SOCIAL AND POLITICAL NEOCONSERVATISM IN CROATIA

AIM, Zagreb, March 5, 1995 Nowadays, there is a curious combination of conservative trends and meanings in Croat society. All such ideas and political trends have the same denominator. Return to the old; an organic longing for tradition, its forms and customs; search for the "true new Croat" who will consume all conservative instructions with due subservience; extreme anti-liberalism; struggle against democracy, free market, freedoms of the individual, and autonomy of the society. Various views of the problem could be seen in the independent journals in the past few months; what are the essential properties of the "new Croat"? What is the modern Croat allowed to do, and what not? What duties must he carry out with piousness, and what ideas must he unfailingly avoid? What is IN and what is OUT in current Croat society? The political trend in Croatia which is gradually gaining ground is certainly not social justice and tolerance. As the rightist conservative hit, corporative parliament, universal xenophobia, organic community, "war solution" and antisemitism will be "worn" this spring.

Political conservative ideas are publicly supported by the official rightists (Hrvoje Cosic, don Anto Bakovic, Zeljko Olujic, Tomislav Sunic, Nedjeljko Kujundzic and Zvonko Lerotic) who believe that "a liberal system can hardly operate in Croatia, since it is just a liberal trend". Therefore, they propose "that the United Nations immediately make the current Charter of Human Rigyts null and void, because it is just rotten poetry which can achieve nothing". The New Rightists demand "absolute cancellation of democracy because it means nothing but mere entro-position of the society and surrendering to disorganization" (Nedjeljko Kujundzic). The desire to cancel constitutional liberalism is interpreted by many analysts of Croatian circumstances as a paranoid fear of economic liberalism and its consequences in the form of social revolts. Unable to make a distinction between the two liberal stances, due to fear of uncertain economic transition of Croat society, the New Rightists (and the rightists within the administration) propose destruction of the very political basis of the society, which simply cannot be tolerated by Western democracies. That is exactly the case with Croatia, and even more than that; it is the case of close cooperation of the authorities (i.e. their rightists who are by far more dangerous than the ordinary rightists) and the official rightists in ideological lobotomy of the Croat citizen. Once, Elias Canetti, a German author, said that "many bans exist only in order to support the power of those who can anticipate and forgive violation of these commandments". Is, therefore, a cruel joy of banning at work in Croatia, for the sake of also cruel joy of forgiving, or is a social combination of all kinds of bans present, aimed at preserving absolute power for as long as possible, and guarding itself in time against any kind of influence of civic liberal tendencies and attempts (an increase of the number of independent media, organizing public critical gatherings and debates, foundation of peace organizations etc).

In the specific political atmosphere, it is porbably the matter of the latter. Rapprochement of the leadership with political views of the Rightists should be observed in this context. After thay have completely abandoned their election national program (which they had won majority of the votes with, in the first place) which promised prosperity, independent Croatia, civic freedoms, fundamental division of power, limitation of the power of the government, and liberal parliamentary democracy - the Croatian Democratic Community (HDZ) simply has neither choice nor power, because the people are realizing that they are not free, that the state is disowned of its territories, that just a single party has remained in the parliament, that they have been robbed and poor, that the judiciary is dependent on the executive authorities, and that just a few party politicians have grabbed absolute power in decision-making. Intimate political flirting of the top of the administration with the ideas of the Rightists and their public production are a logical result of fear that the people could recognize deception and "fail them" at the next elections. The HDZ is doing everything to prevent that, and to call back "the spirits of the past" - in order to give the people something for entertainment.

In accordance with what has been said, the Draft Law on youth appeared in Croatia the month before last, which is motivated by explicit limitation of freedoms for young people below the age of 18. It cites that its task is "to protect children and youth of the danger which can jeopardize their corporal, spiritual, mental, moral and social development..." And also that "children are forbidden to attend public professional fights in the ring, that is boxing matches". Sexuality is also mentioned in the law, as the inevitable conservative paragraph: "Children and youth are forbidden to acquire, possess and apply objects which can endanger their respect of human dignity, for instance, adoration of war actions and activities, violence and stimulation of sexuality. Such objects may be letters, photographs, film, video and audio tapes, recordings and pinball machines". It is important to note as a humoristic trait of the Law on youth that it was inspired by the thesis of the Minister of education, Ms. Ljilja Vokic, of "men as daily beings".

As an instance of a split of public opinion, it should be emphasized that even the majority of the members of HDZ Youth were against it, and that even representatives of the radical rightist political orientation, Nedjeljko Kujundzic (New Croatian Rightists) and Ivan Gabelica (Croatian Pure Party of Right) protested against this form of repressive methods. Many explain this by the fact that they "aim high", at radical political changes, and are therefore not too enthusiastic about "minor social skirmishes".

A negative utopia is awaiting the Croat society, according to radical moves. What one could not have expected even from the former Communist system (especially in the last years of its existence) is being prepared now. State Crusaders primarily have in mind a radical penetration into the sphere of the family (which they refer to with such warmth, since it has always been the cradle of conservative ideas), in which the woman will exist solely as the machine for manufacturing new army recruits, in which men will live in order to be constantly "awake" at the rampart of homeland, and in which children will be brought up by the state so as to be able to lead them, when they grow up, to battle for sacred national objectives.

Semi-public discussions on numerous future laws which would tighten the circle around civic rights and freedoms have been initiated and become quite frequent lately, giving it all an allegedly democratic tone. Despite everything though, noone can say with certainty whether abortion will be abolished. Towards the end of February, about ten rightist conservative parties and associations signed a petition for the abolishment of an article from the 1974 Constitution which speaks in favour of the right of women to abortion. Noone knows whether catechism will become compulsory in schools, or whether it will be the matter of the Church and upbringing in the family. Noone knows whether the Law on the Youth will be adopted after all, as well as the Law on protection of the family and maternity which would enable a maximum of interference of the state in the life of the individual and reduce the right of the individual to protect his/her privacy to a minimum.

It is interesting that majority of Croatian media support the thesis that the increase of anti-liberal instances is just an attempt of a clumsy transmission of the ideological theoretical construction of the New Rightists to social reality and its attempt to "disturb the new (peace-making) strategy of the head of the state, Franjo Tudjman". The rest of the media say that the centre of rightist, and even fascist ideas is closer to the authorities. As the most important argument of the first thesis is the relentlessness of everyday life logic which prevails over the necessity to create "the politically proper Croat". Such logic demands, for instance, that preservatives be used as usual; that teenagers go out after 9 p.m.; that joints be smoked even more; that the number of abortions not decrease, but increase instead; and that sex before marriage, regretfully for the Church and the Conservatives be still fashionable.

Due to growing prospects of a "Croat-Serb political agreement" and relentless power of everyday life, "the former militant Croat nationalist is turning into a patriot, and Croat political righteness remains only on the margins of conservative and New-Rightists' ideas" (commenatry of the independnt political biweekly "Arkzin"). The entire social hysteria is blamed on just a few "bad guys" who have taken over political sins of the entire ideological construction of the Croat society. The thesis is so false, but it is so pleasant for the Croat ear that it is simply hard to resist it. The facts which are listed clearly conceal the essence of the problem. Open rightist ideas which are as a rule antisemitic and racist, repressive and intolerant, should not be the ones which propose and adopt laws or those which create the general social situation. It is also a fact that they perform a significant part of the manual propagandist foreplay for the ruling party, but just that and nothing more. They sincerely and openly express what the ruling party thinks, but does not dare publicly articulate it for this or that reason.

It has become clear a long time ago that Franjo Tudjman uses rightist forces and their ideas in propagating his political stances, and that fascist moves of certain nationalistic buffoons would have been silenced a long time ago have they not been stimulated by the state and had the state not been protecting them. That is why political anti-liberalism of the neo-rightists and other conservative hangers-on emerged solely from below the cloak of the state, while social conservatism is a logical product of the ruling party which wishes to make a reliable pattern for its long rule in this way.

ALEN ANIC