Democratic Centralism, Take Two

The FRY opposition, caught between a massive charge (which they didn't have the force to do), a union (which they weren't wise enough to do) and marketing (which they didn't have money for) ended up with rifts in party committees, arguments amid a shortage of money like the Civic Alliance recently at the speed of one rift, one coalition a month.

The list of those rifts is hardly worth mentioning: the DS-Serbian Liberal Party in 1991, the DSS in mid-1992, Democratic Center in 1996. In the 1990-92 period, the Alliance of Reformists of Yugoslavia (SRSJ) practically disappeared; the Montenegro National Party lost its members to five new parties in 1991; the SPO-Rakitic group in 1994, SRS a series of rifts in 1994-95; DZVM broke up in 1995 into two ethnic Hungarian parties.

Or is it more effective to count the easily proclaimed coalitions: United opposition, Associated opposition, United Serbian Opposition, DEPOS I, DEPOS II, Patriotic Opposition, United Democratic Opposition, Democratic Alliance, Parallel Parliament, March 9 Coalition.

The VREME documentation center tried to present those movements in the opposition graphically. The labyrinth became so entangled that it could not be printed. There are no words to describe this.

In other words, the opposition seems like an army that broke apart in maneuvers, if there ever was an army.

Perhaps the alliances and main boards would not have broken up so easily if the parties had a membership that the leaders suited. The opposition has been dogged by a persistent and almost dogmatic marginalizing of the role of the membership. That would be easily explained with the fact that no one in their right mind has the courage to ask people for membership fees amid all the poverty but in truth, the prevailing belief since the introduction of pluralism was that modern parties don't have members but only leaders. Several years ago, the number of formal members of opposition parties was estimated at 150,000 while the Socialists had about 400,000. Now the Socialists have 500,000 and no one is counting the "organized" opposition.

The ruling party with all the faults of an untouchable power prevented the forming of competition, it held onto its monopolies of power, building, money, the media and systematically treated the opposition as a conspiracy.

On this March 9, two former police officials spoke publicly about their orders to obstruct the election campaign.

Professor Miroslav Pecujlic told the recent gathering on Goals and Roads of a Society in Transition that the current society is a social hybrid formed by the chaotic processes with uncertain outcomes, as the heritage of authoritarian socialism and semi-peripheral capitalism (primary accumulation). Pecujlic said society includes latent potential - human and material - to form a modern society. The elements of the potential alliance for that society (lower level) could be the reformist political elites, the class of private owners in formation, a modern class of managers, highly educated working people, farmers, young and educated generations, self-aware women.

Who is going to rally and move them? Professor Branko Pribicevic addressed the same gathering and listed the weaknesses that make the stability of democracy in post-socialist countries uncertain including the nonexistence of strong, well profiled, well organized political parties. Some of the Eastern European countries have hundreds of parties, some have already disappeared but the time when political powers will be grouped in two or three parties still seems far away.

Sociologist Vladimir Goati noted that the two ruling parties in the FRY (the SPS and Montenegrin DPS) have eliminated their competition and proved themselves more resistant to internal strife than the opposition. He said the SPS is even more successful in avoiding a breakup than any other former communist party in Central and Eastern Europe.

The opposition keeps trying to prove its strength by the grace of some saint through winds, rain, droughts, by rallying in public places and through the number of their main, local, city party boards which often fall apart since their members are not influential activists.

Many analyses show that internal party democracy is relatively meaningless. Individual party members have relatively little chance of influencing party policies. The recent voting at the SPS congress seemed like the acclamation at a stadium that confirmed the choice of Byzantine emperors. Only the small Civic Alliance launched inner party elections with two candidates.