Art and Revolt: From the Socialist Republic of Slovenia to Today DašaTepina University of Nova Gorica, Slovenia dasa.tepina@ung.si Petja Grafenauer University of Ljubljana, Slovenia petja.grafenauer@aluo.uni-lj.si ©2024Daša Tepinaand PetjaGrafenauer Abstract. This contribution takes a closer look at visual art and protest anddevelopsacomparativeanalysisofactivistaestheticsthatwillcon­textualize the images of art and revolt from the Socialist Republic of Slovenia in the 1960s to today. It will focus on the representation of counter-powerimages,notonlyasasupportingvisualformbutalsoas an interweaving that can function as an independent element in mo­ments of social rupture. Beginning with the examples of the student movement from 1968 and the visual code of the student newspaper Tribuna, we follow the stories of the artist collectiveohoand the art commune established by some of its members; from there, follow the examplesofpunksubculture andthelegendaryspacesofDiscofvand theirvisualcodes;thenwetracetheanti-militarizationmovementand the storiesofthe occupationandtransformationof armyfacilitiesinto creative, cultural, social and political places, with the example of Au­tonomous Cultural Centre Metelkova City. The article concludes with thealter-globalizationmovement,thenewwaveofsquatting,andother contemporarysocial movementsoccurring fromthe endof the90’sto the 2020/21 anti-governmental protests. With comparative narration of different social movements and their creative force, we try to com­prehend the revolutionary aesthetic potential of the margins in revolt in different social contexts. KeyWords:visualcode,protests,socialmovements,aesthetics,counter-power Umetnost in upor: od Socialisticne republikeSlovenije do danes Povzetek. Prispevek se podrobneje posveca vizualni umetnosti in pro-testom ter razvija primerjalno analizo aktivisticne estetike, ki bo kon­tekstualizirala podobe umetnosti in upora od Socialisticne republike https://doi.org/10.26493/2630-4082.56.37-58 Sloveniješestdesetihletdodanes.Osredotocasenareprezentacijopro­tioblastnihpodob,kijorazumemonelekotpodpornovizualnoobliko, temvectudikotprepletestetskihelementov,kilahkovtrenutkihdruž­benih prelomovdelujekotsamostojapoliticnapraksa. Takopo prime-rih študentskega gibanja iz leta 1968 in vizualnega koda študentskega casopisa Tribuna sledijo zgodbe umetniške skupineohoin umetniške komune,kisojo ustanovilinekateri clani tega kolektiva; nato sledijo primeri subkulture punk in legendarni kraji Discofvter njihovi vizu­alni kodi; nato sledi gibanje proti militarizaciji in zgodbe zasedb ter preoblikovanja vojaških objektov v ustvarjalna, kulturna, socialna in politicna sticišca na primeru Avtonomnega kulturnega centra Metel­kova mesto. Clanek se zakljuci z alterglobalizacijskim gibanjem, no-vimvalomskvotiranjaindrugimisodobnimidružbenimigibanji,kise odvijajo od konca 90. let do protivladnih protestov med letoma 2020 in 2021. S primerjalno analizo razlicnih družbenih gibanjih in njihove ustvarjalne moci skušamo razumeti revolucionarni estetski potencial obrobja v uporih znotraj razlicnih družbenih kontekstov. Kljucne besede: vizalni kod, protesti, družbena gibanja, estetika, proti­moc Introduction When the political breakthrough of art and the artistic praxes move be­yond theartisticframeworks andintersect withwidersocialmovements, it opens space for aesthetic revolutionary potential. Freedom and auton­omy within art had been buried under the pressures of neoliberalism, and as Danko Grlic (1988, 146) wrote, ‘the absolute freedom of art was only freedom in individual spheres; thus, it came into conflict with the enduring stateofnon-freedomas awhole.’ Thus,art wasalreadystuckin a desperate situation and, as Theodor Adorno (2002, 29) argued, ‘among the dangers faced by new art, the worst is the absence of danger.’ Socialmovementsoftenbearthepoliticalcharacterofacertainkindof vivid, living art, which has the potential to move beyond artistic frame­works. Within the diverse examples from the post-Yugoslavian context of Slovenia (former Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia), the article exam­ines aesthetic revolutionary potential and the recuperation practices of the power structures. We follow the student movement from 1968, the visual code of the student newspaper Tribuna and with it the works of the artist groupohoand the artist commune established by some of its members. After that, we focus on the examples of punk subculture and alternative spaces of Discofvand Škucand their visual codes. Besides subculture, we track the anti-militarization movement and the stories of theoccupationandthetransformationofarmyfacilitiesintocreative,cul­tural, social, and political places just after the dispersion of Yugoslavia, with the example of Autonomous Cultural Centre Metelkova City. The article concludes with the alter-globalization movement, a new wave of squatting, and other contemporary social movements happening from the end of the 90s to the 2020/1 anti-governmental protests. With com­parative narration of different social movements and their creative force, we try to comprehend the revolutionary aesthetic potentials of the mar­gins in revolt in a different social context. In addition, we also examine the mechanisms ofrecuperationin the existingsocialorderand how this potential is systematically neutralized through power structures and/or capitalist codification. Slovene art critic Brane Kovic (1990, 13) stated that ‘the majority of avant-garde poetics were based on the global desire to change the world and use art to establish a different system of both values and relation-ships.’Thelinkbetweenartandthepoliticalisespeciallyprominentwhen it comes to the avant-garde movements, as politically and aesthetically progressive. However,their strength iscontinuallydecreased by different political processes (recuperation, cultural codification, institutionaliza­tion, etc.) by power structures that are making such movements a part of the existingsocialorder. This,inturn, leads to aperpetualneedforthem to be redefined. The avant-garde has always strived for autonomy,in whichthe expres­sionoftheindividualbecomesthemeasureofpersonalfreedomandfree­dom in general. The concept of freedom and the attempts to define it bring art out of the realm of aesthetics and into the field of ethics no longer relegated to the private; art thus becomes public and social. Au­tonomy plays a key role in this. Adorno advocated for the autonomy of art, as art needs autonomy to open up an area of imagined freedom that is in opposition to the present and draws attention to its shortcomings. SamuelBeckettwentastepfurtherandproclaimedthatartonlybecomes autonomouswhenitdemands to becomeaworld ‘untoitself’ ratherthan reflecting the world (Belting 2010, 12). A similar positionwas adopted by Jacques Rancičre (2010, 117), who claimed that the question did not con­cern the autonomy of the work of art but rather the mode of experience. With such stipulationsinmind,this article explores the need to question the notion of freedom, which cannot exist without sufficient space for one’s own expression. Freedom is neither final nor static. It does not exist without the desire or struggle for it, which makes it more of a guideline than an absolute state.Avant-gardemovementsareapartofaestheticrevolutions,forthey criticize the current situation, seeking and formulating alternatives. Of course, this takes place at the crossroads between aesthetics and politics. Accordingto Rancičre (2010, 119), social revolutionsare the daughtersof aesthetic revolutions. Revolution’s fundamental part originates from the emancipation of the individual in terms of the sensorium of which they are a part and which they can influence. Rancičre sees art as a part of the struggle for space, for what we are allowed to show and what we are not, believing that it belongs in the same domain as aesthetics. The ultimate alternative to politics lies in aestheticization, the creation of a new col­lective ethos. This starts when art becomes life and life becomes art (pp. 119–123). Terry Eagleton (1990, 3) argued that aesthetics is an eminently contradictoryphenomenon:ontheonehandattheveryheartofthemid­dle class’s struggle for political hegemony, while on the other providing an unusually powerful challenge to the dominant ideological forms. Theriseof broader social movementsopens a space for diverse art practices and an advancement of new social relations in which we can follow the aesthetic revolutionary potential as the social movements or culturalscenesareongoing.Tohighlightthemwechosesomeofthemost visible acts of revolt from below from the subculture movements in the former Yugoslavia’s Republic of Slovenia to social movements after in­dependence, and through them tried to show how visual practices are an inherent part of the social movements whatever the social context. Similarly, withthe responseofthe powerstructures,with similarmecha­nisms from recuperation, and with appropriation to institutionalization, the aesthetic revolutionary potentials are normalized back to the domi­nant social order. As James C. Scott (1990, 111) says: ‘[A]ppropriation is, after all, largely the purpose of domination.’ This contribution is based on interviews and materials already issued bygroupsandindividualsinvolved,newspaperarticles,andsecretservice reports. From the Student Revolts of 1968–1972 Forwards The student movements which arose in 1968 all around Europe also emerged insocialist Yugoslavia, first inBelgradeinJune1968, and in parallel in Zagreb and Ljubljana. Students were addressingthe socialcri-sis and demanding better living conditions. One of the most important achievements in Slovenia was the establishment of Radio Študent (Ra­dio Student) which still exists today. In 1971 Filozofska fakulteta (Faculty of Arts) in Ljubljana was occupied by students and some professors and many students’ manifestations took to the streets. Besides Radio Študent there was also another important propaganda and informative student newspaper called Tribuna, where the aforementioned group oho also had a large visual input. Besides the general social unrest in the 1970s, the first squatting ac­tions influenced by the Dutch movement took place with the occupation ofthevillaat29ErjavcevaStreet inLjubljana,whichlastedfromOctober 28,1977,toNovember9,1977.Theoccupationdrewattentionprimarilyto student and general housing problems but also had a symbolic purpose – to show the possibility of the functional use of unused spaces in gen­eral. The authorities evicted the squatters in a relatively short time under threat of coercive measures, and a kindergarten soon moved in. At the same time, communes were established all over the world to put libertarian ideas and theories into practice. In Ljubljana, it was Ko-munag7(Communeg7),which was founded in the suburbs of Ljubljana called Tacen under the influence of the hippie (sub)culture and the stu­dent movement. Communeg7was initially a small project, but it gained more public and international attention over time. The main ideas were self-organization, solidarity, and equality; in short, principles and meth­ods derived from anarchism. They also became acquainted with anar­chism, which was promoted by one of the most prominent figures of the Communeg7,FraneAdam.Thesecondimportantcommune,whosede­velopment and impact will be discussed below, was an artists’ commune by the art collectiveohoin the village of Šempas in 1970. ohoGroup In 1965, socialist Yugoslavia underwent comprehensive economic and fi­nancial reform. For the first time, the issue of convertibility of the cur-rency–thedinar,internationalcompetition,andtradewithforeigncoun-tries –wasraised. Thestate-sponsoredincreaseintheproductionofcon-sumer goods, industrial revenues, the development of a goods distribu­tion system, the development of tourism, and port activity (also because of membership in the Non-Aligned Movement) led to an increase in the standard of living. Between 1965 and 1968, per capita income increased by18percentand consumptionby20percent.Thelevelofeducationalso improved. The ‘look’ of Yugoslavia changed, especially in the urban cen­ tres. The country’s borders were opened and the number of trips abroad increased. In daily life, there was the possibility of buying a car, new household appliances were introduced, more items were on the shelves, theadvertisingindustry expanded,thepresenceoftelevision,magazines, and photography was felt more strongly and links with Western Euro­ pean countriesbecame stronger. The artist Kostja Gatnik, who had a sig­ nificant influence on many branches of visual art (alternative as well as dominant) in the 1970s, says that he ordered many magazines to Ljubl­ jana through the Mladinska knjiga bookshop chain, mainly those about art, culture, and alternative lifestyles, but also those that taught how to brew synthetic drugs in your own kitchen, and the delivery never got stuck.ą In the 1960s, rock came to Slovenia, at first as a copy of foreign hits. Rock was not for Slovenian radio, but it was played in the youth clubs that wereopening around the country, followedby the first discotheques andRadioStudent(1969),andbythefirststudentdemonstrationsandthe bands of the Faculty of Arts (1968–1972). In the cultural sphere, students were still oscillating between elite and autonomous culture, drawing at­ tention to social inequality and other pressing problems of the time. At the sametime, thesocial climate wasbecoming morerepressive inthe 1970s. Some communes and broader familyand friendship communities were established, with a distinctive look, sensitivity to ecological prob­ lems, emphasis on a healthy lifestyle in nature, the practice of yoga, the study of Eastern philosophies, the smoking of marijuana, etc. All these factors aroused the interest of artists. ForeignpublicationstravelledmoreeasilytotheYugoslavartworldand the number of international connections and exhibitions increased. The President of the country, Josip Broz Tito, publicly warned against nega­ tive influences from abroad and against modern, especially abstract, art from the Westinaspeechatthe Seventh CongressofYugoslavYouth in January 1963 and in four speeches in the winter of 1964. The attitude of politics towards modern art was ambivalent, not least because of the mi- crophysicsofpower,whichisnotdiffusedfromthetopbutcirculates,and does not reproduce the general form of government at the lower levels and is therefore not a simple projection of central power. Federal policy itself had been ambivalent about the diminishing role of Western, espe- ą InterviewwithKostjaGatnikbyPetjaGrafenauer,conductedon15June2015(keptinthe authors’ personal archive). cially abstract art. Local politicians and bureaucrats, however, for vari­ ous reasons – different views on art, personal ties, political connections, financial and other benefits – tolerated and supported such art, except when there were serious prohibitions from the top, of a kind that could threaten the whole structure. The art world operated relatively indepen­ dently. It is of great importance that when Yugoslavia opened its doors to thecapitalistwestand itssocialismbecamesofteritopenedagapfornew development in the then-marginal art. Inthissituation,newpossibilitiesalsoopenedforcounter-institutional culture and art. Now it could develop further and pose some anticanon­ ical questions. Let us look at the example of theohogroup. Its core was already established in 1963 when, while still in high school in the city of Kranj, the students Marjan Ciglic, Iztok Geister, and Marko Pogacnikes­ tablished a school bulletin called Plamenica that was provocative in its content with a demand of a ‘merciless destroying of fusty peace,’ as was written in the editorial by Pogacnik (Zabel 1994, 19). They demanded a living experience in the arts and a breaking down of the dusty conven­ tions that ruled the Slovene art world. They were joining ‘hooliganism,’ a term in the mid-sixties used for young people who had long hair and unusual clothes and behaved in a way that broke the boundaries of the ‘normal’ socialist society: ‘Naturally, the “hooligan” movement involved a strongexistentialist element of dissatisfaction with the developing con­ sumer society and of protest of it,’ (p. 20). They wished to break the con­ ventions of the art. Theohomovement was born out of two groups. The first so-called Kranj group, which included Pogacnik, Geister, Ciglic, Naško Križnar, and Franci Zagoricnik, and had occasional contacts with Rudi Šeligo, who was a bit older and theoretically strong. They were influenced by the Slovene historical avant-garde magazine tank!, some of the then- unpublished historical avant-garde poems Kons’s˛ by the Slovene poet Srecko Kosovel, and other sources. When Geister and Pogacnik came to studyinLjubljana,they joinedLjubljana’s hooligans. They –AlešKer­ mavner, Naško Križnar, Milenko Matanovic, Matjaž Hanžek, Vojin Ko­ vac (Chubby), and Andraž Šalamun – were inspired by rock music and beatnik poetry and had a countercultural attitude. Pogacnik describes the sound of the reunited group as a mixture of Zen and Dada. oho ˛ Constructivist poetry also involves collage and some of those were also done by Srecko Kosovel and the historical avant-garde artist Avgust Cernigoj in the 1920s. went through manyphases, namely pop art,reism,ł conceptualism, arte povera,landart,programmaticart,andcosmicconceptualism,finallyes­tablishing a commune in Šempas in 1970 and renouncing active collabo­ration with the art world. If you were to wander under the arcades at the corner of the Kaz­ina building on a certain day in the spring of 1966, you would see a young man, a student with long hair, drawing anti-Vietnam protestcomicson the wallsto the sounds ofthe RollingStones. This was Marko Pogacnik [...] whose core parts and satellites expressed themselves in poetry, visual poetry, drawing, performances, and shortfilms. They were students.Theywerehippies. Or asPogacnik says: ‘We listened to the Beatles, Bob Dylan, the RollingStones, and the who.Weworelonghairand necklacesmadefromdiscarded things,pinecones,or deerexcrement. Wewereextremely peaceful.’ Thethree,Pogacnik,IztokGeisterPlamen,andMilenkoMatanovic, were part of the editorial board of the student magazine Tribuna, which had itspremisesinthe building of Kazina in Ljubljanaatthe time. This led to various happenings in the neighboring Zvezda Park, such as tracing a person’s shadow with chalk or blowing up transparent plastic tubes with a vacuum cleaner. The pages of Tribuna were populated by their drawings, poems, visual poetry, theoretical treatises, nonsense, and stunts. The movement initially wanted to focuson film,but the mediumwas noteasilyaccessible, and visual poetry as typewriter art was cheap. They had their own stall under the arcades of the Casino, where they sold – matches. They bought boxes of matches, stuck their own batch of stickers on them, and resold them for the same price. Next to that, they sold diybooks,theso-calledohoEdition,hand-printed witha machine for printing partisan documents. [Oleami 2019] In the first half of 1970, the artists were preparing materials and later taking part in the exhibition Information (curated by Kynaston McShine ł The starting point of Reism is an anti-anthropocentric stance, starting from the whole-nessofbeingandunusuallyfocusedonthings,i.e. ‘thetruth’ –becausetheOhosawthem asthemostsubmissivetoman. Itcontraststhehierarchicalscalewiththeworldofequiv­alent existent entities forming horizontal relations with each other. The equation of the previously higher and lower is done through ‘reistic gazing,’ as a mere obscuring of what is sensually present –tothe eyes, tothe ears, tothe touch. and held atmomain New York between 2 July and 20 September 1970). Afterthat,theydecidednottotakepartintheartworldanylonger,there­fore four ofthem with their families and friends in April 1971 established a commune on an abandoned farm in a small village on the western side of Slovenia called Šempas (Zabel 1994, 134): The Šempas Family, as it was called, was founded on ideas that had been developed duringoho’s last period. The main idea was to dis­cover a way of life based on balanced relations within the family and between the group and its immediate contexts. [...] Nor did they stop making art. [...] The Šempas Family may be considered the conclusion ofoho. The group’s history came to an end when Matanovic, Nez, and Šalamun left Šempas about a year after the community was established. Discofvand Škuc Gallery Sincethemid-1980s,socialandpoliticaldevelopments havealsobrought significant changes to the field of art. In 1976, Yugoslavia, by re-estab­lishing self-management, attempted to establish direct democracy, still, of course, within the framework of the state’s one-party system. Because of self-management, the communist bureaucracy flourished, with each of the social structures operating semi-independently and participating in the decision-making chain. When enterprises, which were still state-owned,weregiventhepossibilityofself-determination, they preferred to invest the resources they had acquired in wages rather than in reinvest­ment. InternationalfundswerespentbytheYugoslavrepublicsonunproduc­tive mega-projects. These included investment in infrastructure for the 1984 Sarajevo Olympics, which did not live its own life after the event. The international debt grew and an economic crisis with rising infla­tion set in. This, together with the death of President Tito, who had led the country since its liberation in 1945, and the escalation of national issues among the country’s economically diverse nations and national­ities, led to new Serbian and Slovenian political programmes (Memoran­dum, Srpska akademija nauka i umjetnosti, Belgrade 1986 and Nova Re-vija 57, Ljubljana 1987). Both programmes envisaged finding solutions to the problems outside the borders of Yugoslavia, which Slovenia did with its independence in 1991. Civil society was awakening in the Slovene national space, heralded by the alternative and subcultural scene. This emerged as the first alterna­tive mass movement in the history of the Slovene Republic (Borcic2013). The episode of art that did not follow the traditional art world patterns and developed twofold outside of them, repeated itself in the late 70s. WithitscoresintheškucGalleryand DiscofvinLjubljana,twogroups, one established mostly from students from the Academy of Fine Arts in Ljubljana and Faculty of Humanities in Ljubljana inškucand the other coming mostly from the Faculty of Social Sciences in Ljubljana and the established Borghesia group and Discofv, fought the system again with adifferentkindofartrelatedtothepunkmovement,thatwasatthattime strongly sweeping over Slovenia. Intheearly1980s,theLjubljanasubculturalandalternativescenebegan to take shape, first within the student institutions that emerged because ofthe student movementin the 1970s, and then independently, atleast in termsofcontent. Likethehistoricalavant-gardeandtheneo-avant-garde ofohobefore it, it looked for inspiration mainly in alternative mass cul­ture, which also came from the West. The poles of 1980s visuality – the world of canonized fine art and the subcultural scene – operated largely separately.Therearemanydifferencesbetweenthemintheirmodesofor­ganization, ideologies, and expression. These differences are manifested in visuality on an extrinsic as well as intrinsic level. The alternative scene was established within institutional frameworks (škdForum,škuc), but these were smaller, more flexible organizations that reacted more easily and quickly to the demands of alternative con­temporaneity than the established galleries and museums, which were also more inthe sightsofthe authorities. The subcultural and alternative scene was established in spaces that were not only dedicated to fine art, but were also linked to other art genres and, above all, to culture more broadly. Special emphasis was placed on popular bands, which also pro­videdthescenewithamoremassanddifferentaudiencefromthatwhich frequentedthe ‘mainstream’ stateand municipalgalleries.Theartpartof thesubculturalscenewasinitiallydeliberatelyworkingwithintheframe­workofmasscultureandalwaysreflectedthesocio-politicaleverydaylife in which it was produced (Zabel 2003, 20): Thevisuallanguageofthe1980ssubcultureandthealternativescene made a conscious decision to contrast itself with traditional fine art and its conception. [...] The visual language so conceived is aware of the social conditionality of painting, sculpture, etc. [...] The re­jectionofPop Art and Hyperrealism was repeated in the 1980s, e.g., as a rejection of Neue Slowenische Kunst’s perverse strategies. Several factors are relevant forunderstanding the characteristics of the visual language of the alternative and subcultural scene of the 1980s and its causes. The visuality reflected and was based on the specific socio- political situation of the Slovene space, but it was also established as a reaction to the specific situation in Slovene visual art. The art system, in exhibition practice, art criticism, theory, and history, was, despite some exceptions,ratherclosedtootherformsofthinkingaboutartandculture. Artworksordiscoursesthatradicallylinkedarttoeverydaylife,masscul­ ture, humour,marginalized groups,politics,orthe economicsituationin the country were almost non-existent. Fine art institutions operated in a self-containedsystemthatallowedforoccasionalexhibition‘excesses,’but the dominant discourse obscured the interconnectedness of art, society, politics, and capital by excluding certain issues. One of the purposes of subculture andalternative culture, whichbegantodevelop inSloveniain the late 1970s, was precisely the link between artistic and socio-political goals. Itseems that the distinction betweenthe productionofthe subcultural scene and established fine art is not so easily made by emphasizing the useofaparticularmedium. Onthe onehand,subcultureandalternatives have produced works that can be placed within the (extended) notion of paintingorprintmaking (graffiti,graffiti painting,posters,etc.), whileon theotherhand,themediumofvideohasalsobeenusedbyfineartistsand has already entered art institutions. The 1979 survey exhibition of Slove­ nian art, Miha Vipotnik’s video installation Videogram 4, was exhibited at the Jakopic Gallery, and Borghesia released its first videocassette Tako mladi in 1985 in co-production with the institution of Cankarjev dom, where the first public presentation of the project was also held. More im­ portantthanthechoiceofmediumfortheanalysisofthetwoscenesdeal­ ing with visuality is where and how the work was made, where it was shown, who watched it, and how and what ideology it served. The alternative and subcultural scene was the first alternative in the then-socialist republic of Slovenia that grew into a social movement in the national space.4 In the second half of the 1970s, there was a collabo­ ration between the visual art ofškucGallery and the Museum of Mod­ 4 BarbaraBorcic (1994,51)hasdescribed ‘fv,orthebroaderLjubljanaalternativeandsub-cultural scene as the most massive cultural movement in Slovenia to date.’ ern Art, but with the departure of Taja Brejc in 1980, a new generation came toškuc. Dušan Mandic began to run the gallery and introduced a programme of ‘new conceptual practice,’ but when the artist co-founded the Irwin group in1983, he was replacedatškucbyBarbara Borcic and Marina Gržinic. The alternative and subcultural scene evolved mostly aroundfv112/15, better known as Discofv:5 We chosethe namebytaking theDictionaryofForeignTerms from France Verbinc and each person wrote 2 numbers on a piece of pa­per. Then we decided that the first number was the page, and the second number was the dictionary entry on that page. So, it came out112through15,so 112the pageand 15thedictionary entry, which was ‘c’est la guerre.’ But that is irrelevant. The important thing was thatfv112/15 was an acronym, which was a trend among the punk bands, anditdidn’t evenreallymatter what it meant. From1981,agroupofstudents,togetherwiththenewwaveofthepunk scene, created a plural and autonomous scene that included theatre ac­tivities, dances, concerts, video recordings, the formation of their own bands,andmultimediaartactions.Inthebasementofthefourthblockin thestudenthousing,thescenedevelopedaroundtheDiscofv,6 whilethe second part was occupied byškuc.7 Both spaces developed a large-scale multimedia production, which (especially infv) was linked to popular band music. A ‘second scene’ emerged, where visual art was only one of the possible expressionsand which,withits own institutions and its own way of working, lived a parallel life. It was only at the beginning of the new century, with artefacts and documentation, that this became part of the canon of visual art, something that the protagonists themselves did not wantinthe early daysofthe movement. Theactors in thescene used a diverse rangeofvisualmedia.Whatwas producedinDiscofvwasverymuchconnected to the theatreand music scene, but also transcended it. A particularly important element of the 5 Interview with Neven Korda by Daša Tepina, conducted on 24 May, 2022 (kept in the authors’ personal archive). 6 ZemiraAlajbegovic,DraganColakovicŠilja,GoranDevide,SergejHrvatin,AldoIvancic, NerinaKocjancic,NevenKorda,AnitaLopojda,MirelaMiklavcic,DarioSeravalandoth­ers. 7 Video production manager Marijan Osole-Max, Borders of Control No. 4 (Barbara Borcic, Dušan Mandic, Marina Gržinic, and Aina Šmid), Keller (alias Andrej Lupinc), Peter Vezjak, Igor Virovac, Kollaps (Bojan Štokelj, Venko Cvetkov, and Darja Prelec), Emil Memon and others. artistic aspect offvwas the space of the disco, which could be described inarthistoricalterminologyasacollective,holisticartwork(Vidmar1983, 44): A special component – and an unusual attraction – of thefvDisco is the walls of the corridor in the anteroom of non-dance commu­nication: these walls, covered with a multitude of scribbled, spray-painted, painted, lacquered and xeroxed words, band names, mean­ingful and nonsensical phrases, ‘classic’ street and new anarcho-punk, even political calls, slogans, signs and texts, all this colourful chaos offvwalls is one of the most fascinating memorials of this space – it is similar to the famous spray-painted compositions of the New York Metro [...] with fewer aesthetics – and mythology, of course – and more ‘politics’:this givesthe spacean additional,sym­bolic meaning, which has been especially felt in the last year – after the police crackdown on street graffiti. [...] The Student disco is a spatial-visual variant of punk as a ‘symptom that has spoken’ – or rather, has drawn itself, painted itself on the wall in an elemental, emotional, often polarized desire to mark its presence. Already towards the end of the 1970s, the first graffiti had appeared on the walls of Ljubljana. These were mainly slogans, names of punk bands, and signs. When the city authorities carried out a campaign to clean the walls and act against graffiti writers, graffiti inhabited the walls of Disco fv.Inthis‘ghetto,’ theartists weresafe from persecutionand thefvcor­ridor became a substitute for urban space (Bavcar 1984, 103–463). In1982,graffitipaintingappeared.WiththescreeningofthevideoIcons of Glamour – Echoes of the Death of the group Borders of Control No. 4 and an evening of selected music in December 1982, Dušan Mandic, as a member of the group, decorated the corridor of Diskofvwith photo­copies of graffiti, 5 × 2 m, drawn on paper, based on a photograph of a graffiti image of four homosexuals, taken from the Art Press magazine. Also,onthe occasion ofanother project, Borders of Control No. 4, agraf­fiti image appears with the stencil-painted text ‘Hey you man watch me, you might be right I am a tool, but why don’t you tell me, if you know a better tool’ (Gržinic 2003, 170). Mandic exhibited the graffiti with the image of homosexuals during a sexualactagain inAugust1983atthefvinŠiška, andin November of the same year, he exhibited a photocopy of the graffiti and a graffiti im­ageofared male sexual organmadewith stencils aspartofthe sympo­sium What Is the Alternative on the Dance Floor. This was also a time of homosexuality outspokenly stepping into the world. In the same month, Roman Uranjek, Marko Kovacic, Andrej Savski, and Dušan Mandic or-ganizedanexhibitionofSv.Urhgraffitionthefvdancefloor.Thegraffiti, whichdepictedpartisansbeingbrutallytorturedandshot,werebasedon templates – photographs from a book containing documentary material about the events at Sv. Urh during the Second World War. In a text for RadioŠtudent,twooftheauthorsmentionedtheconnectionbetweenthe exhibition and the ritual of dancing on the same premises. It was there­fore a way of thinking about visual art that went beyond the visual and considered the specificity of the space in which the work is presented. TheKollapsgroupalsoproducedgraffiti,whichwasondisplayatthefv inNovemberandDecember1983;in1984,theRIrwinSgroup(BorutVo­gelnik, Roman Uranjek, Dušan Mandic, Andrej Savski, Marko Kovacic) organized the exhibition Erotic Graffiti with Pornographic Motives. These finallyestablishedthepornographiccontentthatwaspresentinthepost­cards of Soldier D.M. (Dušan Mandic), The placement of pornography in the image, and thus in the field of ideology, was a radical intervention that represented the specificity of Ljubljana’s subcultural production at thetimeinrelationtothemarket-regulateddividebetweenpornographic and artistic production in the West (Španjol 2003, 87). Infvandškuc, the content and visuality, the way of production and presentation have definitively erased the difference between popular and high culture. Subcultural and alternative art production was aimed at an audience very different from that attracted by gallery exhibitions. Those whocametoDiskofvandškucwerethosewholikedtolistentodifferent music – mainly punk, hardcore, and new wave, but also those who did not feel at home in the established cultural institutions and who wanted different, critical thinking and a different cultural offer. The proverbially closedworldoffineartwasopenedforafewyearsintheframeworkoffv Disco precisely because of the mixing of expressive forms, even to those whowouldotherwisehaveremainedoutsidetheworldofthose ‘initiated’ into fine art. Inthe1980s,thesubculturalandalternativemovementinLjubljanain­volved projects that combined several media. Often, painting and video, photography, and installation were exhibited to the accompaniment of punk, hardcore, ornew wave.fvmixedgallery culture, massculture, and what was coming from the street. The subculture offered motifs, themes, and the use of media that were still largely unacceptable in the context of fine art as it waspresented in galleryspacesatthe time. Itintroducedthe previously taboo themes of crude sexuality, marginalized social groups, violence,differenthumour,lifestyles,andimages.Anewaestheticwases­tablished–anaestheticoftheugly,thedilettante,themarginal,thecrude, thecollaged,andthemass.Thematerialandideologicalpossibilitiesgave rise to thediyPrinciple, which is the main principle of self-organization as a core principle for establishing counter-power relations which pro­voke the hierarchical relations in the established order. This has led to a crudelookinwhich,inconjunctionwithdirect,oftenpoliticalmessages, and with technological possibilities – the use of the photocopier and of pre-existing images whose meaning is perverted by their transfer into a new context – photographs and images from the mass media have been welcomed with open arms. We can speak of a key principle of creation: theprincipleofcollagingpre-existingimages.Posters,graffiti,videos,etc. arejigsawpuzzlesofpartstakenoutoftheiroriginalcontextandinserted into new contexts. Changing the context in whichan imageappears adds a new way of reading it, and this is often used by subcultures to criticize existingsocialreality.Theprincipleofcollagehasbeenbroughttoitspeak by Borghesia’s multimedia projects, which are themselves collages. They consist of pre-existing independent video works, inserts of theatre per­formances, samples of music, pre-existing visual material, etc. Themotivesofthevisualmaterialproducedbythealternativeandsub­culture are highly explicit and include political images, images of vio­lence, catastrophes, or pornography; the latter was itself a political state­ment in this period, as it spoke of political bondage that forbids and re-pressesanddoesnotallow,forexample,imagesofdifferentsexualityeven inthefield ofmassculture. Thesceneconstantlypointstoarepressedbut existing society of prohibition. The message is often on the surface and easytoread,butthematerials,inadditiontotheoriginalclarity,oftenof-fer details that the art material uses to further reinforce, and sometimes subvert,theoriginalstatement. InhisessayCome,CloseClosetoMe,ITell YouManYou WillSee... DušanMandic (1983,38–39)enumerated the characteristics of video in the descent from high to mass culture. Many of them can be applied to the entire visual expressiveness of alternative and subcultural art of the 1980s. This artistic production was interested in ‘entertainment rather than hermetic seriousness,’ yet it cannot be ac­cusedofnotexpressingimportantpoliticalandsocialideas.Mandicgoes on to say that in the works ‘political action rather than political rhetoric is evident and inherent.’ The visuals of subculturalproduction ‘are comic (mocking)ratherthantragic.’Manyofthemarecharacterizedbyhumour, which ranges from the momentary quirks of early posters to the subtle statements with which punk ‘subverts the cynical workings of ideology’ (Žižek 1984, 122–129). The creator of the art material can be anyone, a trained artist editing a video or a disco-goer with an incomplete primary school degree who writesgraffitionthewall.Bothareequal,bothworkswere –atleastinthe earlyphaseofthefvDisco–equallyondisplaytothevisitor.Itisalsotrue thatmanyoftheprotagonistsofthescene,especiallythosewhotrainedas artists, later entered the art system. This abandoned another ideal – the ideal of the creativity of the individual, which was only possible within the framework of subculture and alternative culture as a broader social movement.Inthemid-1980s,moreprominentnamesemergedwithinthe subculture,notablythensk,andwithintheIrwingroup,whichsoonafter its foundation crossed over into the field of ‘high art.’ Anti-Militarismand Squatting of Metelkova Theendofthe1980sandtheearly1990swereaperiodofgreattensionand drastic social changes, from the socialist transition to capitalism to the growing nationalist tendencies that fuelled the Yugoslav wars. As men­tioned above, in the early 1980s, the subculture was very pronounced and was further strengthened by the new wave of punk and hardcore scenes in Ljubljana. In addition to the scene in Ljubljana, the alternative scene also developed in Maribor, where it formed in circles around the Radio Marš initiative, the Katedra newspaper,mkc,agdGustaf, Front Rock, and so on. These subcultures often overlapped in their practice of anti-authoritarian ideology ranging from systemically promoted self-organization to more autonomous practices such as critique of institu­tionalization, assembly decision-making, etc. A 1982 Analytical report of rsnz(RepublicanSecretariatforInternalAffairsoftheSocialistRepublic of Slovenia) stated, ‘It is no accident that in this world of thought, full of naiveté and speculation, punk is used as a synonym for the true progres­siveyouthwhorejectallorganizedpoliticalactionbecauseitexcludeshu­manfreedom,rejects authority,and acceptsan “anarchism thathas never compromised itself in social practice”. Punk is currently the most vital part of the youth subculture that represents a resistance to real socialism and young Stalinism’ (Arhiv Republike Slovenije, 1931,ma-701_108, 9). Undertheseconditions,therewereverystrongpacifistandanti-milita­ristictendencies insideofthese subcultures,whichcame tothe forefront, especially in the 1990s, when they focused on the struggle to turn mil­itary facilities into cultural ones which would be autonomous. One of the mostwidelyknown wasthe 1993 occupation of Metelkova inLjubl­jana, a former military barracks that remained in the centre of Ljubl­jana after independence as an empty reminder of militarization and the tragedy of the Yugoslav wars. A diverse multitude of associations, groups, and individuals, united in a common association, the Network for Metelkova, decided to use the occupation to draw attention to the strong anti-militarist agenda of the time and to demand that military fa-cilitiesbetransformedintospacesforcultureandart(moreinBibic2003; Pavlišic 2013). At the same time, various collectives were formed. These were mainly concerned with anti-militarism and ecology, partly because of the war in the former Yugoslavia (e.g. Kolektiv anarho-pacifisticne akcije (The Collective of Anarchist Pacifist Action) (k.a.p.a.), the punk collectivet.o.t.a.l.i.t.a.r., Škrati (The Elves collective), and the Eco­logical Anarchist Initiative) (Crnkic and Tepina 2014, 25).8 The occupa­tion of the former military bakery in Maribor is also worth mention­ing here. Like the occupation of Metelkova, the protagonists of the oc­cupation founded an informal organization, the Magdalena Network, which tried to acquire premises and organize the individual actors into a whole.. In the 1990s the anarcho-punk subculture was based ondiyculture. This had a significant impact not only on the aesthetics of the subcul­ture but also on self-publishing, where a strong culture of fanzine pub­lishing developed alongside the proliferation of music production.ą° The 8 TheiractionsincludecriticalfairsanddemonstrationsagainstMcDonald’sgreed,nuclear weapons, andgmoproducts. The opening of thefirst anarchistinfo point, Škratovacital­nica (the Dwarf Reading Room), was a co-production betweenk.a.p.a.and the Dwarfs, who founded thekudAnarhiv in 1999, organizing discussions, meetings, and presenta­tions, while Škratova citalnica was responsible for the distribution of radical, libertarian and anarchist literature (Crnkic and Tepina 2014, 25). . Later, in 1996, the organization was formalized asthe PekarnaInstituteof the Magdalena Network. For more information on Pekarna and its structure, principles, etc. see their webpage (Pekarna Magdalenske mreže Maribor n. d.). ą° This led to the publication of numerous magazines and fanzines, such as Svojtok and 13. brat (13thbrother).AlsoworthmentioningistheKolektivnenasilnegadelovanja(Collec­tive for Nonviolent Action) (k.n.d.), which was active from 1989 to 1998, during which time it disseminated anarchist ideas and was involved in the publication of the newslet­ter Preporod – casopis slovenskih anarhistov za svobodno družbo (Preporod – Newspa­per of Slovenian Anarchists for a Free Society) as well as numerous leaflets and other propaganda materials on topics such as antimilitarism,ecology, antifascism, criticism of parliamentary democracy, sexism, etc. (Federation for Anarchist Organising2009, 8). late 1990s are particularly important for the emergence of a new wave of squatting, which was also linked to the emergence of new social move­ments. Forexample, in1999 the Cukrarna squat took placeinLjubl­jana, which was followed by social, political, and cultural squats known as Vila Mara,acMolotov, and Galicia. Similar autonomous spaces be-gantoemergein other partsof Slovenia.ąą The squatting movement was on many levels always interconnected with the wider social and politi­calstruggles,fromtheparticipationinthealter-globalizationmovements andNo-natocampaigntodemonstrationsagainstthewarinIraq,which was followed by student revolts (2006–2007, 2009–2010), solidarity with workers and syndicalist struggles, and many others. Autonomous spaces and squatting had an important interconnection withartandrevolutionaryaesthetics.Inthehistoryofsocialmovements, wecanobservethestrongrelationshipbetweenthestrengthofthemove­mentsandthedevelopmentoftheirownculturalbase –thedevelopment ofthecounterculture,whichischaracterized byaspiritofresistance. The creation of its own cultural base was a starting point and an agency of counter-power for building diverse social movements. One of the most important crossroads was creating autonomous social and cultural cen­tres, which were a consequence of direct actions of occupationsof empty buildings, called squatting. In squatted spaces art and visual image had an importantoreven focal role.Wecould emphasize three points:art has a central role in the creation of the aesthetics of the place, and au­tonomous places are laboratories for experimenting with utopian social activityandrelationshipsthatarebuiltbeyondexistingnormsandvalues. Secondly,alsoconsequently,artandautonomyarefocalpointsasaesthet­icsbecomesawayoflife.Andthethirdimportantroleisthepreservation of the spaces; as we can see in the example ofaccMetelkova, it playedan importantroleasthe buildingshavebeenpreserved with recognition of the place as one of significant cultural value. Autonomous Factory Rog and Contemporary Social Movements In 2006, the projecttempwas also the basis for the occupation of the old, abandoned bicycle factory Rog in Ljubljana, which was established ąą Izbruhov kulturni bazen in Kranj and later TrainStation Squat, Mostovna and Ideal bar in Nova Gorica, Ambasada Štefana Kovaca Marka (Štefan Kovac Marko’s Embassy) in Beltinci, Sokolc (the Sokol House) in Novo Mesto, Inde in Koper, Argo in Izola, and others. on the anarchist ideas of Hakim Bey and the concept of a Temporary Autonomous Zone. A temporarily occupied space of freedom, creativity, and action was created and was used for various projects, concerts, artis­tic activities, a social centre, etc. under the common name Avtonomna tovarna Rog (the Autonomous Factory Rog) – at Rog. Rog also be­came an important meeting point for political struggles, from Nevidni delavci sveta (the Invisible Workers of the World,iww) to Izbrisani (the Erased), who eventually found a space for community and resistance in the RogSocialCentre. The autonomousspaces,akcMetelkova andat Rog, played an important role in struggles rising from the broader so­cial ruptures, as did the global economic crisis, which was countered by thelocalmass movement 150.Thiswasfollowedbywidespreaduprisings that took place in all major Slovenian cities between 2012 and 2013. Af­ter this period another rupture followed one of the biggest social crises that emerged on the borders of the European Union in 2015. One of the central spacesforthe struggle againstthe racistmigrationpoliciesatthat timewasatRog,whichalsohostedmanygatheringsofthebroadercoali­tion of social movements and initiatives united in the Anti-Racist Front that was activein2015–2016.Thisfront brought together various anti-authoritarian collectives and individuals who were working on migra­tion and refugee issues at the time with information sharing, fieldwork, communityevents, etc. After thisveryintensemomentum,anattempt to evict of the entire Rog area followed in 2016, but the eviction was halted, and a court case began between the municipality and the community ofatRog. With its numerous collectives, activities, and political-social actions, Autonomous Factory Rog also represented the struggle against gentrification until January 19, 2021, when the municipality evicted the areaafterfifteenyearsofexistence,despitestrongresistance. Theeviction coincided withthecovid-19pandemic and ahighlevelofsocialdisinte­gration due to strict and rigid government health measures. When there was the firstcovid-19 lockdownin May2020, diverse anti-authoritarian collectives, activists, and artists started bicycle protests in front of the governmental buildings, which led to regular protests, sit-ins, protest assemblies, and themed actions (actions of Aktiv kulturnih delavk in delavcev –addk(Active of Cultural Workers) in front of the Ministry of Culture; a coalition of ecological initiatives carried out many diverse actionsbytherivers,outsideoftheMinistryoftheEnvironmentandSpa­tial Planning and other institutions), etc. (Grafenauer and Tepina 2022, 409–428). Conclusion As can be deduced from this short overview and series of visual exam­ples from different periods in the context of the area of one of the post-Yugoslavian republics, there has been a strong connection between art, autonomous spaces, and social movements reacting to political develop­ments. This tangle created a space for the development of critical politi­cal culture, both through the broader intertwining of the art scene with social movements and through the strong presence of visual and perfor­mativeimagesinthemovements.Atcertainhistoricalmoments(e.g. Ko­muna 7, Šempas, Diskofv,accMetelkova,atRog) we can also speak of the counterculture, when it goes beyond the artistic frameworks such as culturalinstitutions,galleries,etc.,andestablishesitsown,basedonnon-dominant discourse and self-organization principles. Artinsocial movements hasanenormouspotential forrevolution­izing aesthetics, which is also one of the essential elements of achiev­ing fundamental social change. Together with other elements such as anti-authoritarian politics, which has a wider social impact, values, au­tonomous spaces, music, fashion, etc., it forms the basis for the forma­tion of a counter-power. However, if the field of aesthetics is not com­pletely decoded from the existing social codes, no fundamental change takesplace. Hierarchicalpowerrelationseasilyintegrateinsideofartand activist movements and influence their dynamics to the extent that they become subordinated to systemsofpower and capital. As we observe the period of transition to capitalism, we can recognize that always when there is a gap, the code of capital inscribes it and takes control of the dy­namics. These mechanisms of recuperation of anti-authoritarian politics and aesthetics allow capitalism to become an all-embracing system inte­grated in every pore of political and social life. Wecanfollowthechangesinthemethodsandmodesofpressurebythe authorities and institutions, and the response to it, which is reminiscent of that shown by avant-garde movements in the past (with manifestos, rebranding/detournement, street art, and performative actions as a form of protest and art as a demand for a different collective life). We can also observe the attempt to invent alternative social relationships, which have beenaddressedbythisprotestmovementonseveraloccasions,butwhich have failed to find roots in the broader social dynamics. The main obsta­clescanbefoundintherepetitionoftheprotests,normalizationofradical actions,andrecuperationofartistsandrebelliousactionsinthesystemof power structures. When they become a repetitive routine, they lose their potential counter-power and their strength to think beyond the imag­inable. With the reduction of the protests to only demands, the protests became predictable, and the creative political space begins to shrink. The capitalist recuperation of praxis is one of the strongest elements of contemporary suppression of revolutionary aesthetic potential and the building of political counter-power from below. It is also one of the key elements of capitalist flexibility, thus it is important to differentiate be­tween the alternative praxis decodified through alternative social rela­tions (horizontality, solidarity, mutual aid, etc.) and those praxes that are not or are mere simulacrums of the first (Baudrillard 1999). Numer­ous art projects with socially critical and aesthetically conspicuous con­tent have their recognition or/and popularity incorporated by economic value, with which they are easily re-appropriated into the existing social order. The aesthetic revolutionary potential achieves dispersion momentum but is closed by reduced demand. Capitalism has an intensely flexible spectrum that can, through constant crisis, adapt to new social circum­stances. However, it is possible to observe the point at which capitalism needs to brutally adapt to the new realm. The older and more sophisti­catedmethodsofrecuperationandreificationofevery aspectof the indi­vidual’slifearenolongersufficient,thuswearefacingthemoreautocratic phase, which is on the rise. References Adorno, Theodor W. 2002. Aesthetic Theory. Translated by Robert Hullot-Kentor. London and New York: Continuum. Bavcar, Igor, ed. 1984. Punk pod Slovenci. Ljubljana: Republiška konferenca zsms, Univerzitetnakonferencazsms. Baudrillard, Jean. 1999. Simulaker in simulacija; Popoln zlocin. Translated by Anja Kosjek in Stojan Pelko. Ljubljana:šou, Študentska založba. Belting, Hans. 2010. ‘Absolutna umetnost kot utopija.’ Likovne besede (92): 12–21. Bibic,Bratko.2003.HrupzMetelkove:tranzicijeprostorovinkulturevLjubljani. Ljubljana: Mirovni inštitut. Borcic, Barbara. 2013. Celostna umetnina Laibach: fragmentarni pogled. Ljubl­jana: /*cf. Crnkic, Adin, and Daša Tepina. 2014. ‘Misliti anarhizem v slovenskem pros-toru: kronologija in zgodovinski razvoj.’ Casopis za kritiko znanosti 42 (257): 13–29. Eagleton, Terry. 1990. The Ideology of the Aesthetic. Oxford: Blackwell. ‘Federation for Anarchist Organising.’ 2009. Autonomija 1:8. Grafenauer,Petja, and Daša Tepina. 2022. ‘Art and Rebellion: The Struggle for Freedomand Autonomy at theLjubljana2020/2021 Protests.’ ThirdText 36 (5): 409–428. Grlic, Danko. 1988. Izazov negativnog. Zagreb: Naprijed; Belgrade: Nolit. Gržinic, Marina. 2003. ‘Galerija škuc Ljubljana 1978–1987.’ In Do roba in naprej:slovenskaumetnost1975–1985,editedbyIgorŠpanjolandIgorZabel, 164–182.Ljubljana: Moderna galerija. Kovic, Brane. 1990. ‘Irwin – konec utopije.’ Sinteza (83–86): 13–17. Mandic, Dušan. 1983. Come, Close Close to Me, I Tell You Man You Will See ... Ljubljana: Self-published. Oleami, Samo. 2019. ‘Edicija oho.’ Aired on 27 October on Radio Študent. https://radiostudent.si/kultura/objekt-meseca/edicija-oho. Pavlišic, Andrej, ed. 2013. Metelkova mesto. Ljubljana: Študentska založba. PekarnaMagdalenskemrežeMaribor.N.d.‘Onas.’https://pekarnamm.org/o­nas Rancičre,Jacques.2010.Dissensus:OnPoliticsandAesthetics.LondonandNew York: Continuum. Scott, C. James. 1990. Domination and the Arts of Resistance. New Haven,ct, and London: Yale University Press. Španjol, Igor. 2003. ‘Veliki pok: multimedijska umetnost in alternativnascena v prvi polovici osemdesetih let.’ In Do roba in naprej: slovenska umetnost 1975–1985, edited by Igor Španjol and Igor Zabel, 80–92. Ljubljana: Mod-erna galerija. Vidmar, Igor. 1983. ‘Dossier Disco Študent.’ Mladina, 26. maj. Zabel, Igor. 1994. ‘oho – od reizma do konceptualizma.’ In oho: retrospek-tiva/Eine Retrospektive/A Retrospective, edited by Igor Španjol, 18–105. Ljubljana: Moderna galerija. ———.2003.‘Slovenskaumetnost1975–85:konceptiinkonteksti.’InDorobain naprej:slovenskaumetnost1975–1985,editedbyIgorŠpanjolandIgorZabel, 10–28 Ljubljana: Moderna galerija. Žižek, Slavoj, ed. 1984. Ideologija, cinizem, punk. Filozofija skozi psihoanalizo 1. Ljubljana: Univerzum. Archival Sources Arhiv Republike Slovenije, 1931 Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve So-cialisticnerepublike Slovenije(rsnzsrs),Uprava za analitiko1982,ma­701_108, Aktivnost slovenske politicne emigracije.