Initiation and initiative : an exploration of the life and ideas of Dimitrije Mitrinović

THE SENATE INITIATIVE 147

such a vision and ideal, Mitrinovic maintained, it would be possible, through sincerely and fully embracing the point of view of all sides, to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement on the most beneficial way conflicts over how different functions might be performed should be resolved. In addition senators would be able to reveal to others the major contradictions (such as the private ownership of the means of production) which were the root cause of so many conflicts, conflicts which were in fact merely symptoms of the disease in the body of the organic social order.

All this sounds extremely far-fetched, and it is certainly hard to portray without using words for which it is difficult to imagine any corresponding practice. It is hard to imagine how Senate would function in anything other than a utopia, some yet-to-be-achieved ideal social state. It seems utter naive idealism to suggest that it might be possible to permeate social life at all levels with senators who, by their imaginative wisdom rather than by force or propaganda, would be able to facilitate the emergence of a synthesis from the thesis and antithesis contained in disputes and conflicts—by conveying to others their particular all-embracing vision of the ways in which all things and beings are functionally related to each other and have their purpose in the ultimate scheme of things.

Yet Mitrinovi¢ was not a simple and naive idealist. His management of the coup at Leamington revealed his grasp of ‘real-politik, whilst people who knew him have borne witness that he saw the difficulties of creating the Social State, the organic social order, far more fully and vividly than they themselves. That is why it is important to recall the various far-reaching changes in the structures of society that Mitrinovi¢ advocated at the same time as he was developing his ideas on the role of senate and Third Force. Personal change and institutional change were co-equals in his scheme of change—both were necessary to the creation of the new order, neither were sufficient on their own. Once the major contradictions or dysfunctional diseases in the body of society had been transcended, when people no longer had to fear material want, economic exploitation or political oppression, when they could exert control over their own lives through the devolved system of decision making in the various spheres of life—within such a framework the exercise of the senate function as the integrating presence starts to appear somewhat less fanciful.

But, of course, in the 1930s, as now, these transformations in the social order were not on the immediately foreseeable agenda of change. This did not and does not mean, however, that one should not work for such changes and prepare for them. From Mitrinovié’s perspective, however pessimistic a conclusion one might arrive at after a cold intellectual analysis of the