COUNTER-REVOLUTION MADE ME A FILMMAKER
Fiorella Rabuffetti* conversation with Dimitar Anakiev
Fiorella Rabuffetti (FR): How
did your life change when you were erased and how did it change when
you got your status back?
Dimitar Anakiev (DA): In
my case the transition was gradual because I had valid Yugoslav
passport until 1994. So the state Yugoslavia ceased to exist but its
documents were valid and recognized internationally. So I was able to
travel to Serbia (via Hungary because in Croatia was war) and back
until 1994. The Slovenian police “solved the problem” of valid
Yugoslav documents by strong control on the Hungarian border,
creating checking points and pushing back all passengers with valid
Yugoslav documents. They were interested only in passengers coming
from Ex-YU republics so only Hungarian border was guarded like that.
Only there they openly violated international law. So I then traveled
to Italy (Hungary, Austria, Italy) and crossed the border from
Italian side without any problem.
The
problem started when my passport expired. Then I was forced to stay
in Slovenia, where I had apartment on my name and my wife (Slovenian
by ethnic origin) and daughter lived there. So, no valid documents in
a hostile social circumstances (nationalistic state propaganda in all
media), no job, not even car driving possible, but all bills came on
my name (apartment rental, electricity, TV, telephone, water...). So
I was erased only for my rights, not for obligations. That speaks
enough that it was not “blind process” of chaos but very well
thoughtful political tool of collective ostracism.
(FR): Did
the hardships you faced as an erased person started when you were
erased, or were they already part of your life and they worsened? Are
there relatives and friends who were supporting you through those
hardships? If yes, how did they help you? How did erasure impact in
particular your family and social life?
(DA): In
the beginning it looked like a chaos, like a childhood
illness of the new state
and we needed years, more than a decade, to understand that it is
clear state politics hostile to a group of people. You know,
socialist Yugoslavia was multicultural society ruled by the ideology
of “brotherhood and unity” and we was not able to understand
permanent change of ideology: from “brotherhood and unity” to
racism and ethnocentric nationalism. We thought it is temporary until
they take power. So we were waiting positive changes in the manner:
“everything will be fine soon”. But no. Erased people never met
better time. Ethnic nationalism and racism become official ideology
of “democratic” Slovenian state until today. For example, today I
cannot officially screen any of my films about Erased, particularly
last one Slovenia My Homeland.
A
digression: It is interesting that defenders of “free speech” (it
was cult topic during the Cold War) are not interested at all for
such contemporary problem in “democratic” countries like
Slovenia.
But
let us continue the explanation: similar as we, Erased, were confused
with ideological change the same were with Slovenian people in
general, even for many members of ruling apparatus.
You
must know that rulers remained the same after the political changes
of the fall of Yugoslavia. For example: the General Secretary of
Slovenian Communist Party, Milan Kučan, become the President of
democratic Slovenia for long time. Members of communist party just by
the night changed from “communists” to nationalistic rulers and
racists or liberals. So, if the top of the communist party apparatus
- which implemented the ideological change - knew what they do, many
common people, including members of the communist party on the lower
level, were not able to change so fast. The ruling apparatus too
needed more than decade to became monolithic again, in the very
Stalinist manner (our communists were of Stalinist type, of course).
In between many of Erased were individually supported not only by
common people, neighbors, family members, colleagues or friends but
also by some members of ruling apparatus... More one example from my
experience of political filmmaker:
When
I started my filmmaker career (I was not allowed to work as a medical
doctor in Slovenian democracy) I started making films to face the
destructive force of counter-revolution and discrimination in
Slovenia and Ex-Yugoslavia. The counter-revolution made me filmmaker.
Let me recall here the words of famous film director, engineer by
formal vocation, Sergei Eisenstein, who once said that October
revolution made him create films...
So,
in the beginning, my basically political, critical, filmmaking was
supported strongly even from the parts of ruling apparatus. Because
there was an urgent need to rethink social situation. Example for the
support: I got money from the Ministry of Culture of Slovenia to film
Slovenia My Homeland. But when I finished the film it was not
possible to screen it anywhere officially in Slovenia. So, there were
many paradoxes and I think explained why.
This
all is about individual experience. Let us call it “The First
phase”. But after more than decade, twelve years latter, Erased
started to organize political struggle for own liberation. That is
second, organized, phase.
I
must stress here that we never got support for our political
struggle – not from political parties, domestic or foreign, not
from civil organizations, not from “activists” or “independent
intellectuals”, even not from Noam Chomsky with whom I changed
mails in 90' describing the situation, nor Slavoj Žižek, Slovenian
popular Marxist – he never said a single word about Erased but he
was agitating for the NATO...
Even
more, ones who apparently supported Erased, did this in an exclusive
manner to change the character of our fight, from political fight
into cultural fight (cultural fight is a surrogate to political
fight), that means we, the Erased, were abused for cultural fight
between false liberal and false conservative groups of Slovenian
converted communists: in such a way our political rights were
replaced with our human rights. We
were not allowed a political fight, our political rights were
stripped, this is the essence of erasure. Instead of political rights
they offered us struggle for human rights. That is why no one of
people responsible for erasure were sued for erasing people, even the
names are very well known and all the act of erasure is documented
very well.
This
change of perspective of political fight to cultural fight is very
important. From the short perspective of cultural fight it seems that
the main evil in the case of Erased are people around Janez Janša,
leader of right wing, also ex-communist. But from the political
perspective it is clear that behind the case of Erased is in fact
Milan Kučan and his team of converted communists... My late friend,
Aca Todorović, wrote 4 (four) letters to president Milan Kučan,
never got an answer. Janša is politically weak to make erasure
functional nearly 30 years even he tried to misuse the topic in
cultural fight for the power.
It
is very important what kind of glasses you have on your nose when you
talk about politics. Because you see very different things.
(FR): As
an erased person, what were your experiences with other erased
people, with Slovenian citizens and with immigrants? Do you feel your
experience as an erased person changed your perception of Slovenian
citizens and immigrants? If yes, how so?
(DA): No
one knows real number of Erased people because no independent
commission did counting. We only have government statement about.
Only this fact is enough to understand that Slovenian government had
free hands to do what they want in the case of Erased. No monitoring
of “international community”. Helsinki Monitor reported about
80.000 erased people but was soon victim of political pressure and
media lynch. Of all this Erased only 10-15 were permanent activists
in political struggle against the government and perhaps plus 20-30
took part in struggle occasionally. So very small number. I know many
Erased who never announced of being erased. People are afraid, it is
not easy to openly confront politics of the government. There
should be no illusions about erased people. We are not better nor
worst than other people. I think formal status does not characterize
people. Many citizens tried to help us in different ways and also
many other citizens accepted nationalistic rhetoric of the
government. Very similar is with immigrants.
As
an Erased I can only say that I better understand problems of
immigrants but we are not the same. Immigrant is a temporary
situation until one got documents – Erased is for ever erased.
Erased is like Negro, it is an exclusive problem of racism. Of course
you can politicize immigration in racist way but it is separate story
with own context. Basically Erased are not immigrants, even politics
like to present them in that way. All Erased had permanent residence
before being erased, many of them were born in Slovenia (6000
children among Erased) and act of erasing had exclusive political
goals, with roots in WW2.
(FR): What
identification and travel documents have you had in the course of
your life? Could you please describe what these documents allowed and
didn’t allow you to do, both in principle and in practice [in case
there is a difference]? (i.e., travel abroad, access health care and
education, open a bank account, get a job, pay taxes, insure your
house or car or any other property, register a birth, get married,
rent or buy a place to live, inherit…) What were the consequences
for you and your family of being able or unable to do these things?
(DA): I
will answer your question in that way: now I have all documents but I
am still Erased. In some aspects even worst than when I had no one
document. That means: I can not get medical job, my political films
cannot be officially screened, as a filmmaker I am not mentioned in
any book about Slovenian film... – so the exclusion is
totalitarian, it does not depend only on documents. Being Erased - it
is a political status. We
are forcibly promoted into state enemies.
(FR): What
were the consequences of you being erased in the context of a
transition to a market-based economy, with the dissolution of
socialist Yugoslavia? How did the erasure affect your access to
rights and services in this context?
(DA): The
role of Erased in market-based economy is very interesting and
important. Creating “cultural struggle” around Erased converted
Slovenian communists ensured a thick fog, a curtain, for the mafia
privatization. The public attention was focused on the question of
Erased while in the second and third plan rulers of the country and
their favorites did what they want in economic sector.
In
that way Erased share the destiny of all Yugoslav people in
transition: we are robed, tricked, discriminated.
Just
one detail: during the socialistic times great number of Yugoslavs
had state housing. These apartments in transitional time were offered
in private ownership for symbolic prices to all people living in them
for decades. But not the Erased. How many apartments they took from
us in that way - is not known but surely many thousands. Who took
this money?
(FR): Is
there a place in the world you can call home? If yes, where is that
place and why do you think you feel at home there? What does your
current identity/travel document(s) say next to the “nationality”
line, and what would you like it to say [if it is different from what
it says now]? What role do you think being able to settle where you
feel you belong plays in your wellbeing?
(DA): Basically,
Erased are multicultural people. When you come from Serbia, Bosnia
or, say, Macedonia to Slovenia, then you feel there at home. You can
have many homes. Exactly this they wanted to prevent when converted
communists turned to ethnical nationalism. One home, one people, one
leader, that is the philosophy of erasure.
The
erasure didn't change this multicultural sense in my case. I still
feel at home in Slovenia, in Serbia, in Bosnia... I think many of
Erased are like that. We cannot blame Slovenian people for the crime
of their converted & corrupted Stalinists.
(FR): What
is your perception about the term “erased:” do you feel it is
more a stigmatizing category or an empowering one? Why?
(DA): No
doubts, it is both: stigmatizing and empowering. It is a permanent
political status but also it forced me to explore many directions
that I probably will never go without such stimulation. The
filmmaking is the most important aspect. Then, as a victim of
Stalinism, I needed to study the phenomena of Stalinism very deep.
It
is widely known that Stalin killed nearly all Bolsheviks and created
giant army of apparatchiks. So I needed to understand ideological
differences between Bolshevism (Leninism) and Stalinism. These are
important. I learned among other things that mimicry is one of the
basic Stalinists methods. Very useful in Slovenian situation. Then I
learned that ostracism is also typical element of Stalinist method
(“slander, ostracism and gangsterism” is the way James Canon
described Stalinist method and these three things are exactly what
Erased faced).
Then
I learned that cultural struggle is fake political struggle. I learn
a lot about conformism among intellectuals and “activists” etc.
I
got enormous knowledge in politics and sociology along with artistic
and technical skills in filmmaking
(FR): How
did the decision by the European Human Rights Court Commission
mandating the Slovenian state to issue monetary compensation to the
erased affect you? Did you receive compensation from the Slovenian
state or are you in the process of receiving it? If not, what are the
reasons that decision has not materialized for you? What do you know
about other people who were victims of the erasure: are they
receiving / did they receive compensation at all?
(DA): Money
compensation is very symbolic: 50 EUR for each month of living
without documents. Even so I am among small part of Erased (about
7.000 people, for my knowledge) that received that compensation.
I
witnessed that Slovenian government(s) do all they can to prevent as
much as possible their victims to receive any compensation.
(FR): How
did your experience as an erased person impact your career and
everyday work as a doctor?
(DA): I
practiced medicine out of the system, as a humanitarian doctor.
(FR): Your
work as a filmmaker reflects partly on the experience of erasure
–yours and others’. What role did the erasure play in you
becoming a filmmaker, or devoting more time to filmmaking than
before?
(DA): The
counter-revolution made me a filmmaker, the erasure from official
records, the discrimination. It is my fighting tool, a way of
understanding things, and a way of living. The
opposite image in the mirror from that described by Sergei
Eisenstein.
(FR): Is
filmmaking a form of activism for you? If yes, what would you say you
are fighting for through your activist engagement? Were you engaged
in some form of activism before the erasure? Did you get engaged in
any other causes since you became active in the cause of the erasure?
(DA): There
are film-makers who take part in cultural fight. That means they
treat topics from the conventional left side or right side – in
that way they keep system alive, they do not want to change system,
they serve the system, sometimes they directly serve a political
party, like Michael Moore, for example. Such filmmaker are part of
mainstream, they have access to the market, stable sources of
financing and distribution, they also have possibilities for
conventional life. Even some of them like to call own work
“independent” (formally they perhaps are independent) or
“alternative”, they are not.
My
case is different. I wanted to uncover the character of the system
supported by “international community” that made my life
impossible along with thousands of other Erased and I wanted to
change it. I do not know any other filmmaker with such purpose in
Post-Yugoslavia and the Balkans.
My
film is really political tool for fighting. Some experts call such
filmmaking “Cinema of Resistance”. I consider myself a successor
of the tradition of creating films like Slatan Dudow,
Bulgarian/German film director from relatively early phase of
filmmaking (1930') or Shinsuke Ogawa (active in 1970-90') who did
films for the purpose of political fighting and were really
independent, facing production and distribution problems, censorship
and direct political pressure on their life.
Through
my films I also treat the topic of historic revisionism in the case
of collaboration with Nazism, such is film Last of the Žilniks
(2007), the film that also cannot be officially screened anywhere in
ex-Yugoslavia and also destinies of marginal people like in Serbian
Nails (2007), Amigo (2004), then gentrification of Ljubljana in My
Dear Ghetto (2008), domestic violence in You Are the Only Boss in
This House (2006) but also problem of rights of migrants in the film
Not Allowed (2018)...
Very
early I started writing engaged poetry and I continued until today –
some of the poems are translated into English and published in
Politics/letters and the Typescript..The first book of poetry of
mine, Praise of Sin (1995), with poems from my student age, was more
like youthful rebellion but later I faced historic experience and
turned to the topic of erasure and similar contemporary topics.
(FR): You
have taken a public stance on the erasure through your work as a
filmmaker. Did you engage through this work with the organizations
created by erased people to advocate for the cause, with the NGO
local and international sector, with international organizations, and
with academia? If you did, in what ways?
(DA): My
film Rubbed Out (2004) had a great impact on the movement of erased
people. It had very broad alternative distribution in Slovenia and
was screened in numerous festival in Europe (including IDFA), Africa,
Japan and in New York's Resistance Cinema. It was actually the first
information about the Erased in Slovenia and abroad. I got several
threatening
anonymous letters during the distribution...
Rubbed
Out was crucial for engagement of reformed Italian Communist Party
(RCI) on the side of Erased which lead to the engagement of famous
Italian lawyers Lana & Saccuci and creating the European Human
Rights Court case...
In
Austria, for example, in Vienna, it was screened by Yugoslav
emigration clubs but in Graz it was distributed by Kulturforum, local
NGO. In Slovenia many NGOs took part in distribution of the film, it
was screened in a few domestic festivals including National Film
festival official program...
(FR): Do
you feel that the struggle on the erasure has lost strength in the
past years? If yes, why do you think that is, and what do you think
would need to happen to rekindle it? What are the changes you would
like, or would have liked, to see happen with regards to the erasure?
In what fronts of advocacy do you see progress and what have been the
major setbacks?
(DA): We
achieved some wins in the field of human rights, at
the cost of losing political perspective. But erasure of people in
Slovenia is exclusively political topic. I have no doubts that the
time will come when political dimension of the topic will be
recreated. Because the topic is immanent to all people of
Post-Yugoslavia. That is the topic of integration of our nations and
ethnic groups, multiculturalism, Yugoslav nation and being again the
only master of our common destiny.
*
Fiorella Rabuffetti is a Canadian researcher
Fiorella Rabuffetti is a Canadian researcher
Posts
