CORPORATISM PACKED IN PLURALIST IDEOLOGY: The Case of Slovenia

IPSA RC Socio-Political Pluralism DRAFT Elites and Masses: Linkage or Disconnect During Periods of System Transformation CORPORATISM PACKED IN PLURALIST IDEOLOGY: The Case of Slovenia September 13 15, 2001 IGOR LUKŠIČ UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA Faculty of Social Sciences e-mail: igor.luksic@uni-lj.si 1

Pluralist ideology has publicly appeared as possible political concept in Slovenia since discussion after student movement and Czech spring in 1968. On that time the idea of pluralism of opinions and thoughts has emerged. This concept came also in some documents of Socialist Alliance of Working People, the mass organization which included almost all citizens. After that the constitution debate appeared and pluralism as a concept was died until Kardelj s work titled: The Directions of Development of the Political System of Socialist Selfmanagement in 1977. In seventies, the corporatist model was developed and introduced through the Constitution in Slovenia and in whole (SFR)Yugoslavia. In the beginning of 70 s pluralism was in crisis as hegemonic world concept and ideology and corporatism has become more powerful in form of neo- or liberal form. The Constitution from 1974 is perfect document of that time: political power in Yugoslawia was so strong that can introduce the idea in the realty while the other system after the 1974 crisis change the direction toward neoliberalism and pluralism which was on power to the mid 90 s. After World War II the idea of corporatism lived under the hegemony of the socialist ideology (Lukšič, 1992). The idea of the actual interest of real working people and not of their politicisation through the party was the base for the creating of a model of pluralism of selfmanagemental interests (Kardelj, 1977). That pluralism presupposed that parties would generate an unstable situation, national and religious conflicts which would lead to war. 1 In Kardelj s estimation, political parties, regardless of how democratic they may be, are unable to express the will of heterogeneous interests and therefore are also unable to express the will of real human beings which are the embodiment of a range of personal and social interests. Kardelj developed a system of self-management democracy that was distinct from the traditional party system. The fundamental goal of this system was the expression of the authentic interests of human beings in society. In sum, Kardelj opposed the politicization of man as an abstract individual or citizen needing only to decide among political parties and seek to influence them. Instead, he conceived of man as a social being connected to a complex network of interests. 1 All critics of self-management socialism in Yugoslavia have systematically forgotten that part of the Yugoslav story: the potential for civil war which emerged during WW II and on the same basis after 1990. Bosnia was and still is the reality of multi-party non-socialist Yugoslavia. But on other hand the solution in Bosnia today is not the reestablishing of socialist and non-party Yugoslavia. It has been shown (Lukšič, 1991) that consociative arrangements in socialist Yugoslavia were developed by the political elite strengthened stability and the democratization process in former Yugoslavia. 2

Kardelj proceeded from the central belief that a citizen is not abstract but concrete and therefore is imbued with his or her own specific interests. According to Kardelj, the pluralism of interests comes incomparably closer to describing the human being and thus comes incomparably closer to real democracy than any other form of party-based political pluralism. Instead of a party system a system of socio-political organizations was established with the League of Communists in the leading role. 2 The front organization, the Socialist Alliance, included all socio-political organizations, professional and interest organizations. The constitution of 1974 3 introduced self-managemental communities for all vital interests of society: education, culture, social care, medical care, forestry, farming, transport, sport, energy, retirement, child care. Each of them could participate in sessions of the parliament as a fourth chamber on matters within their competence. In this way all vital interests were organized and included in the political system. On the other hand, a delegate system was developed as a system of representation of actual, authentic interests of living and working people. For that reason assemblies were formed not on the basis of general elections, but on the basis of selfmanagement elections (Kardelj, 1977:109). In the republic parliament three chambers were established: the Socio-political chamber, composed of delegates from (commissars of) sociopolitical organizations, the Chamber of Communes, with representatives from all communes, and the Chamber of Associated Labor, with representatives of all branches of the economy and social services. Self-managemental agreements and social compacts between enterprises, organized working people and communities were supposed to replace the anarchy of market forces and state interventionism. The idea was to create a self-managing society which would absorb civil society and the state based on the perception of village community and common property (social ownership). Yugoslavia was in fact also a federation of communes. Communes were recognized as the basis of the state and they also delegated direct representatives to republic (Chamber of Communes) and federal (Federal Chamber) assemblies. In all those forms of political and social activities a participative culture of all working people should be developed. 2 The renaming of the KP to the LC (League of Communists) in 1952 had its roots in Marx s League of Communists, but on the other hand it was deeply rooted in anti-party orientation, especially of Slovenian political culture. Namely, Kardelj as the main ideologist of that and other reforms of Yugoslav politics was a Slovene. 3 It should be stressed that the constitution was prepared in the context of world discussion of neocorporatism and corporatism as a solution of convergence between socialism and capitalism. The Constitution of 1974 was the Yugoslav answer to the question of the time to establish a third way between (Soviet) socialism and capitalism, state regulation and market regulation of the society. 3

In the times of hegemony of socialism some political institutions were created on the basis of corporate culture: the public front, the anti-fascist front (all vital associations and organizations were included except the Church and other collaborators with fascists), the Chamber of Producers on the federal level (1953-1963), chambers of functional representation from the communal to the federal level (1963-1974) and in the institutions of integrated self-management (1974-1990 or 1992). Pluralist corporatism During the 80s pluralism has become the new hegemonic ideology in Slovenia. In that name parties have been established, but almost all of them had a corporate character. Parties were created not to fight for political power but to realize functional interest. On that basis some parties of retirees were established (Gray Panthers, Democratic Party of Retirees), two parties of tradesmen (Liberal party, Party of Tradesmen), a peasants party (today named the Peoples Party), a party of intellectuals and culture workers (Democratic Alliance), and parties of laborers (Labor Party, and two Social-Democratic parties). To realize the ideological aims of the Catholic and nationalist communities, a Christian Democratic and National Party were formed. Between ideology and realizing functional interests were the Greens, who in fact were split between ideologists and pragmatists in 1994. Only two parties were in fact political: the renamed sociopolitical organizations - the League of Communists as the United List of Social Democrats and the Socialist Youth organization as Liberal Democracy of Slovenia. 4 Pluralisation in its first step has shown a corporate character. And that was not surprise knowing some facts from Slovene (non)partyism. In Slovenia the parties came at the end of the 19 th century and at the end of 30s they grew watery. The parties had developed from a very rich proliferation of associations and journals and they returned to it. The second phase was very short - monopartyism, which formally ended with the renaming of the Party to the League in 1952. In that period political pluralism survived 4 Today almost all parties are acting more like political parties than in the first two years. 4

in the form of editors of some ideological reviews, 5 which in 1980s produced the source and core for establishing new political parties. The third phase began at the end of 1989 when alliances included in the Socialist Alliance renamed themselves as parties. The pure form of a party has never been generally accepted in Slovenia. Only in two very short periods were the parties in the center of public interests: at the beginning of the 20 th century (new state) and the beginning of the 90s (new state). Politics has always been something bad, far away and dirty for Slovenes. 6 Slovenes have been active in politics only when they were forced into it for reasons of existence (peasant rebellions, national liberation war, state building and partification). They have accepted rebellions of short periods, but not the long-term involvement in politics which parties have always been. On the other hand, parties were perceived as conflict-causing subjects within a small manipulative and corrupt elite which cared only for itself. This was a lesson from Slovene history in the first part of the 20th century. Party criticism and anti-party orientation was in the 20th century stronger then partyism. The Slovene nation put community, solidarity, profession and interest associations in first place because that was the only way to survive as peasants with their own language and one possible religion or way of thinking. Pluralisation in Slovenia has produced 131 parties (1992). But at the general elections in 1992 only 33 of them and on the elections in local communities in 1994 only 37 of them took part and only seven of them got some representatives or majors. The constitution of 1991 adopted in the era of party enthusiasm was not determined as a possible form of political organization. Parties were mentioned only two times - that policeman and professional soldiers may not be members of a political party and that members of the Constitutional Court may not be members of the party organs. On the contrary: a party has been implicitly recognized as a non-constitutional form. The Constitution (Article 82) prescribes that representatives shall represent all the people and they shall not submit to the undue influence from any source. 5 The Christian Socialists organised Revija in društvo 2000 ( Review and Society 2000), the National Democrats had the Nova revija (New Review), Jungian Marxists and Anarchists organised around Časopis za kritiko znanosti (Newspaper for the Critique of Science), new social movements and initiatives were organised by the weekly Mladina to mention only the most important groups in the 1980s. Nova revija was in fact a real party, which produced in 1990 the Minister for Foreign Affairs, President of the National Assembly, President of the Slovene National Congress, President of the Council of the State RTV, President of the Constitutional Court and three deputies. 6 For details see the very informative article by A. Bibič (1995), Politics - Still a Dirty Song. 5

On the other hand the constitution established a National Council, 7 The Council has very few competencies, but it stands as a symbol of distrust of political parties. 8 It provided the political system a de facto legitimacy in contrast to partyised liberal democracy which operates through general and equal elections. The Council represents a reference point for the corporatisation of interest organizations (Lukšič, 1994:207). The National Council is something special in the political systems of Western democracies. Being composed according to the principle of corporative representation, its only foreign counterparts were the former Irish senate and the former senate of the Free State of Bavaria. The National Council as a means of representing functional interests was first publicly introduced in the so-called "writers' constitution". The National Council is intended to reflect the structural composition of society. Various individual social constituents (such as trade unions, economic organizations, agricultural cooperatives, social and community associations) elect their own representatives to the body. Three principal factors influenced the insertion of the National Council in the political system of the Republic of Slovenia: a tradition of representing collective functional interests in Slovenia, a tradition of a three-chamber parliament in socialist Slovenia, and the desire to follow the model of the legislative system of the Free State of Bavaria. In Slovenia, the notion of a by-parliamentary state body representing functional interests merged, along with the political ideas of Catholic corporatism, at the beginning of the twentieth century and became especially pronounced in the nineteen-thirties. Post-war corporatism, however, was derived from a different set of conceptual sources from the state of councils and from socialism. The 1974 Slovenian Constitution introduced what was called the self-management state, which limited general representation in the socio-political chamber and consolidated functional 7 That Chamber in fact includes elements from the previous system that has been put in Chamber of Communes, Chamber of Associated Labour and some of the Self-Management Communities. 8 Therefore the necessity of the dialogue between politics and professions as a way of avoiding that "political (pseudo) elite, (which) will without support of the professions coquet more and more with the majority opinion of the voting body is very often stressed" (Keber,1992) 6

representation. The self-management system replaced former relations between the civil society and the state, causing both spheres to lose their identity and purpose, and came to reflect the corporate nature of socialism in Slovenia. Local interests were deputized in local community associations while social, economic and other functional interests were represented in the Chamber of Associated Labor. In addition, there were autonomous self-management interest communities which could be converted into a forth chamber of the parliament at times when issues specific to them were dealt with. In such a way, it was believed that the former parliamentary system covered all the vital interests in society. In independent Slovenia, when the three-chamber parliament set about designing a new political framework, the multiple chambers could not conceive of a unicameral parliament. They believed that the new parliamentary system should be at least bicameral in order to effectively represent local and functional interests. The drafters of the new Slovenian constitution explicitly referred to the legislature of the Free State of Bavaria which had sixty senators, elected through indirect elections of interest associations rather than through general elections. The National Council can initiate legislation. It has an advisory function and the ability to influence legislative process through its veto. It also has the authority to order parliamentary investigations. With these functions, the National Council plays an important supervisory role in the Slovenian political system and represents a counterbalance against and corrective to the party system as embodied in the National Assembly. The National Council formally consists of twenty-two representatives of local communities, four representatives of employers, four representatives of labor, two representatives from the field of agriculture and one representative from each of the following groups: craftsmen, free-lance professionals, health care professionals, research workers, culture and sports, universities and colleges, social security and the educational system. TABLE: FORMAL STRUCTURE OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL Representatives of employers 4 Representatives of employees 4 Representatives of farmers 2 7

Representative of craftsmen 1 Representatives of free-lance professionals 1 Representative of universities and colleges 1 Representative of educational system 1 Representative of research activities 1 Representative of social security 1 Representative of health care 1 Representative of culture and sports 1 Representatives of local interests 22 TOTAL 40 The existence of the National Council was fairly controversial and there were those who hoped it would not survive its first term. Yet the corporative tradition has always played an important role in the political life of Slovenia. With few exceptions, interest groups and professional associations enjoyed precedence over parties, the community enjoyed precedence over the market and authentic man enjoyed precedence over the notion of an abstract citizen. The National Council embodies this uniquely Slovenian interpretation of political life. The National Council, and its deputies made up of members of various associations, chambers and unions, represents the central tenet of political corporatism. In this sense, although the National Council has limited powers, it plays an important stabilizing role. Also in that direction is the law on public RTV. The RTV Council is composed of only 5 representatives of the National Assembly (parliament) and 17 interest organizations. Three of them are representatives of employees of RTV. The idea has been always the same: interest organizations as representatives of civil society are an adequate base for managing the public sphere and the parties are not. 9 9 I have argued elsewhere that political parties have been introduced and kept in the Slovene political system because the Slovene political elite knows that the hegemonial perception of democracy in the world is party democracy. 8

In the context of a corporate arrangement based on corporate political culture the possibility that interest associations may have received some matters of State competence in their hands should be stressed. 10 A substantial segment of these so-called interest groups has been acknowledged as vital and important to the state and has been elevated to a special status and institutionalized in the National Council. Following an almost identical process, many interest groups are also represented on the board of RTV, Slovenia's national broadcasting company. The specific interests of employers and employees are separately organized or institutionalized within a social partnership system. Only labor unions representatives are allowed to negotiate with employers and the state on behalf of employees. There are thirty-one such labor unions. There are four labor union umbrella organizations in Slovenia: the Association of Free Slovenian Labor Unions (ZSSS), Independence Confederation of Independent Slovenian Labor Unions (Neodvisnost KNSS), Confederation PERGAM and the Confederation of Independent Labor Unions '90. Table: Membership in Labor Union Organizations Year ZSSS Independence PERGAM Confederation KNSS 90 1992 435,716 162,000 18,392 41,557 1994 439,850 163,000 31,286 49,512 1997 435,816 169,000 87,627 40,000 These associated unions are large by Slovenian standards but, on the other hand, they are small by European standards and have an insufficient level of human resources to participate actively in a wider sphere. The eventual Europeanization of trade unions will mean that Slovenian labor unions will be slowly marginalized. This process could be mitigated by uniting on the national Slovenia had to reform its politics and polity into the form of partyism and liberal democracy, but both are a bit remote from its political culture. 10 That possibility is accomodated for in the Constitution, Article 145. According to that article, for example, two local radio stations have the competence to broadcast some shows for national minorities instead of public RTV by the law of public RTV, and the chambers have some state competences. 9

level. Of all the Slovenian labor associations, only ZSSS is a member of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC). In Slovenia there are three large associations of employers which are a constituent part of the social partnership system: the Chamber of Commerce, the Association of Employers and the Trade Chamber. The Slovenian Chamber of Commerce is a member of the European association of national chambers of commerce or Euro-chambers. In this supra-national organization, the Slovenian Chamber of Commerce enjoys as do all the Chambers of Commerce from countries with association agreements with the European Union - the special status of an associated member allowing almost fully authorized participation in all matters except those that are directly connected with relations among the European Union countries. The Association of Employers is currently in the procedure of entering the United Industry Confederation of Europe (UNICE). The European association only accepts national associations that are organized on volunteer basis. This and other criteria for membership are met by the Association of Employers of Slovenia. The Trade Chamber is a fully authorized member of the United European Association of Craft and Small and Mid-Size Enterprises (UEAPME). The Economic-Social Council, consisting of five government representatives, five representatives of trade unions and five representatives of employers, operates on the state level. The Council has regular meetings during which it defines its positions on policies related to social, economic, budget, labor force issues, etc. Its informal power in the political system has been growing since its establishment in 1994. Since 1995, its partners have every year or two drafted a social treaty which outlines the obligations of each relevant entity regarding economic, social and wage policies. Wages are determined according to a system of collective negotiations between the deputies of representative trade unions and employers. From the beginning of the 1990s the trade unions, the government and employers tried to find a solution for making a social pact. In those years, from 1994 to 2001 a great system of collective agreements has been built and a tripartite organ, the Economic Social Council, has been established as an organ for discussing social, labor and economic policies. In 1995 the first social pact was adopted, and after that for one or two years till now. In the emerging system of social partnership only state recognized trade unions and employers organizations can participate. 10

The huge chamber system was organized on the basis of compulsory membership. For some vital interests, chambers has to be create. Some of them already existed, like the Medical Chamber, Chamber of Lawyers, Chamber of Social Service, Chamber of agriculture and forestry, and the Chamber of Nurses, with some state competencies. The corporate political culture has been shown in its entirety in the transition period in which most key persons from socialist political life remained in the political elite. 11 Their political platform was the survival and development of Slovenia as a nation. Pluralist corporatism also means that no one pillar from the past, that is neither Catholic nor socialist, can have a dominant role. The both have to coexist on an equal basis. With independence of Slovenia the Catholic one was in a privileged position. All other large religions went out: Socialism (as laic one), Orthodoxy and Muslimism. In fact all those religions were recognized as national enemies which had gnawed like a cancer for fifty years through the national body. The Catholic church immediately sought to gain a position of moral, cultural and political hegemony in Slovenia. That brings us to the pillar structure of Slovene Society and politics. Idea of consociative democracy means government by elite cartel designed to turn a democracy with a fragmented political culture into stable democracy. (Lijphart, 1969:207) Fragmented political culture is heir mentioned as pillarised or segmented society in which segment are build along cleavages. In Slovenia the most important cleavage, as shown above, is confession. Central-periphery and class cleavages are almost overlapping with confession. After practicing minimal winning government (55% of votes) made by DEMOS, a group of catholic block parties Liberal Party, Socialdemocratic Party of Slovenia, Greens of Slovenia, Slovene Christdemocrats, Slovene Peoples Party and Slovene Democratic Union, from April 1990 to April 1992, a six month great coalition (80% of votes) with Liberal Democrats (reformed 11 Janez Drnovšek has been the President of the Presidency of SFR Yugoslavia and is now Prime Minister, Milan Kučan was the President of League of Communists, now President of Slovenia, Dagmar Šuster was President of the Economic Chamber of Yugoslavia and then President of the Economic Chamber of Slovenia (until June 1995), Jožef Školč was the President of the Socialist Youth Organization, than President of National Assembly and Minister of Culture, Ivan Kristan was a member of the Constitutional Court of Yugoslavia, than President of the National Council, Dušan Semolič was the secretary of the Socialist Alliance, now the President of the largest trade union Z 11

Socialist Youth with Drnovšek as former president of presidency of Yugoslavia), socialists (SPS), reformed communists (ULSD) from socialist block and Social democrats (SDPS), greens (GS) and democrats (SDU) from catholic block was established. After the election in December 1992 from 1993 to 1996 a new great coalition was made by LDP, United list of Social democrats and Christ democrats 12. Greens and democrats split into two parties, from which socialist part survived on political screen. The same was happened with nationalists. In 1994 greens, part of democrats and socialists entered in LDS. On the election for president Milan Kučan, former president of the League of Communists of Slovenia, was elected. Because of that pro- socialist results also SDP with 3% of votes was invited in the government to create some kind balance between two main camps. This first step of political socialization of political elites in a new pattern ended in two years when president of SDP was removed from the office as Minister of Defense. For building a new balance a model of social-partnership was established via Economic-social Council with representatives of government, Trade unions and employer s association. This short period was important for the reason that shown to partisans of both sides that also for the most distant parties as ULSD and SDP were and still are amicable agreement is at list for a short period possible. After the election in December 1996 no one of the blocks get majority. Members of parliament were divided on two equal parts 45:45, until one of them change over from catholic to socialist camp by the election of prime minister. But despite that fact establishment of the left government failed in the beginning of 1997. After that a new great coalition government was created from LDP and Peoples party with pensioners (DESUS) as a small party. Great coalition represents 63% of votes and 52 deputies out of 90. In that coalition two main blocks are represented through the biggest parties of each block and both of them are the most moderate in their block. Peoples Party s main electoral slogan was building bridges in Slovenian politics. On the election for the president of the republic the candidate of socialist block was elected again with 55% of votes in the first round. SSS, Jožica Puhar was Minister of Labour and she remained in that position until May 1994, to mention only the key politicians. 12

TABLE : Coalition Building in Slovenia 1990-2001 PERIOD CATHOLIC PILLAR SOCIALIST PILLAR 1990-1992 DEMOS (LP, SDPS, GS, SCD, SPP, SDU) ULSD, LDP, SPS 1992-93 SPP, SCD, LP SDPS SDU GS ULSD, SPS LDP, 1993-1997 SPP, SNP 1994), SCD SDPS (until LDP, ULSD DP, GS 1997-2000 (May) SCD, SDPS SPP LDS, DESUS ULSD, SNP 2000 (May) 2000 (Nov.) 2000 (Nov.) - N.Si, SDP SDP, SPP+SCD SPP+SCD, LPD, ULSD DESUS ULSD, LDS, SPS SYS, SNP 12 These three parties have 59 out of 90 seats in parliament, LDS 30, SCD 15, and ULSD 14. 13

TABLE: Election results of the various parties at National Assembly elections from 1990-2000 Party 1990 13 1992 1996 2000 % of seats % of seats % of seats % of seats (240) (90) (90) (90) LDS 14.5 39 23.4 22 27 25 36.3 34 SLS 12.6 32 8.6 19 19.3 19 - - SLS+SKD - - - - - - 9.5 9 SDS 7.1 17 3.3 4 16.1 16 15.8 14 SKD 13 23 14.5 15 9.6 10 - - New Slovenia - - - - - - 8.7 8 Christian People's Party ZLSD 17.3 36 13.5 14 9 9 12.1 11 DESUS - - - - 4.3 5 5.2 4 SNS - - 10.2 12 3.2 4 4.4 4 DS 9.5 30 5.1 6 - - - - LS 2.5 4 - - - - - - ZS 8.8 17 3.7 5 - - - - SSS 5.3 14 - - - - - - SMS - - - - - - 4.3 4 Independents 9,2 22 - - - - - - NATIONALITI 2,5 6 2,2 2 2,2 2 2,2 2 ES Other parties 9.4-17.9-11.5-3.7 - TOTAL 100% 240 100% 90 100% 90 100% 90 13 Elections in one of the three chambers of the Parliament were proportional The percentage shows the result for one chamber, and the number of seats is calculated for all three chambers. Every chamber had 80 members. 14

TABLE: Coalitions in the Republic of Slovenia from 1990 to 2001 Type of coalition Parties in coalition Prime Minister From-to One-block coalition SDS, DS, LS, SLS, ZS, SKD Lojze Peterle May 16, 1990-May 14, 1992 Grand coalition SDS, DS, ZS, LDS, ZLSD, SSS Janez Drnovšek May 14,1992- January 12, 1993 Grand coalition LDS, SKD, ZLSD, SDS Janez Drnovšek January 12, 1993- March 14,1994 Grand coalition LDS, SKD, ZLSD Janez Drnovšek* March 14, 1994- January 31, 1996 Grand coalition LDS, SKD Janez Drnovšek* January 31, 1996- February 27, 1997 Grand coalition LDS, SLS, DESUS Janez Drnovšek February 27, 1997- May 3, 2000 One-block coalition SDS, SLS+SKD ** Andrej Bajuk May 3, 2000- November 30, 2000 Grand coalition LDS, ZLSD, Janez Drnovšek November 30, 2000- SLS+SKD, DESUS * These coalitions emerged as the result of the replacement of one minister and the departure of SDS and ZLSD from the Government. ** This Government coalition had two additional members, one from DESUS and one from SNS. 15

References: Bibič, Adolf (1995): Politika - še vedno umazana pesem. (Politics - Still a Dirty Song) Teorija in praksa, no. 3-4. Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia, Uradni list RS, Ljubljana 1992. Eckstein, Harry (1966): Division and Cohesion in Democracy: A Study of Norway. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Fink-Hafner Danica (1996): Political Culture in a Context of Democratic Transition. Slovenia in Comparison with other Post-Socialist Countires. In: F. Plasser and A. Pribersky, Political Culture in East Central Europe. Avebury, Aldershod. Kardelj, Edvard (1977): Smeri razvoja političnega sistema socialističnega samoupravljanja. (Cources of Development in the Political System of Socialist Self-management) Komunist, Ljubljana. Lehmbruch, Gerhard (1967): Proporzedemokratie: Polityshes System und politisches Kultur in der Schweiz und Oesterreich, Mohr, Tuebingen. Lijphart, Arend (1968): Typologies of Democratic Systems. Comparative Political Studies, no.1. Lijphart, Arend (1975): The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands. University of Californica Presss, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London. Lorwin, Val R. (1971): Segmented Pluralism. Comparative Politics, vol. 3, No. 2. Lukšič, Igor (1991): Demokracija v pluralni družbi?. (Democracy in Plural Society?) Znanstveno in publicistično središče, Ljubljana. Lukšič, Igor (1994): Liberalizem vs. Korporativizem (Liberalism vs. Corporatism). ZPS, Ljubljana. Lukšič, Igor (1996): Political Culture in Slovenia. In: F. Plasser and A. Pribersky, Political Culture in East Central Europe. Avebury, Aldershod. Lukšič, Igor (2001): The political System of the Republic of Slovenia. A Primer. ZPS, Ljubljana. Powell, G.B. jr. (1970): Social Fragmentation and Political Hostility. An Austran Case Study. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Rizman, Rudi (1998): Radikalna desnica na Slovenskem. (Radical Right in Slovenia) Teorija in praksa, vol.35, no.2. 16

Zver, Milan (1992): "Korporativizem v slovenski politični misli v 20. in 30. letih" (Corporatism in Slovene Political Thought in Twenties and in Thirties), Časopis za kritiko znanosti, no. 148-149, Ljubljana. Žižek, Slavoj (1987): Jezik, Ideologija, Slovenci. (Language, Idelogy, Slovenes) Delavska enotnost, Ljubljana. pp. 9-60 and Revija 2000, Ljubljana 1989, no. 41-42. 17