L-I: JUL

> Ah yes, the great legacy of the Serbian Socialist Party. This
Great
> Shining Revolutionary Beacon of the Working Class undertook capitalist
> counter-revolution. That is its sole "achievement". It privatised half the
> economy, scrapped workers' management, and undertook a systematic attack
on
> democratic rights won by the revolution, including banning abortion. Even
> "nationalised" industries in Serbia is a bit of a joke since Milosevic and
> ex-Titoist bureaucrats he demolished via bribery in fact profit and thieve
> from them. I would point out the fact it also funded reactionary and, for
> all intensive purposes, petty-bourgeois fascist militia that went on a
> rampage through Yugoslavia, but since the imperialists use that as a
pretext
> for their attacks I'll be accused of a running dog of imperialism...

If you mean the paramilitaries, I suggest you get real to the realities of
war. In every effect, the IRA is a "paramilitary". The State of Yugoslavia
is surrounded by hostile states that are all backed by the most vicious of
"fascists" and the NATO powers, particularly Germany and, of course the US.
If you want to only have "honorable" troops in such a position, you will
quickly be destroyed, no matter what class state you are running.

>
> These bureaucrats undertook capitalist counter-revolution as much as the
> other regimes in Eastern Europe, not least Russia. Milosevic is
historically
> for Serbia what Yeltsin was for Russia.

Utterly false. Given the tide of electoral "openings" in Europe, the
Yugoslav communists/socialists had a choice: They could go the way of
bourgeois "elections", or risk losing the popularity that the Yugo regime
had EARNED for the prior 40 years, through both economics and a very mild
state. Yugoslavia did not exist in a vacuum. I don't get something, why is
only Cuba allowed to make obviously neccessary concessions to capitalism in
time of crisis and isolation? Is it that fiery speech and the revolutionary
beard? Vietnam, Cuba and Yugoslavia, in similar circumstances but with very
different surroundings, neighbours and traditions have all adapted to the
"new world order" in different ways, none of them perfectly. In fact,
sacialistic Libya has undergone a similar transition, by allowing by far the
most private enterprise since 1969. I guess even Qaddaffi, someone with an
espoused hatred for athiestic communism has been "discouraged". It obviously
has nothing to do with bending to avoid a break.

Here's an idea for these cloud-land critics. Come up with a fucking program
that takes everything into account. You miss one little border marker with
Bulgaria, and you are dead. This is a new video-game, I call it "Cyber Yugo
Commie From Hell". Your mission: It is nineteen eighty-nine. You just saw
all the communist bloc countries either give up power, or get overthrown.
You have just been cut off from all Western trade. You are watching all
indicators fall, yet you have decided to try level one by: Re-nationalising
everything! Sorry, comrade, game over, comrade. Total privatisation and the
IMF runs your bank. No more Dinar, hello Mark! Well, forgive me, but I
subscribe to dialectical materialism. In reality, yes, much of the
Yugoslavian regime is corrupt. However, given the situation they have been
in, I cannot really see much other than what kind of piecemeal privatisation
they have selected they should have picked. I don't have a picture of
Milosevic on my wall, if that's what you want from me. However, I really
don't care about his family (except his wife), whether or not he beats his
dog, or if he prefers to ride in Limos when he rides back and forth to the
smoldering wreckage of what was his "mansion". I am concerned with how he
and his regime have dealt with a situation in Which they had a basically
socialist state to defend in a situation that became worse than pre-1917
practically overnight. If Yeltsin was like Milosevic, as you say, we would
be all better off and the West wouldn't give a shot about Milosevic yet.
They would still be focused on what would still be called the "hard-liners"
who were "stonewalling" in Moscow.

Counter-revolutionary sections of
> the Stalinist bureaucracy that decided their dachas and the finest 1985
> bottles of Ukrainian wine weren't enough...they wanted profit. So they
> abandoned their cynical allegiance to Marx, Engels and Lenin and their
hobby
> horse of "socialism" and became the nouveau riche bourgeoisie. Perhaps I
> should point out that the richest man in Serbia is the Minister of
> Privatisation... Maja, a Serbian activist I'm sure you all remember,
> described the regime she has the misfortune to live under as
> 'kleptocracy'....'government of thieves'.
>

Oh, Shit. Comrade, a couple of days ago off line we agreed how funny it
was that there are still Marxists who talk about big man theories of
history, like the one about the "great revisionist coup" in 56. Now, here
you are rolling out the same crap. *It just doesn't work that way*! There
are probably some time serving bureaucrats in Cuba (although if any country
could wipe em out...) who want to get rich and privatise, etc... there is a
reason why they don't and can't. It sure as hell isn't how rich Cuba is,
either. The state of Yugoslavia should not be judged against the ideal we
all cherish, of workers councils. These slogans are good as battle cries,
but absolutely useless as litmus tests. Judge Yugoslavia against, say,
Romania. Or any other state in East Europe. Just go with the basic
indicators. That'l tell the tale of the tape. If you still want to hate
Milosevic, that's your business, but I'll keep watching.

> There is also the mere fact that the Socialist Party is in coalition with
> fascists, the Serbian Radical Party led by Sesijl, Serbia's very own
> Monsieur Le Pen or Mr. Zhironivsky.

Again, If there had been no way to run an electoral system, the whole system
might have gone down the tubes. What you have is a parliamentary system.
What is amazing is how well they have been kept at bay.

I find it very hard to stomach yet
> symptomatic of the state of the left that any party that commits itself to
a
> political alliance with fascists should find itself being heralded by
> self-proclaimed Western leftists.

Again *only in current conditions!*. Wave a flag of Lenin and October at
them all you like, it won't make that possible in little Serbia/Montenegro.

It obviously has a bit of a thing with
> reactionaries because it had a slight romance with Vuk Draskovic, who
calls
> for the restoration of the monarchy and as far back as 1990 suggested
> expelling all Albanians from Kosovo.
>

It got him off the streets and left him totally discredited as an opporunist
and a traitor. Now he can't pay people to show up, and has successfully
fucked up the entire "democratic opposition". BTW, my prediction is as
follows: a few days ago, Yugoslavia was left off the list of "human rights
violators". When the CIA/money starts to actually have some success in
building a fifth column in Yugoslavia and the SPS decides it has had enough
of that shit and deals with it properly, then they get on the list.
Personally, I consider ii somewhat a badge of honour.

> I would also point out the fact the fascist component of the regime,
> represented by Sesijl's faction, succeeded in its stated aim of attempting
> the forced expulsion of all Kosovar Albanians from Yugoslav soil. Oh
sorry,
> Mac, I forgot you have a bit of a liking for the Jared School of
> Falsification which denies this ever happened, a man with (to be reserved)
a
> more than dubious link with reality, who I presume has a motto in Latin
that
> translates as: "If the fact or source don't exist, make it up!"

What is *your* evidence? Sheer repetition? I personally believe that shit
happens in War, and that paramilitaries are mainly responsible. A plan to
drive em all out? Maybe in certain areas, that might make military sense,
but just straight up racist purging does not. It wouldn't help matters for
FRY anyways.

>
> I don't understand why you have such a fetish for Milosevic. Surely if
that
> sort of filth turns you on, a similar (indeed counterpart) regime, like
that
> of Tudjman, would have more revolutionary appeal. There is the mere fact
him
> and his Croatian bureaucrat fellow travellers committed capitalist
> counter-revolution like Good Old Slobo, but Tudjman was a general under
Tito
> in the Revolution who actually engaged in armed combat with fascists and
> helped the victory of Titoism in Yugoslavia. His regime might be
reactionary
> to the core...but at least he has the history, whereas Milosevic has a
> less-than-dignified past that perhaps does not meet the heroism of Che
> Guevara - as a banker in Belgrade.
>
Umm... does "Fuck You" about cover it? Read alittle more, this is arrogant
BS.

> It is often said that one indicator of the progressive nature of a regime
> is its treatment of women...that can now be said about homosexuals.
> Milosevic's regime fails on both counts. Miserably.
>
Agreed. But no one is calling this a workers paradise, so keep your zeal to
a minimium. You're reminding me of the Spartacist League.

> Just because we support Yugoslavia militarily against imperialist
onslaught
> does not mean we start heralding its regime as the next best thing since
> sliced bread and Bolshevism. Though Mac's infatuation with his glorious
> Milosevic regime might have something to do with his also much-loved North
> Korean Workers' Party and its shows of solidarity with the SSP (I think
that
> state is a leading contestant for 'Most Miserable Corner Of The Earth'
award
> and probably comes closer than the USSR under Stalin for the most realised
> version of Orwell's '1984'). Like: "We welcome the Serbian Socialist
Party's
> great triumphs over the last ten years. Kim Il Jung, Socialist God of All
> The World Who Is Personally Leading North Korea's Great Triumphant March
To
> Communism, To Whom Life Owes Its Very Existence On The Earth, Whom Makes
The
> Sun Rise And Set And Makes The Birds Sing At First Light, Who Makes Crops
> Grow And Flourish And Iron Production Increase By 999999% This Year, said
> Milosevic was a great statesman...."

You have really left the planet Owen. I wish I had read all the way through
before I replied to this shiite. From now on, if I understand you right, I
should not post things from the DPRK or Tanjug or anything else, just from
bourgeois sources. Okay, they are so much more trustworthy. Look, the world
isn't a cut and dried as you want it. It really isn't so easy to figure out
anything about the DPRK. Yeah, they write weird stuff. But if they write
something that promises that "Imperialism will never take back the homeland"
when the US is running stories of "nuke building", etc... that just might
have a little value to you, might it not?

I've had it with this post, I'm cutting the rest. Comrade you should stop
being so indignant about all the people who mock you for being 15 when you
post your opinion in childishly arrogant fashion.

Good day to you, "Master Jones".

Macdonald