The Cold War witnessed a stark ideological divide regarding the nature of science. The Western Bloc championed autonomous, value-neutral science, while the Eastern Bloc promoted "partisanship"—science serving class interests. Yugoslavia, initially aligned with the Soviet Union, adopted this partisan model, reflecting its commitment to socialist modernization and industrialization. However, after the 1948 break with the USSR, Yugoslavia opened to the West, adopting Socialist Self-Management. This study explores how this geopolitical shift and subsequent socio-economic changes impacted Yugoslav science. The research analyzes the interplay between the two dominant Cold War ideologies of science within the unique context of Yugoslavia's semi-peripheral position, examining how the country navigated between the two opposing views and adapted its scientific system accordingly. The study moves beyond a simplistic ideology-critique framework, employing an ideology-theoretical approach to understand the mechanisms of hegemonic ideas in shaping Yugoslav scientific discourse and practice.

The study draws upon existing literature on Cold War science, contrasting the Western ideal of autonomous, apolitical science with the Soviet emphasis on class-conscious science. It examines works by authors such as Polanyi, Merton, Lenin, and others to establish the theoretical framework for understanding the two contrasting positions. The literature review also highlights the limitations of both approaches in practice, acknowledging that both blocs deviated significantly from their stated principles. The study acknowledges the increasing recognition of the ideological function of discourse surrounding free and apolitical science and the use of science by the Western Bloc during the Cold War. It further examines critiques of Soviet science, focusing on the influence of the Bolshevik state apparatus and the arguments that some Bolshevik decisions didn't always align with working-class interests. The study lays the groundwork for understanding the specific ideological nuances of Yugoslav science within this broader context.

This study employs a comparative historical analysis to explore the evolution of Yugoslav science before and after its break with the USSR in 1948. It examines primary sources such as archival documents (including documents from the Arhiv Jugoslavije), journals (e.g., *Journal of the Society for Cultural Cooperation of Yugoslavia and the USSR*, *Priroda*, *Nauka i priroda*, *Pogledi*, *Nauka i tehnika*), speeches by Yugoslav leaders (Tito, Kardelj, Đilas), and publications reflecting the dominant scientific and political discourse of the period. The analysis compares the organizational model, funding mechanisms, and official discourse regarding science in Yugoslavia under both the Soviet-influenced and the post-1948 systems. The study uses both ideology-critique and ideology-theoretical approaches to understand the shifts in Yugoslav science, avoiding simplistic views of ideology as mere false consciousness. The focus is on the mechanisms, processes, and structures that enabled the hegemony of specific ideas within the Yugoslav context. The study’s comparative methodology allows for nuanced insights into the interplay of geopolitical, socio-economic, and ideological factors shaping the Yugoslav scientific landscape.

Before the 1948 break, Yugoslav science largely mirrored the Soviet model, emphasizing centralized planning, partisanship, and the integration of theory and practice. This was reflected in the structure of scientific organizations, funding mechanisms, and dominant discourse. The Soviet model emphasized planned economies and the subordination of science to state goals. Publications such as *The Academy of Sciences of the Soviet Union* were translated and disseminated, promoting the Soviet approach. Journals like *Journal of the Society for Cultural Cooperation of Yugoslavia and the USSR* actively promoted Soviet ideology, including its views on planning and the perceived failings of "bourgeois science." After the break, the geopolitical shift toward the West and the adoption of Socialist Self-Management led to significant changes. Decentralization of the economy weakened the centralized Soviet model of scientific organization. The role of the Yugoslav Council of Academies diminished, and funding mechanisms shifted toward a system that involved more direct interaction between scientific institutions and economic actors. The dominant discourse also evolved, reflecting the greater emphasis on scientific autonomy and less direct state intervention. Speeches by prominent figures like Kardelj and Đilas criticized the Soviet approach, highlighting its bureaucratic elements and advocating for increased freedom in scientific work. While Yugoslavia maintained its socialist ideology, the emphasis shifted away from the rigid Soviet model, incorporating elements compatible with the Western ideal of autonomous science. This is reflected in the increased openness to collaboration with Western institutions and the waning influence of Michurinist biology. The study highlights the complex interplay between the stated socialist ideology and the pragmatic adjustments necessary to navigate the Cold War geopolitical landscape, indicating a blurring of the lines between autonomous and partisan science, even in a socialist context.

The study's findings demonstrate that the evolution of Yugoslav science was not solely determined by the proclaimed ideological stances on the nature of science during the Cold War. The significant changes observed after the 1948 break with the USSR were deeply shaped by the country's geopolitical realignment, its shift toward a market-oriented economy (albeit a controlled one), and its internal political dynamics. The study reveals that even within a socialist framework, the pursuit of autonomy and freedom in science could coexist with broader societal and economic goals. The changes in Yugoslav science demonstrate how a semi-peripheral nation might adapt its scientific system to balance the competing pressures of ideological adherence and the realities of its geopolitical and socio-economic circumstances. While elements of "autonomous" science gained traction, the changes were mediated by the Yugoslav Communist Party, reflecting a deliberate strategic adjustment rather than a complete abandonment of socialist principles. The study also demonstrates how both Western and Eastern bloc scientific paradigms deviated from their ideal-typical formulations in practice, challenging simplistic dichotomies.

This study offers a nuanced perspective on the evolution of Yugoslav science during the Cold War, highlighting the complex interaction between geopolitical shifts, socio-economic transformations, and ideological pressures. The case of Yugoslavia reveals that the rigid dichotomy between autonomous and partisan science, as presented in Cold War rhetoric, does not fully capture the complexities of scientific practice in a semi-peripheral socialist nation. Future research could further explore the experiences of other semi-peripheral nations during the Cold War, providing a richer understanding of the multifaceted relationship between science, ideology, and the state.

The study primarily focuses on the official discourse and organizational structures of Yugoslav science. While it considers the impact of these factors on scientific practice, a deeper exploration of individual scientists' experiences and the specifics of scientific research within various disciplines could provide more detailed insights. The study also acknowledges the limitations of relying solely on publicly available documents and journals, recognizing the potential influence of state control on the representation of scientific activity. Further research incorporating archival materials not yet publicly available could provide even greater clarity.