COURAGE

connecting collections

The document is a comprehensive analysis drafted by the People's Youth of Croatia (PYC) which emphasises phenomena considered to be the result of Western culture’s influence on young people. All of the youth activities that the PYC deemed to have been created under the influence of the West were also considered oppositional because they were at odds with the prevailing ideology. The paper lists and analyses the flight of young people to the West as a result of idolatry of the West; dissatisfaction with the regime or economic problems (since legal migration was largely prohibited until the early 1960s); debates about freedom and free initiative that, to the extent they proceeded, especially in Zagreb, were not desirable because they surpassed of the accepted framework; coverage of events in the West by the youth press, especially movie columns (Vie Giovanilli, Horizon, The Revue, The Film Journal), which in the opinion of the PYC was too exaggerated and idealized the Western way of life versus that under socialism; the reading of works by authors who considered the notion of freedom (Camus, Sartre) at the philosophical level; the spread of comics as a typical form of creative expression by Western cultures; the "hip" behaviour of young people (Western clothing and hairstyles, establishing “gangs“), the obsession of the youth with the Wild West and similar phenomena.

This PYC document, along with the records of other so-called socio-political organizations, was until 1995 a part of the Archives of the Institute of History of the Croatian Workers' Movement/Institute of Contemporary History. In July of that year, the archives were handed over to the Croatian State Archives (CSA), where they are kept today.

The archives are regularly used by the researchers for scholarly publications, which was the case for this report as well.

The official accusatory act concerning the case of Gheorghe Zgherea (case No. 33/ 023262) was issued on 2 June 1953 by the senior investigator of the Inquiry Section of the Cahul District Directorate of Internal Affairs, Captain Vorobiev, and approved by the Head of the Directorate, Colonel Eliseev, the next day. This document summarised the main “anti-Soviet” activities undertaken by Zgherea, who was labelled an “active participant in the anti-Soviet illegal sect of Inochentists-Archangelists.” The defendant’s “anti-Soviet” activities purportedly began upon his entering the Inochentist community in December 1949 and acquired a systematic character after December 1950, when he became a preacher and “went underground” [pereshel na nelegal’noe polozhenie]. Zgherea was specifically accused of “roaming through the villages of Vulcănești, Strășeni, Kotovsk, and other districts of the Moldavian SSR” and engaging in “systematic anti-Soviet agitation” through “using the religious prejudices of the believers.” He attempted to persuade his peasant audience to “refrain from taking part in the social-political life of the country, to boycott the elections for the institutions of Soviet power, tried to convince the village youth not to join the Komsomol” and appealed to the members of the collective farm not to work in the kolkhoz [on Sundays and religious holidays]. Interestingly enough, the religious thrust of Zgherea’s message was minimised by the authorities. The main emphasis was on the disruptive social and political consequences of the defendant’s and his fellow preachers’ propaganda. Another serious count of indictment referred to Zgherea’s “co-option of new members into the sect,” as well as to his “taking active part in the illegal gatherings of the sect members,” where he presumably spread his anti-Soviet views among those present. The Soviet authorities were alarmed not only by the existence of these “anti-Soviet views” as such, but also by the parallel underground structure of the Inochentists, which represented a direct threat to the stability of the regime in rural areas, still under tenuous central control during the immediate post-war years. According to this document, Zgherea’s “guilt” was confirmed not only by the defendant’s own confession, but also by the witness accounts and testimonies. Apparently, Zgherea had no papers or personal belongings (aside from two photos found during his arrest), thus confirming his marginal and “underground” status. It should be emphasised that Zgherea’s case was only one of several trials against prominent members of the Inochentist community (some of them belonging to Zgherea’s immediate network) which took place in late 1952 and early 1953. Thus, the defendant was only one victim of the concerted campaign of the authorities against the Inochentists, aimed at destroying their clandestine structures throughout the MSSR. This probably explains the very harsh verdicts issued against Zgherea and his co-religionists. As in other similar cases, the accusatory act was later used as the basis for the official sentence in this case.

In 1953, Milovan Đilas, a high-ranking member of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia, published a series of articles on the need for democratization and liberalization of Yugoslav society, which led to his condemnation at Party forums and expulsion from the Party. Yugoslav communist leaders labelled all of those who supported similar ideas Djilasovci, i.e.,  Djilas supporters  (Radelić 2010, p. 56).

The Croatian State Security Service accorded considerable attention to such cases. In an extensive analysis conducted in February 1954, the Department in Zagreb provided an overview of responses to the Djilas case in public and cultural circles, especially among journalists, staff at the University of Zagreb, and groups which were already considered opposition to the communist regime (i.e., persons under surveillance due to the Cominform split, the clergy, members of former non-communist political parties). But, Naprijed's editorial board, led by Dušan Diminić, and many “of their supporters in other newspaper editorial boards (Vjesnik, Vjesnik u srijedu) were specifically singled out, as they had been “adopted anarchist and anti-Marxist positions even before Djilas and his articles, which just encouraged them to go in that directionˮ (HR-HDA-1561. SDS RSUP SRH, code 010.1/1-1). The Croatian State Security Service also described the influence of Djilas supporters, i.e., connections to certain “lobbiesˮ in other parts of Croatia, especially in Istria (Pula, Buzet, Poreč and Pazin). At that time, such “localismˮ was also a serious political label (Spehnjak and Cipek 2007, p. 272).

The document has 18 pages. It is available for research and copying.