will gain the experience of organization.
