Lives Journal 4

Rajko Shushtarshich

 

OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SYSTEM –

INDEPENDENT SRP

 

It sowed a lot but reaped a little, almost nothing,

certainly nothing that the government system may want.

 

However owing to the SRP we have accomplished:

our independence –  freedom of thought and word.

 

 

The 20th anniversary of the Review SRP (the »SRP« in Slovenian means a reaping-hook, sickle) will occur at the end of 2012 and by then it will be evident whether it achieves its objectives and implements its programme. For a review a period of 19 or 20 years is a rather long period, especially if it adheres to the values of Liberty (freedom), Verity (truth), and Spirit (courage); since its foundation the review has been repeatedly suppressed by political systems. The SRP headquarters compiled accurate records of these events and made them public by issuing the appropriate documents.1 We wrote many words to defend or preserve our independence, and to enable freedom of thought and expression of thoughts by an individual who would not kowtow to a political system. In 2003 we met formal legal conditions for independence, when the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia rejected the SRP; additionally, after six years, the political system upheld this decision by the final judgement issued by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia as of 10 September 2009. (The e-book »Branded Creativeness«2 describes this procedure in detail.) Our real independence was laid down on the day of our establishment. In 19993 it was defined in more details. Today I just want to compare the current situation with those written findings.

Let us first look at this issue from an other point of view. For a few years the Review SRP was the recipient of subsidies granted by the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Slovenia (although only a symbolic amount, or, more precisely, disgraceful low). The political system wanted in any manner to facilitate the review’s entrance into the market of goods and services. However, from the very beginning the real aim was to get rid of the annoying review as quietly as possible. We, as the editorial board of the SRP, were extremely suspicious subjects that required keeping an eye on; we were treated as some non-domesticated or unsociable individuals, nearly a terrorist mob (that was the hint they made in the Notice of Decision and the Decision itself, both dated on the same day that is exactly on the seventh anniversary of the event happened on 11 September 2002; and these documents were drafted by whoever by the Senior Inspector for moral standards – Adviser of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia).4

Our opinion of course is just the opposite: It is the political system which is questionable: its lack of spiritual sensitivity for humanity, systematic reduction of individuals’ roles in society and the introduction of the completely unfounded hierarchy of parvenus in each system.

Therefore, we will be closest to the truth if we say that our independence was not gained by fighting or abrogated (as it never was owned by anyone but by us) and that the SRP established itself on its own. The political-system’s scientists of roles in the society will of course state that there are no independent reviews and the Review SRP must be dependent on somebody; e.g., on me (as a responsible editor). However, I would not be able to issue the review without my co-workers, the authors of articles and the current editorial board. So we depend each on other. Such a review may be drafted only by the spontaneous co-operation of individuals.

Maybe some day, some other individuals in some other political system will be most interested to learn about the abovementioned recorded events that are witness to the possibility to survive as an independence review in the post-totalitarian system (and some post-other system). As far as I see, our value orientation framework printed at the end of each number of the review withstood the test. There will never be a lack of themes for such a review whose guidance is courageously searching for the truth about the role of the individual within the system. There are also a vast number of themes about hidden, effaced and ideologically distorted facts from our history which will not be worked out so soon, as the political system pulls out all the stops to erase inappropriate facts from our Recollections of the Historical Events as well as the facts which may be the witnesses of our Recollections of the Historical Events (these two groups of facts were included in the two important columns of the review and present important factor for our relationship with the political system. The third column, Individual Development, is characterised by a variety of themes that are described in distinctive ways, and therefore one may need more patience to understand its message. In this column we, as authors of articles, offer the most disparate views: From the articles about particular facts that are characteristic for the political system (sometimes described in ironic narrative expression) to those with the ideas close to utopian. Here and there the questions addressed to a powerful administration had to be asked, although, owing to our poor cooperation, we did not expect any answers. We also asked ourselves about different issues, as there are always more questions than answers; the latter are especially hard to get. We praise and celebrate very little; the caretakers of cultural development within the Ministry of Culture (Minikult) would be mostly pleased with praise; however such cooperation could not be established even if we wanted it. Namely, it is impossible to expect that such a review, written by freethinking individuals, may get a certain common programme within the policy of bringing opinions into line or nourishing a single-minded nation; it is even impossible to expect clearly defined aims, especially those which are applicable for the current situation. If we tried to do so, we would probably quickly fall into the waters of the political system and its ideology.

However, the SRP itself has clearly expressed objectives. Irrespective of the originality of each among co-workers (writers) and their articles, our basic endeavour was equal:

We were looking for the shades of soul and sparks of mind. Why should we reject such efforts? How many data from the articles written in our own way were communicated to readers/record keepers will be noticed by them in a few years; we have to wait at least till an alteration of the political system takes place. Making analysis earlier will entrap us into the foggy discussions of the political-system’s scientists of roles in the society.

 

 

________­­___

That is how I understand independent SRP, us and our basic relationship with the political system: Me, as individual – Rajko SHushtarshich. Each individual sees it differently – in a unique way! (Author’s notice)

 

In Ljubljana, 10 July 2011

 

 

________

1 Dokumenti urednishtva v Revijah SRP (od leta 1993)

2 Zhigosana ustvarjalnost [Elektronski vir]; Rajko Shushtarshich, Franci Zagorichnik, Matjazh Hanzhek

- Ljubljana : Revija SRP , 2003-2009

3 Values of a Social Stratification Matjazh Hanzhek, Rajko Shushtarshich; Uvod ali predgovor - Ljubljana, 1999

4 Document 1: Notice of Decision ; Document 3: Decision of the Senior Inspector ; Question is: Why do you talk to us in that tone?

 

 

 

PREAMBLE3

(from year 1999)

 

This preamble is not necessary,

But just in case …,

As I know that most readers firstly ask themselves:

 

»What is this?«

and

»Who stands behind this?«

or

»What do they want again?«

And so on

And similar.

 

Still, I will try to explain you, although most of you

do not believe merely words anymore, as too many insincere

words have been told so far.

 

No, no

this is not the programme of a political party,

nor its way to collect votes;

We are not led by some secret lodge,

nor by some mighty institutions,

nor by spiritual leaders,

nor by agitators;

We are not propagators,

 

nor we are guided by a civil society – as its representatives have already been

deployed among authority bodies, and it is no surprise

as today in our country almost everybody who thinks highly of him-/herself, tries to find out:

How to reach a post within the state authority, how to lend it and then recall it,

without obligation to pay a price of his/her links – liabilities;

some of them try to find out: how to transfer the ownership rights as soon as possible,

without asking themselves, how could the poor and impoverished possibly survive,

as they come in a pair – enrichment is accompanied with impoverishment – one cannot exist with another;

And finally there are those trying to find out: how to spend as much as possible,

and show to the rest of the citizens Who is Who.

 

Neither does political system,

neither does religion,

neither does science and

neither does culture

agree with our objectives,

although we should be a part of the latter it rejects us and at the same time rejects itself.

»What if you allure us into some new movement?« – you may ask.

Unfortunately no, we don’t, but maybe sometimes.

We would not refuse it, if such a movement would occur spontaneously and would not be animated by the abovementioned groups.

Is such movement

possible?

 

Maybe sometimes.

 

»What about values you are selling?« – you may ask.

Do we send only commodity?

 

No!

The values are not for sale!

Nobody can sell values;

nor sell, nor force on you,

nor take from you if you have at least a hunch that you posses them,

unless you want to sell them.

So goes it!

Quite so!

 

 

Rajko Shushtarshich

Ljubljana, February 1999

 

 

 

 

Translated from Slovenian by Tajana Ida Feher 

 

 

 

Slovenian (gajica)

Slovenian (bohorichica)