Re: The nature of Croat fascism

["Bryan A. Alexander" <bnalexan@xxxxxxxxx>]

Chris' post is, as often, well-thought-out.  His points are worth
discussing in detail.
        1.  In regards Tudjman and the recovery of the Ustashe past -
let's begin by saying the Croatian fascist regime is utterly without
merit.  They made good headway on several genocidal programs (Muslim, Jew,
Grypsy, Srb above all) and died fighting for the Axis.  This is not to
wholly condemn all moves towards un-blackening the Ustashe rep as
fascistic.  During the late 80s some Croats, including Tudjman, did some
good work in making the official Yugoslav history of the period more
realistic.  But this review of the Ustashe entered a second phase with the
Wars of the Yugoslav Succession, a phase still operating.  Here the
Ustashe are seen as desperate heroes in desperate times, an image with
several layers of appeal (the obnoxious odor so tasty to rebel youth, the
air of sheer will with an allure for the battle-weary/hardened, etc.).
Furthermore, the Croat regime can play games of distance with the Ustashe
past, letting others (skins, scholars, anonymous graffitti artists) play
it up, than distancing itself from them as needed, only trying out the
hard stuff (the currency!) after consideration and testing.  In other
words, to discuss the regime of Pavelic is not to necessarily be fascist,
but we should not be too free with granting innocence.
        2. Some crucial systemic features of classic fascism are in fact
at play in Croatia.  To wit:
        a) fetishizing militarism.  From the ludicrous costumes of
Tudjman's guard to the raving agitprop surrounding the army's every
twitch, this glory of arms - and in them the nation, and the state - is
purest Mussolini.  But this alone will not suffice:
        b) the unique combination of wounded weakness and noble glory that
Eco talked about so recently as constitutive of European fascism.  The
Germans were stabbed in the back, but were the master race.  The Croats
were treacherously attacked by the JNA - and the rhetoric of this is
amazing.  I recall reading one article in a Zagreb shop that began along
thse lines: "When the nascent Croat state was assaulted in its cradle by
Chetnik marauders, the situation is best compared to an invasion of a
sleeping good family by an army of rapists and murderers who crash in
through its home's windows and doors..."  And yet the Croats have always
been the leading edge, so to speak, of the west Balkans, the most advanced
(or Western; same thing), the least backward.  Such a glorious people
could only be harmed by the most extreme crimes and treacheries... I don't
see this in any of the Srb agitprop I've read.  although Karazdic is
talking this line this week to explain NATO's sudden spasms.
        3) the concentration of cultural redefintion in central state
hands.  Tudjman orchestrates the creation of news media, a new language,
tastes in music and film.  The mystic element in Nazism appears in the die
hard Catholicism pushed so hard by the Croat state (yes, the Srbs have
this too, in Orthodox priests).
        4) for all his time in prison during the so-called Croat spring,
Tudjman is keen on a whole package deal of cult o' personality.  I saw a
WORKS series in Split that reminded me suddenly of Kim Il Sung's
mega-volumes.  Here Tudjman is more autobiographical, but this should not
distract us from our point: Franjo (so hard not to type F R A N C O !) is
building himself up as the nation's icon.
        Combine these - the convergence of hero/martyr myth, nation, army, 
culture,
leader - and we get the cultural fabric of fascism.

        And yet, economics leaves us with ambiguous characterization.
Croatia is clearly beginning to militarize its industries and agriculture
- but Serbia is far along that route.  It has the requisite combination of
different modes of production, all of which can be played against each
other and used culturally (power of the industrial worker, love of the
peasant's soil, etc.).
        But the point about foreign investment is telling.  Croatia is
trying very hard to attain the opposite of autarky.  Maybe Tudjman is
hoping to entice massive foreign investment, then, 10? 20? years from now,
to suddenly nationalize and go for a new reich.  But not now.  Serbia, on
the other hand, has had no choice but to strive for economic autonomy.
It's not doing very well.
        Point well taken, Chris.  I'd argue that, given the Balkans'
historical tendency of depending on foreign capital penetration, what we
see is a uniquely Balkan form of fascism, an all-but-Mussolini state.  It
would be worth comparing to some Latin America fascist-leaning regimes.

Bryan Alexander
Department of English
University of Michigan
**********************

On Wed, 6 Sep 1995, Chris Burford wrote:

> Perceptions by the left of the conflict in Yugoslavia has been
> strongly affected by ideas about Croat fascism and the Ustashe.
>
> In another context warning has been given about using the term fascism
> loosely separate from its historical context. Without having
> the knowledge fully to illuminate the issue I think I see enough that the
> situation in former Yugoslavia is complex on this question too.
>
> Tudjman  spent some time in prison,
> during a crackdown in 1971 on many leading Croatians who wanted
> greater cultural and political and no doubt economic autonomy.
> In the seventies he was particularly engrossed in re-examining the
> history of Croat nationalism, and he was accused of being a revisionist
> on the fascist nature of the Ustashe. In the debate about how many
> died in the concentration camp at Jasenovac, he is said consistently to
> have argued for the lowest possible figure (The Observer, London,
> 6th August 1995). On the other hand it would appear from this evidence
> that he did not deny the existence of the concentration camp.
> Furthermore it was common that a number of nationalist tendencies
> around the world had sympathies for Germany in the Second World War,
> Irish, Indian, Iraqi, Egyptian, to name only some that come to mind.
> >From everything I hear Pavelic's regime was especially nasty but
> the point I am making is that sympathy with Germany in the 1930's
> in itself does not totally invalidate any claim to national
> aspirations. (Other things of course may.)
>
> What I suspect is that as the centrifugal economic processes in Yugo-
> slavia increased this became the main idological expression of the
> political and materialist question of whether there was a case for
> Croatia to secede from the federation: was there a legitimate
> national case for Croatia?
>
> Serb socialists would therefore have an interest in presenting Tudjman
> as a fascist. Without going into detailed historical arguments we do
> not know to what extent he did a whitewash on the activities of the Ustashe
> or merely said there has been a historical Croat nationalist movement
> going back well before the Second World War, which there was, or something
> in between.
>
> Tudjman is now one of many ex-communist leaders converted to nationalism
> and weak to say the least on civil rights. The situation in Croatia is
> worrying about how far it will turn towards overt fascism. I am forwarding
> a post about the suppression of the last independent radio station.
>
> However it seems to me that the economic basis for a full nationalistic
> Croat fascism is not there. Croatia needs an economy open to the European
> Union. In many ways the split between Croatia and Serbia was like the
> split between the Czech lands and Slovakia: the western territory more
> prosperous, closer linked to the European Union, more ready to embrace
> free market economics; the eastern territory more collectivist, socialistic,
> less competitive. The split occurred in terms of national ideology and
> culture but it was a reflection of the economic base.
>
> In the Croatian government there is the militaristic aggressive and
> semi-fascist "Defence" Minister Gojko Susak, and the more liberal
> Foreign Minister Mate Granic, who is on amiable terms with the European
> Union. Much of the future of Croatia may depend on how they jostle for
> influence within the ruling party, and to what extent they represent
> real economic forces. Tudjman who is obviously a skilled opportunist
> if not an outright fascist, will have been clever enough to calculate
> that while he takes the victory salute in Knin, it will not be in his
> interest for Susak to become triumphant within the Croatian Democratic
> Union.
>
> Much of the resistance to fascist tendencies in triumphant Croatia
> will be about human rights. Any publicity to violations of these
> that can be achieved in countries sending donations to Tudjman's
> campaign funds for the probable election this year, could make a
> material impact.
>
> The purpose of this analysis is to try to go into detail a little about
> what is really happening.
>
> The trouble is our starting point in the left wing analysis assumes
> that Croatia is very possibly fascist, and Serbia may not be.
>
> I think the problem is that for historical reasons fascist tendencies in
> Croatia look anti-communist, whereas fascist tendencies in Serbia look
> socialist. In the 1990's I however I believe that the social fascist
> tendencies of Greater Serb nationalism have been the greater danger for
> the interests of the people of Yugoslavia.
>
> That of course could change rapidly.
>
>
> Chris Burford, London.
>
>
>
>      --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------