Why Marxists from the Praxis circle called Tito a Stalinist. "Many Praxis philosophers actually respected Tito’s *independence from Moscow after 1948* , which broke with Stalin geopolitically. Yet they believed that *internally his leadership style remained partly Stalinist*." "When philosophers of the *Praxis School* called *Josip Broz Tito* a Stalinist , they were usually referring to *his style of political leadership* , not claiming that Yugoslavia was identical to the Soviet Union under *Joseph Stalin*." Here are the main reasons:
1. Personal concentration of power ---------------------------------- Tito held an extraordinary accumulation of roles: * head of state * leader of the *League of Communists of Yugoslavia* * commander of the army * dominant political authority for decades Praxis thinkers believed that this *personal dominance over the party and the state* resembled the leadership model developed under Stalin. Even if repression was milder, they argued that *one man standing above political institutions* contradicted socialist democracy. 2. Cult of personality ---------------------- Although smaller than Stalin’s, Tito did have a strong political cult: * his portrait everywhere * his birthday celebrated as *Day of Youth* * mass youth relays delivering the baton to him every year Praxis intellectuals saw this as *a classic Stalinist political culture* , where the leader becomes a symbolic father of the nation. 3. Suppression of criticism --------------------------- Tito’s government tolerated debate up to a point, but when criticism threatened the authority of the leadership, repression followed. Examples included: * persecution of political prisoners on *Goli Otok* after the *Tito–Stalin split* * removal of critical intellectuals and professors in the 1960s–70s * banning the journal *Praxis* in 1975 To Praxis thinkers this showed that *the party leadership under Tito still behaved in a Stalinist way toward dissent*. 4. Party above society ---------------------- Praxis philosophers believed socialism required *democratic self-activity of the working class* , something they derived from *Karl Marx* ’s humanist writings. In their view, Tito never allowed the *working class to politically challenge the party leadership*. The party still stood above society, and Tito stood above the party. That hierarchy reminded them of Stalinist political logic. Tito tolerated Praxis while it *helped Yugoslavia appear intellectually open* , but suppressed it once the leadership felt that *political stability and party authority might be undermined*. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#41000): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/41000 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/118178757/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. #4 Do not exceed five posts a day. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
