Search results

Autor propituje ulogu ideologije, mita i klase u razumijevanju kompleksnih procesa savremene političke subjektivizacije u BiH. Polazeći od revolucionarnog konteksta s početka devedesetih godina dvadesetog stoljeća koji razumijeva kao paralelni proces nacionalne i kapitalističke reaproprijacije, autor na pitanje pod kojim uslovima, diskurzivnim i institucionalnim, određene etničke razlike postaju politički relevantnima, postaju izvorom političke moći i mobilizacije, razvija odgovor u vidu antireprezentacionalističke hipoteze po kojoj su to s jedne strane diskurzivni i institucionalni uslovi "nacionalne države" shvaćene kao države homogenog etnonacionalnog domaćina i zanemarive etnonacionalne manjine, a s druge strane njima komplementarni diskurzivni i institucionalni uslovi kapitalističkog poretka iz kojega se nacionalni poredak historijski izdiže, a koji podrazumijeva klasnu strukturiranost. Subjekt proizvodnje nacionalno-kapitalističkog poretka je vladajuća klasa, u slučaju BiH klasa etnopolitičkih poduzetnika koja je u posjedu sredstava za proizvodnju društvenog života uopće: i materijalnog i onog simboličkog.

Autor propituje ulogu ideologije, mita i klase u razumijevanju kompleksnih procesa savremene političke subjektivizacije u BiH. Polazeći od revolucionarnog konteksta s početka devedesetih godina dvadesetog stoljeća koji razumijeva kao paralelni proces nacionalne i kapitalističke reaproprijacije, autor na pitanje pod kojim uslovima, diskurzivnim i institucionalnim, određene etničke razlike postaju politički relevantnima, postaju izvorom političke moći i mobilizacije, razvija odgovor u vidu antireprezentacionalističke hipoteze po kojoj su to s jedne strane diskurzivni i institucionalni uslovi "nacionalne države" shvaćene kao države homogenog etnonacionalnog domaćina i zanemarive etnonacionalne manjine, a s druge strane njima komplementarni diskurzivni i institucionalni uslovi kapitalističkog poretka iz kojega se nacionalni poredak historijski izdiže, a koji podrazumijeva klasnu strukturiranost. Subjekt proizvodnje nacionalno-kapitalističkog poretka je vladajuća klasa, u slučaju BiH klasa etnopolitičkih poduzetnika koja je u posjedu sredstava za proizvodnju društvenog života uopće: i materijalnog i onog simboličkog. ; Author investigates the role of ideology, myth and class in understanding the complex contemporary processes of political subjectivization in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Starting from the revolutionary context from the beginning of the 1990s, which the author understands as a parallel process of national and capitalist re-appropriation, the author poses the question: which are the conditions, discursive and institutional, for specific ethnic differences to become politically relevant, to become the source of political power and mobilization. The answer is explored on the basis of the anti-representationalist hypothesis according to which, on the one hand, these are the discursive and institutional conditions of "nation-state" understood as a state of homogenous ethnonational host and negligible ethnonational minority, and, on the other hand, the discursive and institutional conditions of capitalist order from which nationalist order is historically developed presupposing its class structure. The subject of the production of national-capitalist order is the ruling class; in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the class of ethnopolitical entrepreneurs which is in possession of the means of production of social life in general: both in the material and in the symbolical sense.

The purpose of this text is to explore the possibilities of civic resistance and struggle in the context of ethnonational, deeply divided societies such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the light of its June 2013 'jmbg' (citizen's identity number) and 'February 2014' protests. The 2013 and 2014 protests occurred not only in Sarajevo, but also elsewhere in the country, and, to some extent, crossed the entity and its ethnic boundaries. If viewed in the context of regional uprisings from Maribor (Slovenia) via Athens to Taksim (Turkey), the Bosnian sequence of protests shared with them some common ground, or a similar cause – that is, the protests were against social injustice and the system that produces laws and political structures that maintain their hegemonic privileges and hierarchy. The analysis of protests in Bosnia provided in this text will also offer insights into some alternatives in articulating the new democratic counter-power that go beyond ethnonationalistic confines.

The aim of this text is twofold. First, I intend to examine the importance of fear for the creation of ethnonationalist political entities in ex-Yugoslavia, especially in the areas where ethnic borders failed to coincide with political borders, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina after the 1989 Revolution. The region had entered into "a state of suspense and fear, dissolution of the sober little uniformities" (Brinton 1965: 173) and into a series of "aggressions and civil wars (total war) as the most extreme forms of the uncompleted ethnonational revolutions" (Sekulić 2006: 35). This is the first phase of the galvanization of fear, namely, the phase of revolutionary terror, referring to a series of small dictatorships of ethnonationalist extremists "embodied in governmental forms as rough-and-ready centralization" (Brinton 1965: 171). These extremists relied on the illegal use of force, ethnic cleansing and genocide. The second phase of the galvanization of fear excluded armed revolutionary violence due to the intervention of the international community, but implied various mechanisms of ruling ethnonationalist elites in preserving the necessary level of fear in politics for the same purpose of achieving the still unrealized goals of "the territorial-nationalist revolution."1 My focus in the second part of the text will be how fear is structurally produced and politically organized in an ethnopolitical society such as Bosnia and Herzegovina through democratic institutions, for example political elections, for the purpose of achieving the basic political end – the creation of a (ethno)national state.

The implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement, and especially the Dayton Constitution has become a vehicle for constitutional protection of collectivist ethnopolitical practice of discriminatory subordination of citizens on basis of their ethnic «kinship» or their religious affiliation. Therefore, it is important to explore possibilities of re-focusing the attention from a collective-rights-oriented to an individual-rights-oriented political arrangement as possible mode for accommodation of ethnic differences in Bosnia. Furthermore, I intend to claim that every attempt to institutionalize ethnic differences in the political arena generates an untenable crisis with the prospects of possible war.