/
Events
/
Conferences
»Retaliation Against the Class Enemy: the Case of Serbian Bourgeoisie Between 1944 and 1950
»Obračun s klasnim neprijateljem«: slučaj srpskog građanstva 1944-1950.
This work by Nataša Miličević is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
Files (1)
Description
In the first years after World War II the Communist Party of Yugoslavia as themain embodiment of the new revolutionary authorities introduced a large numberof various measures, aimed at building a »new state« and »new society« inaccordance with its own vision and as well as views compatible with the Sovietexperience. The construction of the »new« was based on the destruction of the»old«, and bourgeoisie with its own outlook on the state and society regime wasin the centre of that. The communists saw the Yugoslav or Serbian bourgeoisieas the main class and political enemy as well as collaborators during the war.They saw them as a social class that should be destroyed in order to create a sociallyjust society. Furthermore the communists saw the Serbian bourgeoisie aswell as the Serbian nation as it existed in the pre-war period from the viewpointof »Greater-Serbian hegemonism« and »Greater-Serbian chauvinism«, whichcould also be interpreted as a way of solving the Serbian national question.The revolutionary authorities carried out the »showdown with the class enemy«by »expropriating the expropriators«, or by dispossessing the bourgeoisie. Thatinvolved the execution of a range of measures, depriving the bourgeoisie of itspolitical, economical and social power. Despite its rise to power the CommunistParty of Yugoslavia was forced to conceal its real goal, just like it had done duringWorld War II. Instead of national liberation it now resorted to the People’sFront terminology (phraseology). This was a result of internal as well as of – toeven a greater degree – international factors. Furthermore, during the war andafter it the communists refrained from expropriating the bourgeoisie in openclass-related retaliation. Instead they »fought« against the remainders of fascismduring a process of cleansing the society of collaborators, opponents of the newauthorities, and opponents of the building of the »new society« based on socialjustice and equality. Due to all of this the revolutionary authorities »expropriated« the bourgeoisie in several stages, in an evolutionary and elastic manner.With regard to this there were no differences between the Serbian bourgeoisieand bourgeoisie of the other Yugoslav nations. Everywhere expropriation tookthe same forms and resulted in the same consequences. A certain peculiaritywas only visible in terms of the fact that Serbia had been liberated sooner andthat the measures of the »retaliation« against bourgeoisie started there. In viewof this it is also possible to refer to the actions against the Serbian bourgeoisieas more severe. Furthermore, some information attests to the fact that the penalpolicy towards the Serbian bourgeoisie was more severe than in case of, forexample, Croatian bourgeoisie. There was an even more obvious difference be59tween the Serbian bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie of other Yugoslav nations, as faras the resolution of the national question is concerned. The contemporary politicallyactive representatives of the bourgeoisie believed that with the division ofthe Serbian nation into several federal units the Serbian nation and the territoriesseen as Serbian national territory had been divided.
Metadata (12)
- identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/11686/20466
- title
- »Retaliation Against the Class Enemy: the Case of Serbian Bourgeoisie Between 1944 and 1950
- »Obračun s klasnim neprijateljem«: slučaj srpskog građanstva 1944-1950.
- »Obračun z razrednim sovražnikom«: primer srbskega meščanstva 1944- 1950
- creator
- Nataša Miličević
- contributor
- Marko Zajc (mod.)
- subject
- Slovenija
- zgodovina
- Jugoslavija
- posvetovanja
- 1941-1991
- Slovenia
- history
- Yugoslavia
- symposium
- 1941-1991
- description
- Komunistična partija Jugoslavije je kot glavna sila nove, revolucionarneoblasti v prvih letih po drugi svetovni vojni sprejela veliko število različnihukrepov, s katerimi je v skladu z lastno vizijo, vendar po vzoru sovjetskih izkušenj,gradila »novo državo« in »novo družbo«. Graditev »novega« je temeljilana rušenju »starega«, v središču tega pa je bilo meščanstvo s svojimi pogledina ureditev države in družbe. Komunisti so v jugoslovanskem oz. v srbskemmeščanstvu videli poglavitnega razrednega in političnega sovražnika ter izdajalceiz vojnega časa, ki jih je treba kot razred uničiti, da bi se lahko ustvariladružbeno pravična država. Poleg tega so komunisti srbsko meščanstvo in tudisrbski narod iz predvojnega obdobja gledali skozi prizmo »velikosrbskega hegemonizma« in »velikosrbskega šovinizma«, kar je dodatno vplivalo na svojevrstennačin reševanja srbskega nacionalnega vprašanja. Revolucionarna oblastje »obračun z razrednim sovražnikom« izvajala na način »ekspropriacije ekspropriatorja« oz. z razlaščevanjem meščanstva. To je pomenilo izvajanje vrsteukrepov, s katerimi je bila meščanstvu odvzeta politična, ekonomska in družbenamoč. KPJ je bila kljub osvojitvi oblasti prisiljena ta cilj prikrivati, tako kot jeto počela v času vojne, le da je namesto narodnoosvobodilne sedaj uporabljalaljudskofrontovsko frazeologijo. Na to so vplivali notranji, še bolj pa zunanji,mednarodni razlogi. Poleg tega jugoslovanski komunisti niso niti v vojni niti ponjej razlaščevali meščanstva v odkritem razrednem obračunavanju, temveč podkrinko »boja« proti ostankom fašizma. Hkrati je potekal tudi proces čiščenjadružbe, iz katere so želeli izločiti sodelavce okupatorja, nasprotnike nove oblastiin nasprotnike graditve »nove družbe«, zasnovane na socialni pravičnosti inenakosti. Zaradi vsega tega je revolucionarna oblast na evolutiven in elastičennačin v več fazah »ekspropriirala« meščanstvo, pri čemer ni delala razlik medsrbskim in meščanstvom drugih jugoslovanskih narodov. Povsod je razlaščevanjepotekalo na podoben način in je imelo enake posledice. Določena posebnostin s tem tudi razlika je bila predvsem v tem, da je bila Srbija osvobojenapred ostalimi in so zato prvi ukrepi »obračuna« z meščanstvom potekali pravtam. Zaradi tega je mogoče govoriti tudi o ostrejšem postopanju proti srbskemumeščanstvu. Nekateri podatki pričajo, da je bila kazenska politika ostrejšado srbskega kot na primer do hrvaškega meščanstva. Še izrazitejša razlika prireševanju nacionalnega vprašanja je vidna med srbskim meščanstvom in meščanstvomdrugih jugoslovanskih narodov. Tedanji politično aktivni meščanskipredstavniki so menili, da delitev srbskega naroda v več federalnih enot pomeniločitev naroda in območij, ki so jih dojemali kot srbsko nacionalno ozemlje.
- Komunistička partija Jugoslavije, kao glavna snaga nove, revolucionarne vlasti,je u prvih nekoliko godina posle Drugog svetskog rata, preduzela veliki brojraznovrnih mera kojima je, u skladu sa sopstvenom vizijom i pogledima i pouzoru na sovjetsko iskustvo, gradila »novu državu« i »novo društvo«. Izgradnja»novog« bazirala se na rušenju »starog« u čijem središtvu je bilo građanstvosa svojim pogledom na uređenje države i društva. Komunisti su u jugoslovenskomodnosno srpskom građanstvu videli glavnog klasnog i političkog neprijateljai ratnog izdajnika, koga je trebalo kao klasu uništiti kako bi se stvorilodruštvo slojalne pravde. Uz to, komunisti su srpsko građanstvo, a i srpski narodiz predratnog perioda, posmatrali kroz prizmu »velikosrpskog hegemonizma«i »velikosrpskog šovnizma«, što je nosilo i specifi čan način rešavanja srpskognacionalnog pitanja. Revolucionarna vlast je »obračun s klasnim neprijateljem«sprovodila kroz »eksproprijacija eksproprijatora«, odnosno kroz razvlašćivanjegrađanstva. To je značilo preduzimanje niza mera kojima je oduzimana politička,ekonomska i društvena moć građanstva. KPJ je, i pored osvajanja vlasti, bila prinuđenada taj cilj prikriva, isto kako je to činila u ratu. Umesto narodnooslobodilačke,sada je koristila narodnofrontovsku frazeologiju. Na to su uticali unutrašnji,i još više, međunarodni razlozi. Osim toga, jugoslovenski komunisti, ni u ratua ni posle njega, nisu razvlašćivali građanstvo u otvorenom klasnom obračunuveć u »borbi« protiv ostataka fašizma i u procesu čišćenja društva od saradnikaokupatora, protivnika nove vlasti i protivnika izgradnje »novog društva« zasnovanogna socijalnoj pravdi i jednakosti. Zbog svega toga, revolucionarna vlast jena jedan evolitivan i elastičan način, u više faza, »eksproprisala« građanstvo. Utome nije bilo razlike između srpskog građanstva i građanstva ostalih jugoslovenskihnaroda. Svuda se ona odvijala na sličan način i imala je iste posledice.Određena specifi čnost, pa i razlika, vidljiva je pre svega u pogledu činjenice daje Srbija bila ranije oslobođena i da su prve mere »obračuna« s građanstvom započeleupravo u njoj. Sa te strane, moguće je govoriti i o oštrijem postupanju premasrpskom građanstvu. Osim toga, neki podaci svedoče da je kaznena politika bilaoštrija prema srpskom nego na primer prema hrvatskom građanstvu. Još izrazitijerazlika vidljiva je između srpskog i građanastva ostalih jugoslovenskih naroda urešavanja nacionalnog pitanja. Tadašnji politički aktivni građanski predstavnicismatrali su, da je deljenjem srpskog naroda u nekoliko federalnih jedinica, cepani srpski narod i teritorija koje su oni smatrali da su srpske nacionalne teritorije.
- In the first years after World War II the Communist Party of Yugoslavia as themain embodiment of the new revolutionary authorities introduced a large numberof various measures, aimed at building a »new state« and »new society« inaccordance with its own vision and as well as views compatible with the Sovietexperience. The construction of the »new« was based on the destruction of the»old«, and bourgeoisie with its own outlook on the state and society regime wasin the centre of that. The communists saw the Yugoslav or Serbian bourgeoisieas the main class and political enemy as well as collaborators during the war.They saw them as a social class that should be destroyed in order to create a sociallyjust society. Furthermore the communists saw the Serbian bourgeoisie aswell as the Serbian nation as it existed in the pre-war period from the viewpointof »Greater-Serbian hegemonism« and »Greater-Serbian chauvinism«, whichcould also be interpreted as a way of solving the Serbian national question.The revolutionary authorities carried out the »showdown with the class enemy«by »expropriating the expropriators«, or by dispossessing the bourgeoisie. Thatinvolved the execution of a range of measures, depriving the bourgeoisie of itspolitical, economical and social power. Despite its rise to power the CommunistParty of Yugoslavia was forced to conceal its real goal, just like it had done duringWorld War II. Instead of national liberation it now resorted to the People’sFront terminology (phraseology). This was a result of internal as well as of – toeven a greater degree – international factors. Furthermore, during the war andafter it the communists refrained from expropriating the bourgeoisie in openclass-related retaliation. Instead they »fought« against the remainders of fascismduring a process of cleansing the society of collaborators, opponents of the newauthorities, and opponents of the building of the »new society« based on socialjustice and equality. Due to all of this the revolutionary authorities »expropriated« the bourgeoisie in several stages, in an evolutionary and elastic manner.With regard to this there were no differences between the Serbian bourgeoisieand bourgeoisie of the other Yugoslav nations. Everywhere expropriation tookthe same forms and resulted in the same consequences. A certain peculiaritywas only visible in terms of the fact that Serbia had been liberated sooner andthat the measures of the »retaliation« against bourgeoisie started there. In viewof this it is also possible to refer to the actions against the Serbian bourgeoisieas more severe. Furthermore, some information attests to the fact that the penalpolicy towards the Serbian bourgeoisie was more severe than in case of, forexample, Croatian bourgeoisie. There was an even more obvious difference be59tween the Serbian bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie of other Yugoslav nations, as faras the resolution of the national question is concerned. The contemporary politicallyactive representatives of the bourgeoisie believed that with the division ofthe Serbian nation into several federal units the Serbian nation and the territoriesseen as Serbian national territory had been divided.
- publisher
- Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino
- Muzej novejše zgodovine Slovenije
- date
- 2013
- 29. 11. 2013
- type
- video
- language
- Srbščina
- isPartOf
- rights
- license: ccByNcNd