What was 'Tito's way', and how successful was it?

Résumé du document

Looking back at the time after the end of communism (Cuba and today's China being particular and Chavez not a communist), we basically find only three different ways of communism; the original one, the Lenino-Stalinism in the USSR, the latter one, China's Maoism, and finally the Yugoslavian one. In a sense, we could talk about Tito's third way as the only way communism worked. But what is probably meant by third way is the alternative between communism, offered by the USSR, and capitalism. Tito's way, Titoism, would be a mediator between those two. Titoism was first considered as being a very pejorative term, used by the soviets to describe Tito's way of ruling the country. But it now has a very particular meaning and has become a full theory.

Extraits

[...] And in order to give everybody the same access to decision making, the same principle was introduced into public services. In a way, we could see the Yugoslavian economy as a mixed planned socialist and market socialist economy. The socialist self management system reduces the state control of the economy. Managers were supervised by worker councils, which were made up of employees, with one vote each. But the Communist Party was extremely organised in most of the companies, so that most of the time (but not always), managers were appointed with the consent of the party The Soviet-Yugoslav split There are many reasons of the split. [...]

[...] The land was partially nationalised and redistributed, and also partially collectivised. Rather than being owned by the state, companies were socially owned and managed with worker's self managements. Unemployment was low, due to Yugoslavia's neutrality, companies exported in both the western and eastern market. In the 70s, the notion of associated labour was introduced. This means that the right to decision making and the share of profits in socially owned companies was based on the investment of labour. From this point, companies became 'organizations of associated labour'. [...]

[...] Moreover, Tito first resisted to fascism, then to Stalin. In a way he was a symbol. Conclusion In conclusion, we could summarize Tito's way with the word independence. He wasn't afraid to try new policies and to test new theory. His way was to keep a strong power with a strong leadership, but also to open the economy of his country to its population and to the world. Finally he embodied the third world countries. [...]

[...] - The withering away of the party. But one of the main aspects of Titoism is, without any doubt, the creation of the self management system which brought participation in companies. We will deal with this subject later. It is to be noted that the self management system could have brought democracy in Yugoslavia, if the states and the party withered away, which didn't happen. But there is a fundamental contradiction, noted by Milovan Djvlas as early as 1953. 'Any attempt to achieve genuine liberalization in a one-party dictatorship must release forces that, in the end, will conflict with the one-party system.' It reminds me the fall of the USSR Economy In 1948, before the split with the USSR, Yugoslavia's economic policies were similar to the soviet ones, based on five-year plans. [...]

[...] What was 'Tito's way', and how successful was it? What was 'Tito's way'? Third way Titoism Economy Soviet-Yugoslav split in 1948 Diplomacy/Non aligned Movement 1. Third Way Looking back in time after the end of communism (Cuba and today's China being particular and Chavez not a communist), we basically find only three different ways of communism; the original one, the lenino-stalinism in the USSR, the latter one, China's Maoism, and finally the Yugoslavian one. In a sense, we could talk about Tito's third way as the only way communism worked. [...]