CIA and the Non-communist Left (NCL)

[PTK]

And CCF is the CIA's funded program that created the New Left. The Frankfurt School also received some funds from CIA due to its anti-ML stance it posited.

The CCF did not create the New Left. You yourself have provided a quote that indicates that the CCF did not create the New Left. You are rather confused.

 

[Pickman's model]

The CCF did not create the New Left. You yourself have provided a quote that indicates that the CCF did not create the New Left. You are rather confused.

For rather read very

 

[Yugoslav]

The CCF did not create the New Left. You yourself have provided a quote that indicates that the CCF did not create the New Left. You are rather confused.

It did. It just thought the New Left was "separate" from their interest when in fact, the New Left turned out to be ironically what the CCF actually wanted.

 

[Yugoslav]

The very good Who Paid the Piper? covers what Yugoslav is waffling on about.

Interestingly it brings up that Milovan Đilas also received some funds from the CIA. Wouldn't be surprised given his overtly liberal status that got him excluded from Yugoslavia for daring to propose a prototype of Perestroika and Glasnost that was certainly not needed in the 1950s as Yugoslavia had to be focused on industrializing its republics at the time. Later in a 1987 interview, Đilas outright said that communism does not work as a result of him completely abandoning socialism. Đilas, despite being Montenegrin, also rejected the existence of Montenegrin cultural identity (especially after he left the party).

 

[PTK]

It did. It just thought the New Left was "separate" from their interest when in fact, the New Left turned out to be ironically what the CCF actually wanted.

The Congress for Cultural Freedom created a movement it described as "Stalinist"? Why would it want to create a Stalinist organisation?

 

[seventh bullet]

Interestingly it brings up that Milovan Đilas also received some funds from the CIA. Wouldn't be surprised given his overtly liberal status that got him excluded from Yugoslavia for daring to propose a prototype of Perestroika and Glasnost that was certainly not needed in the 1950s as Yugoslavia had to be focused on industrializing its republics at the time. Later in a 1987 interview, Đilas outright said that communism does not work as a result of him completely abandoning socialism. Đilas, despite being Montenegrin, also rejected the existence of Montenegrin cultural identity (especially after he left the party).

Leaving aside the particularities of Yugoslav socialism as Marxist-Leninists understood it, and its uneasy relationship with the USSR, dissident is such a classist term of distinction. Ordinary people rejected the imposition of authoritarian state rule but weren't lauded for it. They didn't write books but in their silence and invisibility still ended up in a burial pit or prison camp for their efforts. Dilas wasn't the only person, party intellectual or otherwise, to become utterly disillusioned by Stalinism.

 

[Pickman's model]

Interestingly it brings up that Milovan Đilas also received some funds from the CIA. Wouldn't be surprised given his overtly liberal status that got him excluded from Yugoslavia for daring to propose a prototype of Perestroika and Glasnost that was certainly not needed in the 1950s as Yugoslavia had to be focused on industrializing its republics at the time. Later in a 1987 interview, Đilas outright said that communism does not work as a result of him completely abandoning socialism. Đilas, despite being Montenegrin, also rejected the existence of Montenegrin cultural identity (especially after he left the party).

What party are you a member of?

 

[Yugoslav]

Leaving aside the particularities of Yugoslav socialism as Marxist-Leninists understood it, and its uneasy relationship with the USSR, dissident is such a classist term of distinction. Ordinary people rejected the imposition of authoritarian state rule but weren't lauded for it. They didn't write books but in their silence and invisibility still ended up in a burial pit or prison camp for their efforts. Dilas wasn't the only person, party intellectual or otherwise, to become utterly disillusioned by Stalinism.

Well he was an anti-Stalinist but he was way too much liberal.

 

[InArduisFouette]

What party are you a member of?

wait a few moments , i sure the answer will change depending on his latest views on the purity of thought of various groups ...

 

[tim]

wait a few momwntsd , i sure the answer will change depending on his latest views on the purity of thought of various groups ...

Don't mock those who afflict us.

 

[Yugoslav]

What party are you a member of?

If hypothetical, I'd be a SKJ hardliner

 

[Pickman's model]

If hypothetical, I'd be a SKJ hardliner

No, which party are you a member of

 

[PTK]

Don't mock those who afflict us.

Good one!

 

[PTK]

Following the example of the Vanguard of the thread, let me not answer the question by stating that I would be a member of Bogdanov's tendency in the Bolsheviks, I would be a member of the Chartists, I would be a Leveller, I would have followed Spartacus.

 

[Yugoslav]

No, which party are you a member of

Realistically, I'm currently an independent. In my country there is no official party that adheres to Titoism. Communism is tolerated per law but no communist party supports Tito in my country.

 

[krtek a houby]

Realistically, I'm currently an independent. In my country there is no official party that adheres to Titoism. Communism is tolerated per law but no communist party supports Tito in my country.

You live in the US, though

 

[Pickman's model]

Realistically, I'm currently an independent. In my country there is no official party that adheres to Titoism. Communism is tolerated per law but no communist party supports Tito in my country.

So please could you tell me how you apply democratic centralism in your politics

 

[A380]

No, which party are you a member of

 

[Yugoslav]

You live in the US, though

Haha.

 

[Yugoslav]

So please could you tell me how you apply democratic centralism in your politics

Given the current condition of the "democracy", democratic centralism would be applied as a necessity for a socialist/communist party in Bosnia. Fellow workers will be able to run for positions within the party, however provided that they are able to understand the conditions here in Bosnia and are able to have a valid narrative that matches an orthodox Titoist approach. Members are expect to uphold the program of "Preustroj" (restructuring) which aims to abolish the Dayton agreement that breaks and complicates the administrative system into having each canton within the federation or each entity uphold their own worldview of history and class struggle fuelled by chauvinism and separatism.

There are still schools which are segregated in Bosnia based on ethnicity and the view of national history aligned not with the general historic perspective but a perspective enforced from the separatist political agenda. Democratic centralism would aim to preserve the ethnic and cultural importance (in a hypothetical reunited Yugoslavia, there will be four republics, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, and Montenegro, with the central seat being Sarajevo). Sarajevo represents this multicultural city and should have been the seat of such beforehand during Tito for it would have provided a stronger democratic centralism and stronger socialism in Yugoslavia since there would be no furthered separatist, chauvinist agenda that threatened to corrupt the very party vanguard of Yugoslavia. It would not have diverted it into "revisionism".

During the period of Tito, Muslims had access to their Islamic education provided by the madrassah in Sarajevo which remained open. Mosques were demolished yes, but a plentiful of mosques were built in Bosnia during the period of Tito. The main issue was the inability to recognize the Bosnian identity, mostly attributed to a deadlock created by Serbian elite that denied the progress be achieved earlier before the 1970s.

 

[Pickman's model]

Given the current condition of the "democracy", democratic centralism would be applied as a necessity for a socialist/communist party in Bosnia. Fellow workers will be able to run for positions within the party, however provided that they are able to understand the conditions here in Bosnia and are able to have a valid narrative that matches an orthodox Titoist approach. Members are expect to uphold the program of "Preustroj" (restructuring) which aims to abolish the Dayton agreement that breaks and complicates the administrative system into having each canton within the federation or each entity uphold their own worldview of history and class struggle fuelled by chauvinism and separatism.

There are still schools which are segregated in Bosnia based on ethnicity and the view of national history aligned not with the general historic perspective but a perspective enforced from the separatist political agenda. Democratic centralism would aim to preserve the ethnic and cultural importance (in a hypothetical reunited Yugoslavia, there will be four republics, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, and Montenegro, with the central seat being Sarajevo). Sarajevo represents this multicultural city and should have been the seat of such beforehand during Tito for it would have provided a stronger democratic centralism and stronger socialism in Yugoslavia since there would be no furthered separatist, chauvinist agenda that threatened to corrupt the very party vanguard of Yugoslavia. It would not have diverted it into "revisionism".

During the period of Tito, Muslims had access to their Islamic education provided by the madrassah in Sarajevo which remained open. Mosques were demolished yes, but a plentiful of mosques were built in Bosnia during the period of Tito. The main issue was the inability to recognize the Bosnian identity, mostly attributed to a deadlock created by Serbian elite that denied the progress be achieved earlier before the 1970s.

and how do you currently apply democratic centralism in your politics?

 

[Yugoslav]

and how do you currently apply democratic centralism in your politics?

I did give you a hint into how would I apply such. The "Preustroj" program or "preustrujavanje" (restructuring) would be the transition of a corrupt, inefficient, decentralized, feudalized and Balkanized Bosnia, supervised by the West into a developed, centralized state whose regions have no ethnic division at all.

As to how would I apply it currently, it would require a revolutionary effort to do so, an effort of a revolution conducted by Yugoslav masses of Bosnians, Croatians, and Serbians. Though the process of such will face difficulty due to the worldviews of ethnic groups as well as ethnic segregation and opposition to communism not just from right-wing separatist ideologues but also the imperialist opposition by the US and Russia. Probably risk of a NATO-backed counterrevolution due to presence of NATO and its conductment of IFOR and SFOR programs from 1995 to 2004, and the current "EUFOR" program. To cancel the EUFOR is risky due to recent Western incursion into Bosnia such as the 2024 accession talk into the EU.

Keep in mind that the "SAA" agreement, signed in 2008, along with IA (Interim Agreement which entered force that same year) brought an end to domestic production of cars in Bosnia as TAS went bankrupt.

 

[PTK]

Given the current condition of the "democracy", democratic centralism would be applied as a necessity for a socialist/communist party in Bosnia. Fellow workers will be able to run for positions within the party, however provided that they are able to understand the conditions here in Bosnia and are able to have a valid narrative that matches an orthodox Titoist approach. Members are expect to uphold the program of "Preustroj" (restructuring) which aims to abolish the Dayton agreement that breaks and complicates the administrative system into having each canton within the federation or each entity uphold their own worldview of history and class struggle fuelled by chauvinism and separatism.

There are still schools which are segregated in Bosnia based on ethnicity and the view of national history aligned not with the general historic perspective but a perspective enforced from the separatist political agenda. Democratic centralism would aim to preserve the ethnic and cultural importance (in a hypothetical reunited Yugoslavia, there will be four republics, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, and Montenegro, with the central seat being Sarajevo). Sarajevo represents this multicultural city and should have been the seat of such beforehand during Tito for it would have provided a stronger democratic centralism and stronger socialism in Yugoslavia since there would be no furthered separatist, chauvinist agenda that threatened to corrupt the very party vanguard of Yugoslavia. It would not have diverted it into "revisionism".

During the period of Tito, Muslims had access to their Islamic education provided by the madrassah in Sarajevo which remained open. Mosques were demolished yes, but a plentiful of mosques were built in Bosnia during the period of Tito. The main issue was the inability to recognize the Bosnian identity, mostly attributed to a deadlock created by Serbian elite that denied the progress be achieved earlier before the 1970s.

You have demonstrated in your reply that you do not know the meaning of the term "democratic centralism" as used by Lenin. Lenin's concept of democratic centralism applies to a party, not to the organisation of a state.

 

[chilango]

Are there any "Titoist" parties in existence anywhere?

 

[Pickman's model]

I did give you a hint into how would I apply such. The "Preustroj" program or "preustrujavanje" (restructuring) would be the transition of a corrupt, inefficient, decentralized, feudalized and Balkanized Bosnia, supervised by the West into a developed, centralized state whose regions have no ethnic division at all.

As to how would I apply it currently, it would require a revolutionary effort to do so, an effort of a revolution conducted by Yugoslav masses of Bosnians, Croatians, and Serbians. Though the process of such will face difficulty due to the worldviews of ethnic groups as well as ethnic segregation and opposition to communism not just from right-wing separatist ideologues but also the imperialist opposition by the US and Russia. Probably risk of a NATO-backed counterrevolution due to presence of NATO and its conductment of IFOR and SFOR programs from 1995 to 2004, and the current "EUFOR" program. To cancel the EUFOR is risky due to recent Western incursion into Bosnia such as the 2024 accession talk into the EU.

Keep in mind that the "SAA" agreement, signed in 2008, along with IA (Interim Agreement which entered force that same year) brought an end to domestic production of cars in Bosnia as TAS went bankrupt.

It wouldn't take a revolutionary effort but I'm wondering how someone not in a party applies it

 

[Yugoslav]

It wouldn't take a revolutionary effort but I'm wondering how someone not in a party applies it

Oh but it would. You think Bosnia has free will under EUFOR mandate?

 

[Yugoslav]

Are there any "Titoist" parties in existence anywhere?

Sadly not. Most communist parties in ex-YU are either plain reactionary such as NKPJ in Serbia or are plain liberal such as SRP in Croatia

 

[Pickman's model]

Oh but it would. You think Bosnia has free will under EUFOR mandate?

Reckon it'd take a revolutionary effort for you to understand dc

 

[PTK]

and how do you currently apply democratic centralism in your politics?

That reminds me of a story that I am sure is true.

The Workers Socialist League, a Trotskyist group in Britain, recruited a couple of Turkish people and established a sympathising group in Turkey. There were about four members, three of whom were on the central committee.