Dokumenti predstavljeni u ovom odeljku pružaju uvid u međunarodne dimenzije radničkog samoupravljanja u Jugoslaviji tokom Hladnog rata. Oni pokazuju da su i ideja i praksa samoupravljanja „putovale“ preko granica zemlje, ali i da je samoupravljanje služilo nizu jugoslovenskih diplomatskih i paradiplomatskih ciljeva, u nastojanju zemlje da pronađe nezavisan put između Istoka i Zapada u Hladnom ratu.
Samoupravljanje je decenijama privlačilo zaista globalnu pažnju. Jugoslavija je postala značajna referentna tačka za pokušaje reformi u sovjetskom bloku nakon smrti Josifa Staljina 1953. godine, što pokazuju dokumenti koji se odnose na mađarsku i poljsku krizu 1956. i Praško proleće u Čehoslovačkoj 1968. godine. Jugoslovenski samoupravni sistem takođe je služio kao alternativni model razvoja za zemlje globalnog Juga u eri dekolonizacije. To ilustruju materijali vezani za posetu Jugoslaviji prvog izabranog predsednika Alžira, Ahmeda Ben Bele, 1964. godine, nakon što je Alžir uveo samoupravljanje. Istovremeno, levica u Zapadnoj Evropi pokazivala je interesovanje za Jugoslaviju u okviru rasprava o tome kako ostvariti demokratiju u proizvodnji i oživeti „ekonomsko čudo“ nakon Drugog svetskog rata. Diskusija između Sika Mansholta, četvrtog predsednika Evropske komisije, i jugoslovenskog predsednika Josipa Broza Tita 1972. godine predstavlja odličan primer.
Međutim, jugoslovenski sistem samoupravljanja nije bio univerzalno prihvaćen i nailazio je na značajne kritike unutar međunarodnog radničkog pokreta. To potvrđuje interni bilten sa Drugog kongresa samoupravljača iz 1971. godine. Kritike su se kretale od optužbi za preteranu zavisnost sistema od tržišnih mehanizama do tvrdnji da je samoupravljanje samo maska koja sprečava stvarnu radničku vlast i demokratiju. Značajno je da su jugoslovenski zvaničnici bili svesni ovih kritika i nastojali da na njih odgovore.
Dokumenti predstavljeni ovde ukazuju na bogatstvo arhivskog materijala koji bi mogao dodatno da rasvetli ulogu zemlje u diskusijama i pokušajima razvoja „trećeg puta“ tokom Hladnog rata. Time što iznova ukazuje na složenu ulogu koju je Jugoslavija igrala u globalnom kontekstu rasprava o samoupravljanju, arhivska građa kontrira posttitoističkim odbacivanjima sistema kao puke neuspele prošlosti. Istovremeno, ona pobija i herojski narativ dominantan u eri titoizma. Arhivski materijali često otkrivaju ograničenja, protivrečnosti i kritike kojima je sistem bio izložen, kako na domaćem tako i na međunarodnom terenu. Samim tim, oni otvaraju prostor za odmereniju diskusiju o samoupravljanju, koja ide dalje od pojednostavljenih portreta jednog sistema – prikazujući samoupravljanje kao razvojnu društvenu pojavu, o kojoj još postoje sporovi, i koju su oblikovale ne samo domaće okolnosti već i međunarodne debate i pritisci.
The documents presented in this section offer insight into the international dimensions of Yugoslav workers’ self-management during the Cold War. They show that both the idea and practice of self-management travelled abroad, but also that self-management served Yugoslav diplomatic and para-diplomatic purposes in a variety of ways in the country’s attempt at navigating an independent path between East and West in the Cold War.
For decades, the allure of self-management was in fact truly global. Yugoslavia became a significant reference point for reform attempts in the Soviet bloc after Joseph Stalin’s death in 1953, as shown by documents pertaining to the Hungarian and Polish crises in 1956 and the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia in 1968. Yugoslavia’s self-management system also served as an alternative model of development for the Global South in the era of decolonisation. This is illustrated here by materials related to the visit to Yugoslavia by Ahmed Ben Bella, the first elected Algerian president, in 1964, on the back of Algeria’s adoption of self-management. Meanwhile, the Western European left showed interest in Yugoslavia as part of the debate about how to achieve industrial democracy and revive the continent’s post-war economic miracle. The discussion between Sicco Mansholt, the fourth president of the European Commission, and Yugoslav president Josip Broz Tito in 1972, is an excellent illustration.
The Yugoslav self-management system was not however universally admired, and there was significant criticism from other sections of the international labour movement, as evidenced by an internal bulletin produced for the Second Congress of Self-Managers in 1971. Criticism ranged from charges of the system’s over-reliance on market mechanisms to self-management being a mask to prevent real workers’ power and democracy. It is significant that Yugoslav officials were aware of these criticisms and sought to address them.
The documents showcased here suggest that there is a wealth of archival material that could be used to further unearth the part played by the country in discussions and attempts at developing a third way in the Cold War. By recovering the complexities of Yugoslavia’s global engagement in relation to self-management, these archives challenge the post-Titoist dismissal of the system as merely a failed relic. Yet they also defy the Titoist era’s heroic narrative as well. The archives often expose the limitations, contradictions and critiques to which the system was subjected, domestically and internationally. They thus open a space for more nuanced conversations that move beyond simplified portrayals, showing self-management as a contested and evolving phenomenon shaped not just by domestic but also by international debates and pressures.
Bonfiglioli, Chiara. “Women’s internationalism and Yugoslav-Indian connections: From the non-aligned movement to the UN decade for women.” Nationalities Papers 49, no. 3 (2021): 446–461.
Dimić, Ljubodrag D. „Pogled iz Beograda na Čehoslovačku 1968. godine.“ Tokovi istorije 3–4 (2005): 205–232.
Dimić Lompar, Natalija. “In Search of an Authentic Position: the First Phase of Political and Ideological Cooperation between Yugoslavia and the West European Left, 1948–1953.” Acta Histriae 27, no. 1 (2019): 55–74.
Filipovic, Luka. “Yugoslavia and Eurocommunist parties during the ‘Long Year’ of European democratic socialism (1974–1976).” Истраживања 35 (2024): 236–254.
Harisch, Immanuel R., and Goran Musić. “Workers’ Proto-Diplomacy: Early Contacts between Zambian and Yugoslav Trade Unions, 1959–1962.” International Review of Social History 69, no. 3 (December 2024): 411–38.
Rajak, Svetozar. “Nonalignment at the Crossroads: ‘Castro is a Brother, Nasser is a Teacher but Tito is an Example’.” The International History Review 45, no. 4 (2023): 661–680.
Spaskovska, Ljubica, and Anna Calori. “A nonaligned business world: The global socialist enterprise between self-management and transnational capitalism.” Nationalities Papers 49, no. 3 (2021): 413–427.
Swain, Geoffrey, and Nigel Swain. Eastern Europe since 1945. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2017.
Unkovski-Korica, Vladimir. “From the Cold War to the Kosovo War. The British Left and Yugoslavia.” Revue d’études comparatives Est-Ouest 1, no. 1 (2019): 115–145.
Zaccaria, Benedetto. “Learning from Yugoslavia? Western Europe and the myth of self-management (1968–1975).” Planning in Cold War Europe: competition, cooperation, circulations (1950s–1970s) (2018): 213–35.
Žorži, Frank (Frank Georgi), Samoupravljanje u izgradnji. Francuska levica i jugoslovenski „model“ (1948–1981). Akademska Knjiga, 2023.