The Presidential Years 301
price regulation connected to increased productivity, giving fresh impetus to
the economy.^190
Kardelj versus Ranković: Succession FightAt the beginning of February 1961, there was a plenum featuring a lively dis-
cussion about the future development of the nation. The conservatives protested
about the “vulgar economic logic” of the advocates of reform, mostly attacking
Kardelj as a supporter of capitalist tendencies. He replied at the Second Ple-
num of the Socialist Alliance of Working People, affirming that the free market
in Yugoslavia was not akin to the capitalist market, which was anarchic, with-
out a plan. “Our market is affected by the plan,” he noted, “and, in a certain
sense, does not only complete it, but becomes its instrument.”^191 To control
some “excesses” in the setting of prices, salaries, and places of work, Kardelj
announced administrative measures, thus showing his belief that policies should
maintain control over the economy. His ideas prevailed. In an interview pub-
lished in Komunist on 2 February 1961, one of his collaborators, Avdo Humo,
president of the Committee for Social Planning, described the Yugoslav system
in this way: in the Soviet bloc, the state is owner of the means of production,
which signifies that the workers are its employees; in the capitalist system,
private individuals are entrepreneurs and there workers depend on them; only
in Yugoslavia are the working people also the entrepreneurs, which means that
the dependent relationship is abolished. The basis of this new system is self-
management, which functions thanks to workers and their councils. Until the
advent of communism, where every individual has everything needed at his or
her disposal, it was necessary to respect the Marxist principle as formulated by
Stalin and Trotsky: “To each according to his contribution.”^192
Over the course of two successive sessions, the Federal Assembly adopted
thirty-two laws regarding economic reform, which were ratified by the Execu-
tive Committee on 23 February 1961. These changes were accepted favorably
in Slovenia, and partially in Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, where
the economy was healthy. However, the representatives of the underdeveloped
areas in Macedonia and Montenegro did not hide their skepticism.^193 They
were right, because in the following months it became obvious that the difficul-
ties were greater than expected and it would not be possible to eliminate the
disparity in prices between different republics nor avoid inflation. Not to men-
tion the fact that economic anarchy appeared due to the passive resistance of
workers and of the state and party apparatus in those environments where the
reform was not welcomed. Some factories used the occasion to raise wages,
especially for managers, thus worsening social relations from within. This was
further exacerbated because many factories, especially in Bosnia-Herzegovina,