Milovan Djilas Nova Klasa.pdf [updated] Jun 2026

The New Class: A Critique of Communist Elites In his seminal work, "The New Class", Milovan Djilas, a Yugoslavian communist leader turned dissident, critiques the rise of a new elite class within communist societies. Published in 1957, the book offers a scathing analysis of the bureaucratic and corrupt nature of communist regimes, which Djilas argues deviated from the original ideals of socialism. The Betrayal of Socialist Ideals Djilas contends that the communist revolution, which aimed to eliminate social inequality and create a classless society, ultimately led to the emergence of a new ruling class. This new class, comprising high-ranking party officials, government bureaucrats, and managers of state-owned enterprises, exploited their positions to accumulate power, wealth, and privileges. Characteristics of the New Class According to Djilas, the new class is characterized by:

Bureaucratic control : The new class exercises control over the means of production, distribution, and consumption, often using this power to maintain their own privileges. Privileges and corruption : Members of the new class enjoy exclusive access to luxury goods, services, and other benefits, which they justify as necessary for their "revolutionary" work. Manipulation of ideology : The new class uses ideology to legitimize their rule and suppress dissent, often distorting the original ideals of socialism to serve their own interests.

Consequences of the New Class Djilas argues that the rise of the new class has led to:

Degeneration of communist ideals : The new class has corrupted the original ideals of socialism, turning them into a tool for maintaining their own power and privilege. Stagnation and inefficiency : The bureaucratic and corrupt nature of the new class has led to economic stagnation, as resources are misallocated and innovation is stifled. Alienation and disillusionment : The new class has created widespread disillusionment among the population, as people become aware of the gap between the ideals of socialism and the reality of the new class's privileges. Milovan Djilas Nova Klasa.pdf

Legacy of "The New Class" Djilas' work has had a lasting impact on the critique of communist systems and the study of elites in socialist societies. His analysis remains relevant today, as many countries continue to grapple with issues of corruption, inequality, and the concentration of power. The book "The New Class" serves as a warning about the dangers of unchecked power and the corruption of ideals, highlighting the need for transparency, accountability, and genuine democratic participation in any society. Would you like to discuss any specific aspects of "The New Class" or its relevance to contemporary issues?

Milovan Djilas's The New Class argues that Communist revolutions create a distinct ruling elite of party bureaucrats who exploit nationalized property for personal gain. The work outlines how this "new class" enforces ideological conformity to maintain a monopoly on power, transforming revolutionary ideals into bureaucratic tyranny. For an academic overview of these arguments, visit Academia.edu . The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System

Title: The Heretic’s Blueprint: Bureaucratic Collectivism and the Pathology of Power in Milovan Djilas’s The New Class Author: [Your Name/Academic Institution] Course: Political Theory / Comparative Communism Date: October 26, 2023 Abstract: Milovan Djilas’s The New Class (1957) remains one of the most powerful insider critiques of communist systems ever written. Drawing on his experience as a senior Yugoslav partisan and Vice President under Tito, Djilas argued that the Soviet-styled revolution did not abolish class exploitation but rather replaced it with a new, more durable form: rule by the party bureaucracy. This paper argues that Djilas’s thesis—that political privilege, not economic ownership, defines the new ruling class—provides a robust framework for understanding the stagnation and eventual collapse of Eastern European regimes. The analysis proceeds in four parts: the theoretical break from Marxism, the mechanism of class formation, the sociopsychological profile of the bureaucrat, and the lasting relevance of Djilas’s model to contemporary managerial capitalism. 1. Introduction: The Apostate’s Question In 1954, Milovan Djilas was a revolutionary hero. By 1957, he was a dissident imprisoned for publishing The New Class . His central question was deceptively simple: If the communist revolution abolished private property, why did it not abolish inequality? His answer was radical: the revolution had produced a new exploiting class—the party bureaucracy. Unlike Marx’s bourgeoisie, this class did not own the means of production outright; instead, it controlled them through political monopoly. Djilas thereby transformed the critique of communism from an economic one (failure of planning) to a political one (emergence of a new oligarchy). 2. Deconstructing Orthodoxy: The Dialectics of Betrayal Djilas begins by accepting the Marxist premise that history is a series of class struggles. However, he decisively breaks from Lenin and Stalin by arguing that a party-led revolution cannot abolish class per se . “The idea of a classless society,” writes Djilas (1957, p. 37), “has proved to be an illusion. The communists have not succeeded in creating a society without classes, but only in creating a new class of bureaucratic exploiters.” This is a profound revision. Orthodox Marxism held that class disappears when private ownership of productive forces is abolished. Djilas counters that ownership is less important than control . The state, under communism, becomes the sole proprietor. Those who administer the state—the party officials, directors, secret police, and military commanders—thus wield ownership power collectively. Hence, “the new class appropriates the national income not through direct ownership but through the monopoly of administration” (Djilas, 1957, p. 45). 3. The Anatomy of the New Class Djilas identifies four mechanisms through which this class perpetuates itself: The New Class: A Critique of Communist Elites

Political Monopoly: The Communist Party is not a political party in the democratic sense; it is a filter that selects and excludes. Entry into the Nomenklatura (the list of key positions) is the only path to privilege. Material Privilege: While formal salaries may be modest, members of the new class receive villas, cars, hunting grounds, special stores (e.g., Beriozkas in the USSR), and educational advantages for their children. Ideological Closure: The class reproduces itself through control of higher education and media. Party loyalty, not technical skill, is the primary criterion for advancement. Succession by Co-optation: Unlike the bourgeoisie, which passes capital to heirs, the new class passes position . Djilas notes, “The sons of high party officials inevitably become high party officials, not by law but by influence” (1957, p. 112).

Crucially, Djilas argues that this class is more stable than capitalism’s bourgeoisie, because its wealth is not subject to market fluctuations; it is guaranteed by the police and the army. 4. The Psychology of the Bureaucrat One of the most insightful sections of the book describes the dual consciousness of the new class member. He sincerely believes in communist ideals while ruthlessly pursuing personal power. Djilas calls this “revolutionary hypocrisy” (1957, p. 152). The bureaucrat experiences:

Asceticism in public (denouncing private property) vs. hedonism in private (access to forbidden goods). Revolutionary language (class struggle, proletariat) vs. conservative action (suppressing any change that threatens his position). Manipulation of ideology : The new class uses

This produces a neurotic ruling class that fears two things above all: market reforms (which would introduce economic competition) and true democracy (which would introduce political competition). As Djilas puts it, “The new class fears freedom more than it fears counter-revolution” (1957, p. 168). 5. Contemporary Relevance: From Tito to Technocrats While The New Class was written about Stalinism, its analytical lens has proven flexible. Two applications stand out: 5.1 Post-Soviet Oligarchy: Djilas’s model predicted that when the party’s monopoly on force collapses, the new class simply converts political power into private property. The Russian oligarchs of the 1990s—former party secretaries who bought state assets for kopecks—are the perfect Djilasian type. 5.2 Managerial Capitalism: Critic Noam Chomsky (1986) extended Djilas’s logic to Western corporations. The modern CEO, who does not own the company but controls it through stock options and board networks, constitutes a “new class” within capitalism. While not identical to Djilas’s bureaucracy, the similarity in control without classical ownership is striking. 6. Criticisms and Limitations No paper on Djilas is complete without addressing central critiques:

Empirical narrowness: Critics (e.g., Lévesque, 1975) argue that Djilas over-generalized from Yugoslavia’s decentralized model to all communist states. China’s market communism, for instance, has produced a hybrid class of party-business elites that does not fully match his description. Economic determinism persist: Though Djilas breaks from Marx, he still leans heavily on economic base analysis, underplaying nationalism, ethnicity, and religion as independent sources of stratification. Solution deficit: The book is brilliant at diagnosis but impoverished in therapy. Djilas’s proposed solution—democratic socialism—is vague, and he offers no transitional mechanism from new class rule to workers’ self-management.