Together with J. B. Tito, Edvard Kardelj found himself in the middle of Stalin's terror in Moscow in the 1930s. Although they did not lose their faith in the “homeland of the proletariat” and Marxism, Kardelj bacame convinced that in Yugoslavia “everything would be different”. After the split with Cominform in 1948, Kardelj became one of the main heralds of the new Yugoslav political direction which was trying to find another route into socialism, different from the one enacted by Stalin in the Soviet Union and “people’s democracies” of his bloc. Even after the “normalization” of relations between Moscow and Belgrade in the mid-1950s, Kardelj continued to upgrade his idea of self-management socialism, perceived by the Soviets (especially M. Suslov) as despicable “revisionism”.
B.03 Paper at an international scientific conference
COBISS.SI-ID: 1538331844In the context of the problematic relations between religion and state-socialism we knew in Yugoslavia, the situation of religious teachers was in the focus during the entire post-war period, especially in the 70s, after the demands of the Marxist ideas in school lessons escalated. In the highest political forums, in the Socialist Alliance of Working People (SZDL), and for the first time after the war also in the press, a sharp polemic has developed with the involvment of the Marxist theorists and the highest political representatives (M. Kučan, F. Šetinc) on one side and eminent theologians (F. Perko, V. Grmič, J. Janžekovič) on the other side. Later the emerging intellectual opposition also joined. Author presented political formulation of the position and rights of religious teachers, which was based on the said Leninist assumption, but in the spirit of the late Yugoslav socialism still sought to include religious people into the ranks of supporters of self-governing regime.
B.03 Paper at an international scientific conference
COBISS.SI-ID: 1538727876Reviewing the book “Politics of Rupture: From Partisan Politics to Socialist Transition” (Gal Kirn, 2014), Jure Ramšak presented the most common misunderstandings, which are part of public discussion on Yugoslav self-management during the transition period. He put an effort to contextualize Kirn’s interpretation of revolutionary rupture during and after the World War II on the one hand and traced political and social developments, which led Yugoslav political economy away from its revolutionary origins on the other. In this sense, he made special emphasis on the Edvard Kardelj’s claim on individual happiness as a symptom of the late socialism or in other words, transition towards “post-socialism”, which took place since the 1960s.
B.06 Other
COBISS.SI-ID: 1538074052