Aleksandar Đenic | New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (Serbia)
This article was published in Cuba at the request of the Cuban comrades and has been posted in several parts on ‘The Platform’.
A Few Examples of the Success of Yugoslav Socialism (the list is long, but it exceeds the scope of this essay)
1) Industry and Agriculture
From the 1950s onwards, the share of industry in Yugoslavia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) continuously increased, while the share of agriculture declined. By the end of the 1960s, industry had become the dominant sector in the economy, while agriculture increasingly became a secondary sector. This shift in the structure of the economy was crucial for the modernization process of Yugoslavia during the socialist period. During the 1970s and 1980s, the share of industry in GDP was around 40%. The socialist system enabled faster industrial production development than in many other countries at the time. Yugoslavia became an industrialized country, with developed sectors such as metallurgy, the automotive industry, electrical engineering, and shipbuilding. The chemical industry also developed, and the country produced tractors, combine harvesters, cultivators, and other agricultural machinery that were recognized worldwide (for example, the IMT tractor was exported to 81 countries). The textile industry was also an important sector.
According to data from 1981, there were 8,779,735 active workers in Yugoslavia, making up 43.4% of the total population. Of this number, 2,602,122 worked in agriculture and fishing, 2,209,698 in industry and mining, 689,297 in construction, 589,169 in trade, and 445,367 in transport and communications. The state owned about 24% of agricultural production, and food industry complexes became significant scientific centers.
2) Health Policy in Yugoslavia
Socialist Yugoslavia provided free and quality healthcare. During World War II, the number of doctors decreased, so in 1945, one doctor served 10,000 people, and many doctors were not up to date with medical advancements. The lack of middle-level medical staff was pronounced, and in 1945, there were only 4,000 healthcare workers. Most hospitals were destroyed or damaged, and treatment conditions were very modest.
Healthcare was developed under Soviet influence, and in 1946, health insurance was introduced for workers and civil servants, covering 12% of the population. In 1950, a law was passed to expand coverage, including family members, and from 1959, farmers also became part of the system.
In the 1950s, intensive efforts began to develop primary healthcare. By 1988, 450 health centers and 2,550 healthcare stations were established. Private practice was banned. Prevention of infectious diseases was crucial, and vaccination yielded excellent results in reducing diseases like malaria, typhoid fever, polio, diphtheria, and others. Yugoslavia became one of the largest vaccine producers in the world.
The health of the population did not depend solely on the healthcare system but also on other social factors, such as education, infrastructure, and better living conditions. Increased access to clean water, better nutrition, and recreation contributed to improving overall health. Free vacations (factories had their own resorts in the mountains and by the sea) and sports activities were also widely available. By 1978, 82% of the population was covered by health insurance. The number of doctors in 1987 was 47,869, and the number of hospital beds increased to 142,427. The infant mortality rate was reduced to a quarter of the pre-war level. Life expectancy between 1950 and 1991 increased by 15.5 years for men and 18.8 years for women.
Healthcare funding was organized through self-management interest communities (SIZ), and employees contributed 8% of their gross salary to healthcare (today they contribute 37%), which was the main source of funding. Healthcare workers and citizens had the opportunity to influence the management of healthcare institutions. Healthcare spending during economic growth decreased from 7.1% of Gross National Income in 1969 to 3.95% in 1986.
3) Education
Socialism significantly reduced illiteracy in Yugoslavia, so that by 1981 it was less than 10%. At that time, about a third of the population had completed secondary education, while 6% obtained a university degree or higher professional qualifications. By 1945, there were three universities in Yugoslavia: the University of Zagreb (founded in 1669), the University of Belgrade (founded in 1808), and the University of Ljubljana (founded in 1919, as the first university in Yugoslavia). By the 1980s, the number of universities in the country had grown to 17, and the average number of students in higher education reached 400,000 annually, with over 45% of students being women. Primary education was compulsory, and education from kindergarten to doctorate was free. The primary school became an educational and developmental institution that included many extracurricular activities. In addition to classes, children participated in sections involving sports, arts, and culture, as well as visits to theaters, cinemas, and operas. These activities were key to the overall development of children, enabling them to develop their talents and interests outside the classroom.
4) Development of Scientific Centers
Scientific centers in socialist Yugoslavia played an important role in the development of science, technology, and industry in the country, as well as in strengthening international cooperation with other socialist states and the capitalist world. From 1945 to 1991, Yugoslavia developed a specific model of scientific organization and research, which was focused on integrating science with industrial development, as well as promoting socialist values through education and research. Scientific centers in socialist Yugoslavia were crucial for the country’s development in all aspects – from industrial production and technology to education and social innovations. Yugoslavia aimed to become a technologically and scientifically developed country, which produced many important projects, and many of these centers continue to play a significant role in the scientific communities of their respective countries.
5) Development of Computer Science
The development of computer science in socialist Yugoslavia was a dynamic process that began in the 1950s and culminated in the 1980s, when Yugoslavia became a recognizable player in the field of computing and information technologies. The development of computer science in Yugoslavia started in the first half of the 1950s when the first rudimentary computers appeared. At that time, Yugoslavia was following global trends, but due to the economic situation, it was still in a phase of development. In the 1960s and 1970s, Yugoslavia began developing its own computer industry, which was a key step toward further progress in computer science. The golden years for computer science development in Yugoslavia were the 1980s, when the country began to integrate into the broader international network in the field of computing technologies, particularly through programming, software products, and academic cooperation. The development of the domestic computer industry, investments in education, and international cooperation enabled Yugoslavia to become an important actor in the field of computing before the internet revolution. Many of the infrastructures developed at that time remain the foundation for further technological development in post-Yugoslav states.
6) Housing Policy
The right to housing was an integral part of the legislation of socialist Yugoslavia. In this context, the construction industry rapidly advanced in the early post-war decades, with significant help from volunteer labor. Through funds from the housing solidarity fund, from 1961 to 1980, 1.2 million housing units were built, which accounts for more than 35% of all currently existing apartments in Serbia. In this way, the housing issue was resolved for a large part of the population. All enterprises were required to allocate 4% of their income for housing construction. In Belgrade alone, between 1965 and 1974, more than 80,000 apartments were built. These apartments were free of charge, and citizens had the opportunity to take out favorable loans for building their own homes. Many families, in this way, built their weekend houses. Apartments were designed according to high standards – every window had to provide at least two hours of daylight. In addition to housing units, the blocks contained schools, shops, kindergartens, proximity to health centers, as well as numerous green areas, benches, and sports fields for football and basketball.
7) Culture and Art
In Yugoslavia, significant investments were made in culture, enabling its development and accessibility to the masses. Culture centers were built in nearly every village, and music and ballet schools were free of charge, which remained the standard up until today. Large funds were allocated to publishing and libraries, leading to the printing of thousands of copies of literary classics, social sciences, philosophy, and professional journals, all of which were available to everyone. In addition, many theaters were built, and amateur theaters and cultural-artistic societies were encouraged. Due to investments in education and cinema, Yugoslavia became internationally recognized for its film industry. At the same time, many writers who gained international fame emerged on the Yugoslav cultural scene. This approach to art allowed many artists—sculptors, painters, actors, and directors—to gain worldwide recognition. Art and culture were available to all, which enabled children from working-class and rural families to become top-tier artists.
8) Energy System
Yugoslavia was rich in rivers, which allowed for the construction of numerous hydroelectric plants (over 20 significant hydroelectric plants and more than 50 thermal power plants were built). The largest of these was the Đerdap Hydroelectric Plant, located on the Danube river, which was built in collaboration with socialist Romania. This plant was one of the largest infrastructure projects of its time. In addition to hydroelectric plants, Yugoslavia also developed the Krško Nuclear Power Plant in Slovenia. These investments allowed Serbia and other parts of former Yugoslavia to maintain independence in electricity supply. Today, Serbia continues to use these energy resources, which allow it to have one of the cheapest electricity rates in Europe.
9) Youth Volunteer Actions (Volunteer Work)
Youth Work actions and volunteer work played a significant role in the social life and economic development of Yugoslavia, especially during the socialist era. They represented a form of organized volunteering and collective labor on major infrastructure projects, which often had political and ideological significance. Work actions in Yugoslavia were organized initiatives where citizens, mostly young people, participated in large infrastructure projects and the construction of national importance buildings. These actions were based on volunteerism, but with strong social and political support from the state. Many of them were part of a broader plan for the modernization of the country and the development of a socialist economy. Work actions and volunteer work were an integral part of Yugoslav society, as they enabled the construction of key infrastructure objects, but they also had a deeply ingrained political and ideological dimension. Although the circumstances and motivations for participation in these actions changed over time, they remained a symbol of Yugoslav solidarity and collective labor.
10) Environmental Care: The Afforestation Policy in Socialist Yugoslavia: Structure and Development
The afforestation policy in socialist Yugoslavia, which lasted from 1945 to 1991, was a key part of the strategy for environmental conservation and the sustainable development of natural resources. Afforestation had ecological, economic, and social goals, and various initiatives and organizations significantly contributed to improving forest areas and restoring degraded lands. The Goran Movement, an organization gathering young people, played a central role in implementing afforestation across Yugoslavia. Young volunteers were engaged in tree planting, forest area restoration, and the reclamation of land affected by erosion. In addition to physical labor, the Movement also had an educational character, offering workshops and seminars on ecology and nature protection. The afforestation policy in Yugoslavia was part of a broader ecological and economic strategy aimed at balancing nature protection with the need for industrial resources. The Goran Movement and other volunteer engagements of young people played a crucial role in raising ecological awareness and building a socialist community. Despite challenges in implementation, afforestation left a significant mark on the conservation of the country’s natural resources.
11) Sport
Mass (amateur) sport was promoted in Yugoslavia. Sports were accessible to youth across the country, and all necessary equipment was provided by the sports clubs. In this context, gymnasiums were built in schools, and some schools even had their own Olympic-sized swimming pools. A large number of sports fields, complexes, swimming pools, and fitness tracks were constructed, along with the necessary equipment for engaging in mass sports.
12) Socialism, Security, Sovereignty
What socialist Yugoslavia provided to its citizens was security. Socialist Yugoslavia was a multi-ethnic and multi-confessional community that ensured 45 years of peace and development for its people, where there was no hatred among people and national identity was not important. Crime was a foreign phenomenon, and mass killings by individuals were unimaginable. There were a certain number of terrorist attacks organized by the Ustaše emigration (assisted by Western services) aimed at destabilizing the country. It is important to emphasize that socialist Yugoslavia was a sovereign country, with control over its territory and decisions made independently, while the countries formed after it are fragmented republics that are in NATO, or where NATO is present, as in Bosnia and Herzegovina, or in the occupied southern part of Serbia, Kosovo and Metohija, where decisions are made in Brussels and Washington, and the government is formed by the American ambassador.
The Final Triumph of the Counter-Revolution: The Path to the EU from 2000 to 2025
After the criminal NATO aggression, emergency elections were organized for the President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Western opposition formed the Democratic Opposition of Serbia (DOS), which included 20 organizations. According to official results, the pro-Western candidate Vojislav Koštunica won 48.96% of the votes, while Slobodan Miloševi큓 received 38.62%. This meant that a second round of elections should have been held. However, the pro-Western opposition claimed that Koštunica had won 50.24% of the votes and had already won in the first round. This claim was followed by the organization of a “colored revolution,” with the opposition entering the Federal Assembly and burning the election results.
The new pro-Western government declared that the “Bastille had fallen” and that communism in Yugoslavia had been finally overthrown. NATO had failed to break the resistance of the people of Yugoslavia during the aggression, but through its fifth column, with the October 5th coup in 2000, it succeeded in installing a government modeled on its own. A key role in this counter-revolution was played by the “Otpor” (Resistance) movement, which mobilized young people under CIA instructions. Later, its leaders founded the CANVAS organization (known for its distinctive logo—a clenched fist), which participated in the colored revolutions and their attempts in the Arab Spring, Venezuela, Georgia, Ukraine (twice), Bolivia, Belarus, Hong Kong, and many other countries.
From then until today, puppet regimes have alternated, and a common feature of these governments has been that they acted under the orders of Brussels and Washington. In this context, the new pro-imperialist governments began dismantling the socialist state and system, initiating mass privatizations and implementing neoliberal reforms. Only some examples will be mentioned here, as the crimes committed against the people, putting them in a state of slavery, exceed the scope of this text.
1) Destruction of the Financial Sector
After the coup, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia immediately joined international financial institutions like the IMF and the World Bank, which operated in the interests of imperialism. Soon, it began borrowing from Western creditors, while the domestic financial sector was destroyed. Upon taking power, the four largest state banks and the Social Accounting Service, which controlled the market, were liquidated, and foreign banks that now dominate the market replaced them.
2) Privatization
The reactionary process of privatization created a million-strong army of unemployed people and handed public property over to foreign and domestic, mostly foreign, bourgeois exploiters. The initial accumulation of capital in Yugoslavia, as in other former socialist states, was achieved by plundering public resources by those close to the authorities, creating a domestic bourgeoisie. In rigged tenders, large companies were sold for symbolic amounts of just a few euros, while many firms were sold below their market value. The restoration of capitalism enabled the creation of a domestic bourgeoisie and various parasitic structures, leading to mass dissatisfaction, a drastic decline in production and citizens’ living standards, an increase in crime, mafia activities, and plundering, as well as the negative influence of international financial and industrial monopolies on our economy. Our people became aware that there was no “fair” privatization—every privatization was a robbery of public resources that the working class of Yugoslavia had created over decades. The entire privatization process was accompanied by the revision of citizens’ social rights, acquired during the socialist construction period, as well as the abolition of many achievements in the fields of social protection, healthcare, education, culture, science, and sports. This policy had a particularly negative impact on everyday life through inflation, constant increases in rent, utility services, transportation, food, and other basic needs.
3) Destruction of the Army
The phrase “He who does not feed his army, will feed someone else’s” best describes the period after the counter-revolutionary coup, when the army reform began, which essentially meant a process of demilitarization. NATO officers were engaged in implementing this reform, and a NATO office was opened within the General Staff. Gradually, compulsory military service began to be abolished, and by 2010 it was completely eliminated. A large number of patriotically oriented officers were retired, while military equipment began to be destroyed, along with the military industry that produced equipment for the needs of the army.
In 2003, the Yugoslav Army had 206,000 active soldiers and 680,000 in reserve, while the number of people fit for military service reached as high as 2,300,000. One of the most illustrative examples of the reduction of military power was the purchase of the steel mill in Smederevo by the American company US Steel, which melted down tanks and then sold the factory for just one dollar.
Today, although the Serbian Army is renewing its capacities, both technical and industrial, it has only 25,000 soldiers (Serbia made up 87% of the population of the former FRY) and an active reserve of only 2,000 people.
4) Deindustrialization and Economic Dependence
The puppet authorities quickly began implementing a policy of aligning Serbia with the European Union, which serves large capital and represents a prison for nations. In the EU, the rich become even richer, while the poor become even poorer. Through this policy, deindustrialization of the country was carried out, and factories, built over decades by workers in socialism, were stolen and handed over to domestic tycoons and foreign capitalists. Under pressure from the EU, Serbia’s economy was reoriented towards a market economy and the development of small and medium-sized enterprises. Mineral and natural resources were sold off at bargain prices.
Industrial production in 2012 was at only 38.4% of the level from 1989, and in recent years, it has hovered around 50-55% of that period. Serbia experienced one of the largest deindustrializations in Europe since World War II. In the first years after the counter-revolution, the number of industrial workers was reduced by more than 50%.
Exports of industrial products are low, which negatively affects the trade balance and payment balance situation. Today, Serbia’s industry is not competitive either on foreign or domestic markets. Industrial activity is far below the country’s potential. Revenues from privatization were not invested in revitalizing industry but were mainly used for current consumption. Part of Serbia’s industry lost its previous markets in the EU, Eastern Europe, and the non-aligned countries. Additionally, the competition from foreign goods in the domestic market, after the liberalization and reduction of customs duties, further weakened the position of domestic producers.
The deindustrialization of Serbia is one of the indicators of the loss of sovereignty, as the country was placed in a dependent position toward Western centers of capital, exporting raw materials while simultaneously buying finished products from them. Today, Serbia’s gross domestic product (GDP) is composed of 51% services, 26% industry, and 6% agriculture. Employment in agriculture is 16%, in industry 28%, while services account for 56% of total employment. Serbia’s annual debt amounts to about 60% of GDP, while the total debt of all Yugoslav republics from 1991 has risen from 15 billion to 145-160 billion dollars.
Unemployment in Serbia currently stands at just over 8% (although if you are unemployed for more than 2 years, you are no longer considered unemployed in statistics), and the largest share of trade exchanges occurs with EU countries, whose share in trade is 59%. Large enterprises employ 44% of workers, while these companies account for 57% of total profit. Micro-enterprises make up 13%, small 20%, and medium 23%. Around 98% of companies in Serbia are privately owned, while only 1.3% are state-owned. Private companies employ 85% of the workforce, while state-owned enterprises employ only 14.5%. Private companies generate more than 91% of gross added value, while state-owned companies generate only 8%. Private companies account for 97.5% of exports, while state-owned companies account for only 2.3%, with imports from private companies accounting for 93.5%, and from state-owned companies 6.3%. In terms of exporters, private companies account for more than 99.2%, while state-owned enterprises achieve only 0.55%. Private companies also participate with more than 99.3% in the number of importers, while state-owned enterprises account for only 0.55%.
Due to the market logic of capital, which assumes the free flow of people, goods, and services, many young, highly educated people decide to seek their fortunes outside of Serbia. Serbia is also the leader in Europe in terms of brain drain. A large number of young, especially highly educated individuals, are leaving the country in search of better living and working conditions. These migrations represent a great loss for the country, as investments in the education of professionals often end up benefiting other countries that make use of their potential. These professionals often accept jobs in Western imperialist countries for significantly lower wages than they would be willing to work for in their home country, as they have no other options. This phenomenon clearly shows that poor and underdeveloped countries stand no chance in competition with developed, imperialist countries that are the center of global capital.
Serbia also encourages foreign investors by offering them subsidies of 10,000 euros per employee. However, after the subsidy period expires, many foreign companies often close their operations. Additionally, the Labor Law allows employers to easily dismiss workers, and in some factories, such as the South Korean company Yura, workers are forced to wear diapers to avoid losing time by going to the toilet during work hours. In many factories, union activists are harassed, and in many companies, the union is practically banned. The current Labor Law was written by the American Chamber of Commerce (as well as many other laws). The legislative framework is largely subordinated to the interests of large capital, rather than the welfare of workers.
Demographic changes and migration significantly impact Serbia’s economy. According to the 1991 census, Serbia had around 9.78 million inhabitants, of which around 1.95 million lived in Kosovo and Metohija. If we subtract the population from that area, Serbia had around 7.82 million people. According to the 2023 census, Serbia’s population has decreased to around 6.62 million, representing a decline of 1.21 million people. This number would have been even greater if it were not for the million refugees who came to Serbia, mainly from Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as from Kosovo and Metohija. In the last decade, between 30,000 and 60,000 people leave Serbia every year, mostly in search of a better life in Western Europe.
Uneven regional development also affects migration within the country. Young people from underdeveloped parts of Serbia are moving to Belgrade and Vojvodina. During 2020, 109,747 people changed their place of residence, meaning they permanently moved to another city or municipality. Of this number, 43,428 people moved to Belgrade, while 38,562 people left the capital. When including those who did not register, this number is much higher.
In Serbia, urban residents make up 61.2% of the total population. Statistics show that as many as 69.5% of young people between the ages of 18 and 34 still live with their parents, which is significantly above the EU average, where that percentage is 47.9%. This trend is a consequence of the inability of most young people to afford to buy an apartment or take out a housing loan. Additionally, more than half of young parents live with their parents or in homes they inherited. Buying a new apartment or taking out a housing loan is unimaginable for the vast majority of citizens in Serbia.
According to data from 2020, as much as one-fifth of the population (21.1%) was 65 or older, while only 14.3% was younger than 15 years old. The population growth rate compared to 2019 was negative and amounted to—6.7 per thousand. These demographic and migratory trends lead to a shortage of labor in Serbia, which is why the number of migrations from countries such as Sri Lanka, India, Bangladesh, as well as from Africa and other regions, has increased recently. Furthermore, more than 370,000 people have arrived in Serbia from Russia, and estimates suggest that this number could exceed 400,000.
5) Political Court—The Hague Tribunal
One of the first tasks of the new authorities in Yugoslavia after the counterrevolution was to extradite those who fought against American imperialism to the Hague Tribunal. In order to justify the role of the United States and Western imperialism in the breakup of Yugoslavia, it was crucial to accuse one side and demonize it. The goal was to portray one side as the “wolves” and the other as the “innocent sheep” led to slaughter. In this context, the principle of selective justice was applied, where only the consequences are discussed, while avoiding the discussion of the causes of the civil war in Yugoslavia and the role of Western imperialism in that process.
Here, no one seeks to justify the Serbs who committed horrific crimes during the war and who deserve to be punished, but the problem is that it is propagandistically portrayed that only the Serbian people and their leadership are responsible for the war and crimes in the former Yugoslavia, while Western imperialism and the separatists under its control are avoided as a responsible factor. The aim was to condemn the Serbian people, as it was the Serbs who were the most prominent opponents of the distruction of Yugoslavia, a country where all Serbs lived together.
After the counterrevolution, the president of the FRY during the NATO bombing, Slobodan Miloševi큓 (who was killed in The Hague before he could be sentenced), as well as the entire leadership of the FRY and the Bosnian Serbs, were arrested and extradited to the Hague Tribunal. When looking at the funding of the Hague Tribunal, it is clear that the United States, the EU, and their allies provide the most funding for the court, which suggests that its decisions were made in their interest. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia indicted 161 individuals, of which 94 were Serbs (58.39%). Interestingly, representatives of the US, NATO, and the EU, who are most responsible for the crimes, were not held accountable, but instead lectured on human rights.
6) The Destruction and Commodification of Education and Healthcare
Healthcare in Serbia has been systematically destroyed, with private healthcare services increasingly favored over public ones year after year, to the detriment of the public sector. Many doctors work simultaneously in both private and state institutions, often referring patients to private clinics. The government, under pressure from the International Monetary Fund, has passed numerous regulations prohibiting employment in public healthcare institutions (the latest decision extending the ban is valid until the end of 2026), which has led young healthcare workers to leave for Western countries. Long waiting lists for scans, surgeries, and other medical services (some of which people wait for years) force individuals to turn to private medicine, while those without financial means are left to fate. The destruction and privatization of the pharmaceutical industry and research centers have led to rising drug prices and a decrease in their quality. State pharmacies were sold off during privatization, and one of the last remaining, Apoteka Beograd, which has existed since 1830, is being sold to betting shops and casinos due to its prime locations. Private healthcare centers, many of which are foreign-owned, are making huge profits off citizens who are forced to receive treatment there. A striking example of the state’s neglect of healthcare is the abandoned hospital with new equipment built during the COVID-19 pandemic, now overgrown with weeds. The shortage of healthcare workers and the aging medical professionals further challenge the Serbian healthcare system.
Similarly, the education system is gradually becoming commercialized, with extreme commercialization starting with the implementation of the Bologna Declaration in 2006, which was signed in 2003. According to this declaration, education is increasingly reduced to market-oriented courses, with knowledge treated as a commodity that anyone can purchase. In practice, this has led to the overproduction of fake diplomas and doctorates, seriously degrading the quality of the education system. Students have become clients, and education has become a privilege for the wealthy, with fewer than 5% of students coming from working-class and peasant families. Private universities proliferated in the 1990s, and after the 2000s, their overproduction led to an even greater decline in education quality. At many private universities, children of wealthier parents simply buy their degrees. Primary and secondary education is increasingly aligned with European standards and EU ideology, aimed at educating obedient generations who will be part of the administrative elite within the EU. Furthermore, colonial discourse dominates university curricula, with the curriculum adjusted to the interests of the EU. The government wanted to bring foreign, unaccredited universities to Serbia and offer scholarships to certain students, but after professors protested, the law was withdrawn. However, the president stated that he would insist on bringing foreign universities to Serbia, but the current student protests have removed this issue from the agenda. In secondary education, the introduction of a dual training system, under the guise of “vocational advancement,” has led children to work in private companies for minimal compensation, effectively reintroducing child labor. Colonial discourse also dominates primary education, as, for example, Palestinian FATAH and the PLO are labeled as terrorist organizations in history textbooks.
The degradation of education and low wages are leading to serious problems. At some faculties in recent years, there have been no applications for programs such as mathematics, chemistry, physics, and Serbian language teaching, and due to the lack of staff, the state has allowed students to teach these subjects in primary and secondary schools, which further exacerbates the quality of education.
7) The Fire Sale of Mineral and Natural Resources
After the counterrevolution, Serbia began selling off its mineral and natural resources, primarily to foreign capital. One of the best examples of this approach to mineral resources is the attempt by the Serbian government to grant a 99-year concession for lithium extraction to the company Rio Tinto, with an annual rent of 4%. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Serbia to support this policy, as the issue of Serbian lithium had become an important point in his political campaign. Although the people of Serbia have managed to prevent the British-Australian company’s lithium exploration several times—given its globally negative impact—the government persistently insists on this plan. The reason for this is the strategic importance of Serbian lithium for the European Union in the competition with China over electric vehicle production.
8) The Breakup of the State Union
The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which was supposed to serve as the nucleus for the restoration of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, was broken up in 2006 through a rigged referendum, aided by a puppet regime in Montenegro led by Milo Đukanovi큓. This event fits into the continuity of imperialist policy in the broader process of dismantling the SFRY. As a result, Serbia lost its access to the sea, and Montenegro became a member of NATO. This process of fragmentation continued later, with the self-declared independence of the false state of Kosovo, which remains under NATO’s protectorate.
9) Anti-Communist Propaganda and the Invention of Traditions as EU Ideology
After the fall of the Berlin Wall, history began to be falsified in most former socialist countries. The Council of Europe adopted numerous resolutions condemning former socialist regimes following the collapse of the Eastern Bloc. For example, the Resolution on measures for dismantling former totalitarian systems emphasized that the main goal of transitional processes is to create a pluralistic democracy based on the rule of law and respect for human rights. This includes freedom of choice, economic pluralism, protection of private property, freedom of the press, development of civil society, as well as decentralization, demilitarization, demonopolization, and debureaucratization of former socialist regimes. The resolution highlighted the need to rehabilitate individuals who were victims of communist crimes and to return property to churches and individuals who were harmed by the state through nationalization, confiscation, or other forms of expropriation during communist totalitarianism. It stressed the necessity of adopting a lustration law, with a process that must meet democratic standards, meaning that guilt must be individual, not collective, and there must be a presumption of innocence until proven otherwise, with the right to appeal, as the aim of lustration is not to convict people (this is the task of the prosecution), but to protect the newly established democracy.
Additionally, a Resolution was adopted on the need for international condemnation of crimes committed by totalitarian communist regimes, which stated that the hallmark of these systems was the massive violation of human rights, mass collective and individual executions, concentration camps, deportations, torture, forced labor, and ethnic or religious persecutions, as well as other forms of violence. According to the authors of the resolution, these regimes were characterized by the absence of political pluralism, “violence against freedom and conscience, thought and expression, and freedom of the press.” The resolution pointed out the problem that communist criminals, unlike those belonging to the National Socialist ideology, have not faced justice after the fall of these regimes. One of the primary issues identified was the lack of awareness of these crimes in European societies. It also noted the problem of certain communist parties operating legally without distancing themselves from the atrocities committed during socialism. According to this assertion, it is essential to raise awareness about these criminals to prevent the repetition of such crimes in the future, while the moral condemnation of these crimes plays a crucial role in educating future generations. The resolution emphasized the clear stance of the international community on the past, which “can serve as a reference for future joint actions.” It also noted that the victims of crimes committed by communist totalitarian regimes, whether they are still alive or their families, “deserve sympathy, understanding, and recognition for their suffering.” The assembly believes that such resolutions will pave the way for “reconciliation and encourage historians to continue their research aimed at determining and verifying what happened.”
In this context, the European Parliament adopted a Declaration proclaiming August 23 as European Day of Remembrance for the Victims of Stalinism and Nazism, the day the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed. In the justification of this declaration, it refers to the United Nations Charter on the non-applicability of war crimes, as well as the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to the claims in this declaration, this date was chosen because a series of secret documents from the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement divided Europe into two spheres of influence between Germany and the Soviet Union. The declaration emphasizes that both Stalinism and Nazism are responsible for imprisonments, deportations, and torture, which fall under the category of crimes against humanity. It also notes that this resolution is being adopted because “the impact of the Soviet order and occupation on the citizens of post-communist states and its significance are little known in Europe.”
This declaration was reaffirmed by the European Parliament Resolution of April 2, 2009, on European Conscience and Totalitarianism. One of the key arguments presented in the resolution is that European integration emerged as a response to the suffering caused by the Two World Wars, Nazi tyranny leading to the Holocaust, and, on the other hand, the spread of totalitarian and undemocratic communist regimes in Eastern Europe. The resolution notes that Europe cannot be united until it confronts its past, where Western Europe was under Nazism, and Central and Eastern Europe were under Communism. The text condemned fascist regimes in Portugal, Greece, and Spain, while emphasizing the uniqueness of the Holocaust. This Resolution aims for Europe to develop a unified stance on its shared history and create an honest common discussion about Nazism, Stalinism, Communism, and Fascism and the crimes committed by these regimes. In the first point of this document, the European Parliament expressed solidarity with all the victims of totalitarian and undemocratic regimes in Europe, and at the same time, paid tribute to those who fought against tyranny and oppression.
The latest in a series of resolutions in this spirit was adopted by the European Parliament on September 19, 2019, regarding the importance of European remembrance for the future of Europe, which emphasizes the greatest responsibility for the start of World War II and the division of Europe between the USSR and Nazi Germany. The argument used was the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact, which divided Europe through a series of secret agreements, with Poland being first attacked by Hitler and then Stalin. It was noted that, after World War II, Europe reconciled, while the countries of Eastern and Central Europe were under Soviet occupation and communist dictatorship. According to this resolution, Stalinism and Communism are treated as synonyms and emphasized that, like Nazi regimes, they were responsible for murders, crimes, deportations, and concentration camps. Therefore, in many EU countries, the propagation of Nazi and Communist ideologies and their symbols is banned. The resolution calls for countries to condemn communist and Nazi regimes and ban any propaganda of Nazism and Stalinism in EU countries, including the removal of monuments, street names, and other symbols associated with this period. The document urges all EU countries to include this date in their school curricula to raise awareness about the history of totalitarian regimes among younger generations. This resolution discusses how EU and NATO integration not only brought the countries of Eastern and Central Europe back into the family of free democratic nations but also brought socio-economic development to these countries. It stresses the need to raise awareness of the crimes of communism and the need for European nations to confront extreme political ideologies like Nazism and Communism, their propaganda, regimes, and symbols. It was noted that the Russian people suffered the most under communist totalitarianism and that this country and its leaders should face their totalitarian past and stop celebrating and denying communist crimes. In the context of these documents, in many EU countries, communist symbols and those related to the former socialist countries have been banned as part of the decommunization process.
Countries that sought to join the EU mostly enacted laws condemning political persecution during the socialist era. These laws were adopted in line with resolutions and declarations by the European Parliament, which condemned all totalitarian regimes, interpreted as a condemnation of all regimes ruled by communist parties, regardless of their actual character and historical changes. Thus, Serbia adopted the Rehabilitation Law, which aligns with the country’s policy of joining the EU and distancing itself from its socialist past. In order for Serbia to join the EU, chapters are opened between Serbia and the EU during this process. Throughout this process, Serbia aligns its legal system with the norms prescribed by the EU.
Although trials in post-war Yugoslavia were conducted according to international law (not revolutionary law) for fascists, Nazis, and collaborators with the occupiers, and this was an international obligation of Yugoslavia as one of the founding members of the United Nations, the EU, like in other Eastern European countries, demanded their legal rehabilitation, arguing that Yugoslavia conducted trials based on ideological principles. Since the beginning of negotiations between the EU and Serbia, the European Parliament has passed resolutions every year reporting on the progress of negotiations between the two sides. Thus, in the EP resolutions from 2014 to 2016, the Serbian government was urged to fully implement the Rehabilitation Law without discrimination. The Rehabilitation Law was adopted in Serbia in 2006, with amendments made in 2011. Through the application of the Rehabilitation Law, over 3,000 people in Serbia were rehabilitated, mostly those convicted for the most serious war crimes during World War II.
It is impossible to separate these processes from the historical and political context in which they emerged. They arose as counter-revolutionary processes. The aforementioned resolutions manipulate historical facts, stripping them of context, and represent anti-communist propaganda. The historical fact is that the Soviet Union, led by communists, was the most responsible for the defeat of Nazism, that communists led the largest anti-fascist resistance in war-torn Yugoslavia, followed by the largest resistance in Greece, also led by communists, as well as in other countries, and that big capital, as mentioned earlier, gave Hitler his power. However, these resolutions clearly show a precise template by which former socialist countries in Eastern Europe were dismantled, referring to the propagandistic pamphlets of Karl Friedrikh, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Hannah Arendt, Raymond Aron, and Claude Lefort on totalitarianism. According to this pattern, these directives were carried out across Eastern Europe. Here, we see the logical contradiction of these resolutions, which claim to fight against monism but are themselves imposing a monistic way of thinking. These decisions promote an anti-communist narrative that dehumanizes communists, creating an anti-totalitarian discourse used to condemn everything related to communism, while, on the other hand, post-socialist societies tacitly rehabilitate anti-communist movements (regardless of their fascist and collaborationist character).
The normalization of Nazi collaborationists and Nazis in the public and political discourse in former socialist countries paralleled the fall of socialism and the implementation of neoliberalism. Many political emigrants, a large part of whom were on the side of the collaborationist forces or openly sided with the Nazis, returned to former socialist countries. Former dissidents, along with communist converts, overnight became heralds of democratic processes in these countries. The remains of former state enemies, Nazis, and their collaborators, were transferred from the countries where they had been buried to the countries of their origin, and funeral ceremonies were organized with full state (and church) honors.
Historical textbooks, literature, films, art, and all other social factors underwent a 180-degree change. Former collaborators and Nazis returned to the historical stage, having suddenly become national heroes and patriots, celebrated as individuals who sacrificed their lives in the fight against communist totalitarianism. Under the banner of the fight against communism, neo-fascist movements have once again raised their heads across Eastern Europe. Many of them have been normalized and rehabilitated.
What is universal about these movements, although each has its specificities in different countries, is that they express pronounced anti-communism, anti-Semitism, racism, and chauvinism, which is mostly directed at ethnic minorities in their countries, while in the former USSR and Poland, Russophobia is also expressed. Additionally, fascist and collaborationist organizations (and in some cases, paramilitary formations) have been politically normalized, even though many of these countries are in the European Union or on their way to it. In all these societies, it has become common to rename streets, schools, and other public institutions, while the demolition of some monuments and the construction of new ones is a reality that closely follows these phenomena. The most extreme example of the rehabilitation of Nazism is in Ukraine, where its indelible consequences can still be seen today.
The factual situation is that every law protects the legislator, and its essence is to defend the existing social order. Based on this, the legal system in a state represents the ideological framework of a society. Its role is to regulate the political and economic processes occurring within it. In this spirit, we can say that some judicial processes after World War II in Yugoslavia had an ideological and political character. The communist government wanted to condemn the previous system and those involved in war crimes, thereby legitimizing socialist construction and its economic and political system, and with it, the socialist concept of citizenship. However, they were no less political and ideological than today’s courts. Thus, every judicial process is ideological and political, and it cannot be value-neutral. The same is true for the rehabilitation of nationalist icons that are crucial for the nationalist narrative, which ran parallel to the neoliberal transition in Serbia. The dominant narrative, for ideological and political reasons, sought to sever ties with the “totalitarian past” and justify its role by delegitimizing socialism and the left as an alternative to the current political system.
The process of dealing with the former socialist regime is not an isolated case in Serbia. It is part of a broader political and ideological revenge that is being applied across Europe, especially in its eastern part. Nazi and socialist regimes are, to a large extent, legally equated. For this position, both a legal and a moral-political framework has been established. What was in the sphere of propaganda warfare in the West during the 20th century has, by the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century, found its legal framework in the East. Thus, any criticism of liberalism and the EU as an ideological concept can easily be characterized and categorized as totalitarianism. Anti-communist resolutions and declarations passed throughout the old continent have provided the necessary “conscience” for Europe. In line with such an ideological offensive, it was important to discredit the alternative to the existing neoliberal processes, which nationalists themselves used to rehabilitate their policies.
Although the European Union is formally based on the principles of anti-fascism, the fact remains that there is tolerance within it for numerous neo-fascist and collaborationist movements, with former socialist countries, now members or candidates for membership, leading the way. By disregarding critical historical analysis, a wide normalization and rehabilitation of individuals convicted for the worst war crimes took place across Eastern Europe. Overnight, the worst war criminals and their movements were declared fighters for democracy and human rights. They became victims overnight, and their crimes were relativized. Numerous resolutions passed by EU institutions and their implementation at the level of national judiciaries aimed to condemn “real socialism” as a totalitarian dictatorship and equate it with the other side of the totalitarian coin, German National-Socialism.
The Rehabilitation Law was adopted after Serbia began its policy of rapprochement and alignment of its legal framework with the EU. In this context, this phenomenon is not characteristic only for Serbia but occurs within the broader context of postsocialism, as part of a wider process of normalizing political forces in public discourse that were the losers of 1945 in Eastern Europe. Although the Rehabilitation Law in Serbia did not apply to individuals convicted for crimes committed during World War II, the vast majority of cases (and the most public outcry) related to that period. By adopting the Rehabilitation Law and its application, the Nuremberg Trials were effectively denied.
Legal rehabilitations within the new paradigm of ethnonational and neoliberal citizenship in Serbia aimed to legitimize the ruling ideological model and, in doing so, delegitimize the previous socialist system. In Serbia, legal rehabilitations were carried out within the framework of forming an ethnonational citizenship, which was incompatible with the paradigm of the anti-fascist movement with a supranational character, as was the case with the partisans. Therefore, the nationalist narrative, through the rehabilitation of individuals, movements, and symbols associated with it during World War II, resorted to inventing traditions about its victorious role and democracy, masking its crimes and collaboration. The Rehabilitation Law has an ideological and political character, and its application was politically motivated, with the aim of historical revenge.
Within the neoliberal offensive, whose narrative insisted on dismantling the totalitarian former socialist systems that existed in the East, the nationalist narrative began to exploit the void it created. In Serbia, the nationalist narrative seized this opportunity, presenting itself as an innocent victim of communist totalitarianism. The neoliberal concept of citizenship in Serbia was tolerant of the right-wing narrative, although in some respects, the ethnic concept of citizenship contradicts it. In the case of Serbia, it is useful insofar as it rehabilitates collaboration and condemns revolution, and thus any socialist alternative. Legal rehabilitations within the new paradigm of ethnonational and neoliberal citizenship in Serbia are based on strong anti-communism and historical revisionism, with a narrative focused on the present and future, rather than rectifying historical injustice.
10) Colonial Discourse and the Erasure of History
The colonial discourse that dominates in Serbia, a result of Western imperialism, is carried out through the control of two so called opposing narratives. On one side, there is the conservative-nationalist (or chauvinistic) discourse, and on the other, the liberal-civic (or auto-chauvinistic) discourse. The conservative-nationalist discourse often idealizes the past, presenting it as a golden age that was allegedly destroyed by the “evil communists.” According to this narrative, Serbs are depicted as naive and good, while other nations are said to have always acted against them. It is emphasized that Serbs wanted to build a state with their Slavic brothers but sacrificed their statehood by entering Yugoslavia. Unfortunately, for others in Yugoslavia, it was merely a stop on the way to gaining independence. Serbs are shown as innocent and loyal, while all others were evil and waited for their moment to stab Serbs in the back. Sometimes, it is claimed that Serbs missed their historical opportunities, which resulted in wars, sanctions, and bombings. Within this discourse, Albanians are often portrayed as an inferior, almost evolutionarily backward people, who “stole” Kosovo due to, according to this view, the naivety of the Serbs, the Yugoslav idea, and communist policies. To return Kosovo to Serbia, this discourse demands “liberation” from Yugoslav and communist illusions, because only then can Serbs achieve their national interests and restore their former greatness. Although criticism of the West is sometimes heard within this discourse, it is often stated that Serbia belongs to the European family of nations. It is emphasized that Serbia has historically defended Europe, and thus the Western world should side with the Serbs, not their “enemies.” A similar discourse exists in other former Yugoslav republics and among the Balkan peoples.
On an abstract level, the nationalist discourse opposes NATO and the EU, as they bombed us, and the EU recognized the independence of Kosovo. However, instead of criticizing NATO, which, according to this discourse, keeps the Balkans under occupation, the hatred is largely directed towards other nations, calling for revenge. For example, fans of Red Star, one of Serbia’s most famous sports clubs, forbid Croats, Bosniaks, and Albanians from playing, yet have no issues with athletes from NATO countries such as the USA, France, Germany, or others. When discussing the “return of Kosovo,” it is often implied that Albanians should be expelled, but there is never mention of expelling NATO forces or the US, who have military bases in the area.
This discourse thus contributes to legitimizing the NATO pact, as it is claimed that “peace buliding missions” in the Balkans are necessary to maintain peace. According to this logic, the withdrawal of NATO would allegedly cause “new bloodshed.”
The other discourse implemented in Serbia is liberal-civic. This discourse is often portrayed as the opposite of the nationalist one.
According to this line of thought, the guilt for war crimes lies predominantly with Greater Serbian nationalism, and the propaganda mantra about war criminals sentenced by the Hague Tribunal is constantly repeated, even though the tribunal was politically oriented. This discourse also focuses on the narrative of the so called Srebrenica genocide, which, although it is a terrible crime, represents a form of imperialist propaganda. This narrative insists on selective justice, accusing only the Serbian side while completely ignoring the role of Western imperialism and separatists, who were supported by the US, EU, and their allies. In this way, the responsibility of Western countries for the distraction of Yugoslavia is minimized, and the dominant colonial discourse is imposed as the only correct one.
Although this discourse is used to justify Western hegemony, in practice, it encourages the conservative-nationalist discourse by manipulating the emotions of the masses. Serbian victims are hardly ever mentioned, or they are spoken of very little, further fueling national divisions. This discourse is mainly spread through non-governmental organizations, media openly aligned with the West, and universities influenced by Western financial flows. In this way, youth who are anti-nationalist in sentiment are attracted and, through manipulation and brainwashing, become instruments in fueling hatred without even realizing it. Also, this discourse argues that idea of Yugoslavism was good, but unattainable in practice.
In essence, the “reconciliation” policy based on selective justice does not lead to true reconciliation but instead stirs new conflicts, because according to this narrative, the Serbian side is always guilty, which places a large part of the Serbian population into the conservative-nationalist discourse that uses the sentiment of injustice to argue that no one cares about Serbian victims. The goal of this discourse is not reconciliation but maintaining divisions to facilitate the control of territory, which NATO uses to manage the space of the former Yugoslavia and the entire Balkans.
These two discourses are nothing but two sides of the same coin, originating from the same source. These discourses feed off each other. Both discourses are transmitted through state ideological apparatuses and become subjects of daily conflict, not only in political discourse but also in many families whose members take different sides. Both discourses come to the same conclusion. Yugoslavia is impossible in the long run. However, historical practice has shown us that if there is no Yugoslavia, there is occupation, meanin there is no true sovereigntity. Through ideological manipulations carried out at all levels, the “divide and rule” policy becomes an integral part of the lives of ordinary people. Thanks to these manipulations, the system of Western imperialism remains dominant.
The way history is erased in Serbia is best illustrated by the fact that the “Eternal Flame” monument, erected in honor of all victims of the NATO aggre-ssion, was extinguished immediately after the counterrevolution. This monument was never even registered as a cultural monument, and the flame on it was never reignited. There are also other examples, such as the Hotel Jugoslavija and the General Staff building. These buildings were under state protection and represented symbols of socialist construction, but they were bombed during the NATO aggression. Hotel Jugoslavija lost its protection, the urban planning plan was changed, and a private investor close to the government was allowed to demolish the hotel and build new structures according to their own desires. As for the General Staff building, the government removed its special protection and allowed Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to transform the building into a luxury hotel, which is an insult to all citizens of Serbia. There were protests, including protests by architects, professors, and academics, but the government killed three birds with one stone—it erased the memory of socialist symbols, NATO bombings, and supported big capital.
11) Cooperation with NATO
The NATO alliance has had its office in the Serbian General Staff since 2014, located in a building that was bombed during the 1999 conflict. The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro signed an agreement in 2005 that allows NATO to move freely on Serbia’s roads, with NATO forces exempted from any responsibility. In 2006, Serbia joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace program, and in 2011, Serbia hosted a NATO summit. In 2013, a NATO Youth Summit was organized, aiming to raise awareness among young people about the importance of Serbia’s potential membership in the organization and warn about security risks if this does not happen.
A pivotal moment came in 2014, when the Serbian government signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with NATO in Washington. The agreement was ratified by the National Assembly in July 2015. In January 2015, the Serbian government signed the IPAP agreement, an operational document outlining a broad range of joint activities and further development of cooperation with NATO in nearly all areas. In September of the same year, an agreement with NATO on procurement and logistical support was signed, which was ratified in February 2016.
Between 2006 and 2018, 150 military exercises were conducted between Serbia and NATO, with the most recent being the “Platanski Vuk (Wolf)” exercise in June 2024 in southern Serbia. In July 2024, Serbia’s Foreign Minister Marko Đuri큓 represented Serbia at the NATO summit in Washington. He stated that Serbia wants to play a constructive role in regional and global issues despite its limited capacities. He also mentioned that a potential investment of $1.7 billion in Serbia’s solar energy sector could help diversify energy sources, as the country is currently too dependent on Russia in this field. Due to all these events, it is often said in Serbia that the country did not join NATO, but NATO has entered Serbia.
12) Constitution, Legal Legislation, and Harmonization of Laws with the EU
The entire legislation adopted after the counter-revolutionary processes in Serbia in 2000 was largely shaped under the influence of the EU. The installed authorities adhered almost exclusively to orders from Brussels, submitting reports on implemented measures to the European Commission at the end of each year. When you complete this process, that is, lose even the smallest form of sovereignty and thoroughly destroy your economy, you are ready to enter the EU. The European Union is essentially an imperialist creation that protects the interests of monopolies, and its legislation is designed to maintain and deepen economic disparities among its members. The essence of the EU lies in protecting private property and enabling the free flow of goods and services—which in practice is often neither free nor fair.
In 2005, the private sector in Serbia became dominant over the state sector. Under pressure from Western imperialists, Serbia adopted a new constitution in 2006, which completed the process of capitalist restoration. This constitution abolished the dominance of social property over the means of production, which had been guaranteed by the previous constitution, while simultaneously legalizing privatization and enabling the plundering of citizens. In line with EU models, the constitution guaranteed the inviolability of private property. Also, with this constitution, Kosovo and Metohija were granted a significantly weaker legal status, and the autonomous province of Vojvodina acquired a broader degree of autonomy, opening the possibility for further disintegration of the country and the creation of new satellite entities under the influence of imperialist powers.
Consequences of the Counter-Revolution in the Balkans and NATO Occupation
The Balkan Peninsula is today under military occupation by NATO. The only countries that are not members of the NATO alliance are Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina is under international protectorate, and around 1,100 NATO soldiers are stationed on its territory, with the possibility of increasing this number if necessary. Also, the southern Serbian province is under NATO occupation. In this sense, Serbia is practically the only country in the region that is militarily neutral and not a member of NATO, but is surrounded on all sides by NATO member countries.
The policy of Western imperialism toward the Balkans is part of NATO’s eastward expansion in relation to Russia, as well as the goal of controlling the Mediterranean and Western Asia (the Middle East). In this context, Western imperialism applies a “divide and rule” strategy. The concept of “Balkanization” was created for this policy, which refers to the creation of small, ethnically conflicted groups in a small space, whose mutual conflicts exhaust the region and prevent any lasting agreement.
It can be said that Serbia has made a full circle, returning to the positions it held in the 19th century. Just as Austria-Hungary considered Serbia its province, today the European Union does the same. However, just as Serbia had some form of independence at that time due to a struggle rooted in the people, it still has some form of independence today, despite the heavy control of Western imperialism, because it is not a member of the EU and NATO. Although sovereignty is limited, Serbia today has the highest degree of sovereignty in Europe, with broad support from the people who oppose membership in NATO and the EU.
Conclusion
This text addresses the idea that history does not follow a unilinear course and that there are no universal templates that can be applied from one place or historical moment to another. The practices and objective material needs of today’s society, as well as specific circumstances, differ from those in past periods. The dialectical method and materialist approach, as scientific worldviews, point precisely to this fact. Therefore, when analyzing certain phenomena, it is important to explain phenomena, describe it, and predict what can be expected in the future.
In this context, the text outlines the process of forming a strong communist movement in the former Yugoslavia, with an emphasis on the objective material circumstances that influenced it. It shows how, despite great ups and downs, this movement managed to rise from the ashes and, from a small group of revolutionaries, lead the largest anti-fascist uprising in occupied Europe. It also considers the successes and mistakes in the construction of socialism in Yugoslavia. It is important to note that the mistakes and criticisms were connected to the specific historical circumstances of that time and were related exclusively to Yugoslavia.
This essay also analyzes how counter-revolutionary forces in Yugoslavia eventually prevailed and what the consequences were. Progressive forces must openly discuss these issues to avoid repeating similar mistakes in the future. Moreover, the current defeat of socialism in Yugoslavia can serve as a lesson for contemporary socialist countries, which should learn from our mistakes, as it is often better to learn from others’ defeats than from one’s own.
The experience of Serbia and Yugoslavia shows that the chances for small countries are only possible when they are part of regional alliances based on the principles of solidarity and sovereignty. When these principles are abandoned, downfall follows, with consequences that are catastrophic for millions of people. Some mistakes must be acknowledged because, without them, there would have been no counter-revolution in Yugoslavia, Eastern Europe, or the Soviet Union. However, it is important to emphasize that socialism had a thousand flaws, but also a million virtues, while capitalism has a million flaws and no virtues. Despite the mistakes of Yugoslav socialism, it was the greatest civilizational leap in the history of our peoples.
Therefore, it is important to understand that, for the vast majority of people, even the worst socialism is better than the best capitalism. As long as inequalities exist—hungry and full, rich and poor, oppressed nations, the exploitation of man by man—the idea of social justice will not disappear. That is why the triumph of counter-revolution in Yugoslavia, Eastern Europe, and the USSR is the current state, but socialism will ultimately prevail. This will not happen due to the will of an individual or a group, but because it is a lawful stage in the development of human society, a human need, and the wheel of history cannot be stopped.
