yugoslavias implosion

78
ChApter 1
[i.e., Bosnian Mulsims] cannot have one because one cannot have
new nations emerging in Europe at the end of the twentieth century;
the Macedonians cannot have one because they are Serbs.” 70
The debate brought to the surface the two sides’ fundamentally
different views about Yugoslavism. Ćosić contended that for Slovenes
“Yugoslavism is exclusively a political, that is, state category
devoid of integrative content and aspirations.” 71 Drago Jančar, president
of the Slovenian pen club, believed that the Slovenes were being
forced to accept “some kind of Yugoslav super-nation which is built
neither on Serbian mediaeval culture nor on Croat Renaissance nor
on Slovene Baroque and Protestantism, but which is no doubt built
on political power and resorts to simple solutions. It is the generals
that talk about it the most. Its only substance are the empty rituals
involving stadium spectacles and relay races, the prittle-prattle about
unity.” 72
After the talks, Ćosić and his group decided on another, ongoing
option that was soon to be launched in the Memorandum. At the
sanu meeting on 24 May 1984, Ćosić gave a hint of the institution’s
activities to come. “The body of knowledge that exists within the
Academy,” declared Ćosić, “should not remain confined to the professional
disciplines, but should be integrated into wisdom, general
experience, and a collective strategic vision.” 73
One of the first books to demonstrate in no uncertain terms that
the Yugoslav system was in crisis was by Jovan Mirić, a political scientist
from Zagreb. Writing critically about the 1974 Constitution,
Mirić suggested that the Federal Assembly should be recomposed to
operate at three levels, representing the working class, the citizens,
70 Ibid .
71 Dobrica Ćosić, Knjževne novine (Literary Magazine) 15 (November-December 1987)
72 Ibid .
73 Dobrica Ćosić in Godišnjak SANU,XCII (Almanac of the Serbian Academy
for Sciences and Arts) ( Beograd: SANU for 1984 and 1985)