The Postwar Period 241
two-party system. Later he softened these positions but the words had been
uttered. Kardelj was induced to believe (or to hope) that he would not repeat
them and decided not to mention them to Tito, although his duty called him
to do so.^453 On 24 December, reading Borba, he was alarmed to discover that
Djilas had remained deaf to his admonitions; in an article entitled “The
Answer,” Djilas informed readers that his ideas had been criticized and that,
therefore, he had to reply. He rejected the reproach that he was merely an
abstract philosopher and stressed that, on the contrary, he wanted to “abandon
the unreal world of the elected and predestined few, and immerse himself,
as much as possible, into the real world of simple working people.” He would
not defend himself from the suspicion that he was a heretic: his heresy was
“magnificent,” and every Communist should be honored to share it. For his
part, he was not ready to accept second-hand Stalinist dogmas as ultimate
truth. The way he was being criticized testified eloquently enough to the char-
acter of his adversaries, who were “without principles, Stalinist, bureaucratic,
pseudo-democratic.”^454
Meanwhile, Tito read his articles and realized that Djido, beyond his ver-
bosity and abstruse reasoning, “attacked the LCY... tried to liquidate it,
undermine the discipline.”^455 This judgment was known to many in his circle,
which is why, in the following days, Djilas discovered that a menacing void
was developing around him, although some comrades continued to encourage
him to go on with his writings. At the New Year’s party organized by the fed-
eral government, Vukmanović (Tempo) told him: “Djido, do not sprinkle ashes
on your head. I will stay with you till the end.”^456
The final two articles, which appeared in Borba on 1 and 4 January 1954,
were dedicated to the Marxist doctrine regarding the withering away of the
state, and also mentioned the withering away of the party. Djilas affirmed that
in the future neither the merits acquired during the liberation struggle nor
adherence to Communism would have any importance, but only what each
person would be able to create through his work. As such, he counseled the
LCY to get rid of all opportunists and careerists and rely instead on the ideal-
ists. “Today, the movement is feasible only in democratic and not revolutionary
forms, whereas it is possible to preserve the soul of the revolution only in real
freedom.... The Leninist form of party and State is obsolete.”^457
By the end of 1953, the impetuous Montenegrin understood that he was
unable to follow Tito anymore, although in the past he had maintained that
no force could separate them. He topped off his series of writings with an essay
published in the magazine he had recently founded, Nova Misao (New thought),
giving it a provocative title: “Anatomy of a Moral.” Although he was aware of
Tito’s anger and was invited to Brdo Castle to clarify the situation, he made clear