Can Europe Learn the Lessons of Yugoslavia?

[The Croat]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Wasn't Tito a Croat?

Let's say he was. Did he do anything for the Croat people? Stalin was Georgian but he never did anything for his own, only for Russia. Communists are like that, they do not emphasise or identify themselves in ethnic terms.

Even then, tito was at best half croatian and half slovene so I fail to see your point.

[Awar]

Originally Posted by The Croat

Let's say he was. Did he do anything for the Croat people? Stalin was Georgian but he never did anything for his own, only for Russia. Communists are like that, they do not emphasise or identify themselves in ethnic terms.

But, Georgia did have a lot of benefits which other nations within SSSR didn't have.

Even then, tito was at best half croatian and half slovene so I fail to see your point.

Terribly sorry man, but according to Zvonimir and yourself, you're just an Australian,
nothing for you to discuss here.

[Awar]

@Zvonimir:

The data shows the significant drop during the period of the economic sanctions.
Most of the sanctions were from 1992-1995, but some of them were held until 2001.

So, what's your point here?

[Zvonimir]

Originally Posted by Awar

The data shows the significant drop during the period of the economic sanctions.

Data also shows that Serbia was poor in a first place so it would be false and very illogical to expect that Serbia was financing Croatia because monetary politics in Yugoslavia always tended to minimize differences in regional economy with investments in undeveloped regions.

Unfortunately I don't have same or similar chart for Croatia but I can easily guess that Croatia had a lot bigger GDP per capita before war because life standard after the war has gotten worse.

Originally Posted by Awar

Most of the sanctions were from 1992-1995, but some of them were held until 2001.

Most radical drop was between 1990 and 1992. This could be explained with costs of war and halt of inflow of Croatian and Slovenia money.

[Awar]

...as you said yourself, you're just guessing, and might I add, deliberately misinterpreting one small graph.

[Zvonimir]

Originally Posted by Awar

...as you said yourself, you're just guessing, and might I add, deliberately misinterpreting one small graph.

What would be correct interpretation of chart?

[Menydh]

Zvonomir,

Originally Posted by Zvonomir

And like I mentioned earlier, Tito wasn't Croat.

Actually, what you mentioned earlier was...

Originally Posted by Zvonomir

He was half Croat from father’s side and half Slovene from mother’s side

That doesn't make him a Serbian or a Montenegrin as we can all see and understand. And it does make him [at least half] ethnically Croat no matter how much you wished that it didn't. And half Slovene. What it doesn't make him is ethnically Serbian by any conceivable mind.

Do yourself a favour and when posting here take much into account that this is not the phora, and that the average poster here is not an American retard accustomed to believe that Hollywood is an Academy of History.

but he considered himself as a Yugoslav and later married a Serbian women.

Why? Did he make a public statement telling "I do not consider myself a Croat"? And even if he had done it, since when can someone change his ethnicity? "Yugoslav", as per your admission, is a political term, not ethnical.

Thus, if you consider that a Croat adscribing to the political concept of Yugoslav is a traitor, then maybe Tito was one in your eyes. But that would still mean that Tito was a Croat traitor.

I am afraid that you guys don't realize of where your minds are still set, but your style when trying to portray the issue here would remind anyone of the coarse propaganda of the Communist era.

Also, reporting Vojvoda's post for laughing at your lame attempt to conceal the truth, and simply typing "yes, he was [a Croat]", doesn't say much in your favour, wouldn't you say?

Originally Posted by Zvonomir

Croatia had war on here territory for 5 years. Forth of country was occupied and third devastated later suffered due to corrupted privatization etc.
But still we have five times bigger GDP per capita.

Oh does terrible sanctions.

Economic and trade sanctions do bring misery to countries, something that everyone knows. Obviously not you. The short, middle and, especially, long term extent of the effects of economic sanctions is very had to fully analyze and quantify even by experts, and still harder the political effects and further economical consequences derived from these political effects.

Originally Posted by Zvonomir

Oh course. I am lying, Zvaci is lying and you don't want talk about it...

Yes, and not just. He is also pathetic as an individual.

His "argument" starts by insulting me and this board..

"I couldn't resist not to react on your diarrhea. I really hate bringing trash from Herpes here, but its so tempting to kick your ass here without having a psychopathic Moorish nanny Mynnd on my back so...here you go."

And ends the same..

"Nice to hear Mynnds Moorish bath for pan-eurotrash turned into a graveyard."

Not the first time he does, and just because he is resented that I don't allow him a free ride here. Well, sorry, I don't care for people living off social benefits or taking free rides on public or community offered resources. Less so for those who believe that they have a natural right to them. For God's sake, he sounds like a damn whining immigrant!

First lie: Stirpes is pan-european..

Stirpes is a project which aims to provide a space for information on past and current affairs, as well as future trends, and discussion between the Nationalist peoples of Europe. Our allegiances and concerns are strictly with every and each of the Nations of Europe, and the doom which threatens the preservation and which endangers the very existance of the peoples of Europe and their Nations, our cultures and our heritages.

We are alien to concepts like Pan-Europeanism, White Nationalism, or any other such constructs which may imply a loss of our individual national identities in favour of an homogeneous pro-European pseudo-identity or, worse, of an amorphous Internationalism based on pseudo-racial delusions.We are simply Europeans and Nationalists, regardless of distinctions in political ideologies and religions.

Not only he is a pathetic and irrelevant individual, but he has also joined the ranks of the trash (as expected from such a character) in a pathetic community of American trashes with similar characters to him. Take "Ebusitanus", another phora moderator, as an example: a pan-europeanist, pro-american white nationalist and, as it could not be otherwise from someone in that line, a German who has renegated of his national character and pretends to pose as what he is not, a Spaniard. Stupid wannabe multiculturalists and pro-americanists all of them.

[Zvonimir]

Thanks you Mynydd, now I know what Yugoslavia was all about.

Tito was Yugoslav.

He came from mixed family. He had mixed marriage. He didn't respected national differences in Yugoslavia. He encouraged imaginary brotherhood between nations. He tried to create new Yugoslavic nation in melting pot process.

What more do you want?

Difference between nationality in ethnical and political sense is sometimes small and he tried to erase that difference.

As for your conflict with Zvaci and other Phora members, I don't care a bit. Settle that with them.

[Menydh]

My conflict with.. ?

I couldn't care less for that slum. You offered the link to the phora and asked if Zvaci was lying, and I showed you that he is a compulsive liar.

That's all. Other than that, the whole argument is rather stupid since it is unrelated to any kind of nationalism but to small village hooliganism.

[Awar]

Ok, the topic of the thread is :

Can Europe Learn the Lessons of Yugoslavia?
Or will it continue to build societies destined to explode?

Not 'Tito's ethnicity'... we've gone far enough with it.

From my perspective Yugoslavia wasn't "destined to explode"
it should've transformed into something more along the lines of BeNeLux,
but, it seems that nobody in Europe, or the world wanted a strong, independent
economy in the Balkans. Especially not during the rise of the EU.

[Menydh]

In fact the issue of Tito being a Croat means peanuts, but it does make a point to show how futile and useless are these 'balkanic' hostilities. I don't expect someone like Zvaci to understand this, but I am sure that Zvonomir will.

The perspective of a benelux-like association would have made much sense from a geo-political point of view, while not interfering in the normal evolution of the national ethnic identities and sovereignties.

If the pride of Croatian nationalists is that this never happened and that they will soon join "the West", the E.U., while Serbia will remain outside for the moment, then they should be prepared to accept the reality that this implies: the loss of their national sovereignty to a gang of useless bureaucrats who know nothing about Croatia, the Balkan region, nor do the care about it.

[Zvonimir]

I fully agree with Zvaci's observation and comment about comparison Yugoslavia and Germany ("Germany was united from within and traditionally divided from outside, Yugoslavia was created from outside, and divided from within").

Yugoslavia was artificial multiethnic state made without will of majority of people in every nation (Macedonia was probably exception). Only thing that kept state alive was strong Tito's dictatorship and his foul vision of new homogenous Yugoslavian nation. He was master in balancing between western powers of democracy and communistic powers from the east, and balancing between Serbian ultra centralistic stream and Croatian/Slovene federalist stream inside state. Even he in his last years realized that this melting pot was impossible to achieve so he turned towards vision of union of nation (constitution from 1974, only good thing he ever did for Croatian nation). After his death collapse of Yugoslavia was evident and it was only matter of time and matter of way and means by which it will be destroyed.

Almost same thing goes for first Yugoslavia (kingdom) only then dictator was Serbian king and world powers were different (democracy of Great Britain/France and Third Reich).

If someone can not learn from those two historical examples that it is impossible to have union between nations in this part of Europe because of bloody past and vast cultural differences than I rest my case because that person is blind and stupid or ignorant.

As for European Union goes, I am fully aware that Croatia when enters (it is only matter of time) will lose part of national sovereignty and that Croatia will be submitted to Brussels and I don't like it but it is only way to go because it would be disaster from economy to stay isolated in from everyone else in long run.

It is not question about being western or eastern because Croatia have been through all history part of western civilization. Yugoslavia didn't take it away from us and EU certainly wouldn't give back something we already have. In fact, I believe that best way for Croatian cultural development and preservation would be isolation from both Serbia (and other eastern neighbors) and EU but that possibility is unfortunately ruled out.

[Zrinski]

Originally Posted by Awar

Which is quite funny, because everyone was fed with such propaganda.
Serbs were continually told that "all the money from Serbia is going to Croats",
while Macedonians thought their money is going to Slovenia, or Croats who thought that Serbia is being built from Croatian money.

I am sorry, but thats not true. The last communist congres issued a demand that more richer countries(Croatia and Slovenia) give more money into the Yugoslav central budget. This demand was issued because Serbia and the rest of Yugoslavia were stagnating while the mentioned two countries above were prospering and were getting more and more developed. This was the main reason why Croatia and Slovenia opposed to it what led to an open conflict.

Also the reason why Croatia and Slovenia propsered opposed to the rest of Yugoslavia was not in Tito....especially since this all was happening 10 years after his death...

Originally Posted by Awar

The war wasn't waged on the entire teritory of Croatia.
Overwhelmingly in the parts where Serbs were the majority.

The 'invading army' didn't attack Croatia's economy.

Again this is incorrect and I would dare to say a blatant lie. The "Yugoslav" Army and Serb rebel terrorists bombarded more than 1/2(more around 3/5) of Croatia including one of the most advanced and prosperous industrial regions of Osijek along with regions of Zadar, Dubrovnik, Sisak and many more destroying industry in those regions. The regions of Croatia where Serbs were a majority were the poorest regions in Croatia and had almost no industry, but were strickly agrarian(mostly sheep herding, etc...).
This all brought to crushing of the agrarian branch and most of the other industrial branches. The consequences of this can be easily seen if to this day when Slavonia is now a poorest region in Croatia while before the war and before that was the richest province not only in Croatia but in whole region.

We too have suffered through corrupt privatization process
where the most profitable industries were first ruined, and then sold
for pennies. This was further magnified by the sanctions:

Thats something totally else...

Look at what the sanctions did to Iraq. From one of the most advanced countries in the region, to a place where millions died from hunger.

The sanctions did nothing to Iraq. The hunger and starvation were caused by Saddam and his lackey. While his people was hungry he built palaces and villas and God knows what else....

You're lying and hiding the facts, as I've already proven. End of discussion.

Wow...what an argument...you know until you have actually proven something you cannot claim you proved it.

Fake is fake, doesn't matter who posts it.

Indeed. Ironic that it comes from you.

Tito was a Croat, as his father was one.
Doesn't matter to which ideology he ( officially ) belonged to.

Tito was what he thought of himself. He recognized both his Croatian and Slovenian origins, but above all he considered himself to be a Yugoslav. Also emphasizing that Tito was a Croat and that because of this Croats had some use is a blatant and ignorrant lie. The man lived in Serbia, had a Serb wife and most of his staff was Serb, but that all is totally irrelevant since while he was alive and in power to do what is nescesarry no ethnic group wheter it was a Serb, Croat or Slovene was in favour. After his death...well then it started....

You have a complaints section for that, and a 'report bad post' button.
I should issue you a warning for complaining outside that section.

Of course...I think you both proved how objective you are when it comes to issuing warnings. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I don't have nothing about warning people and even banning them if it proves when they are clearly violating the rules of the forum, but Vojvoda and occasianlly you are violating the priiliged position you have as a mod and are showing clear disrespect to this forum and to the people who visit it.

[Zrinski]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Wasn't Tito a Croat?

Yes his father was a Croat and his mother was a Slovenian. His wife was a Serbian. This has to do with what?

[Menydh]

Originally Posted by Zrinski

Yes his father was a Croat and his mother was a Slovenian. His wife was a Serbian. This has to do with what?

"In fact the issue of Tito being a Croat means peanuts, but it does make a point to show how futile and useless are these 'balkanic' hostilities. I don't expect someone like Zvaci to understand this, but I am sure that Zvonomir will."
Can Europe Learn the Lessons of Yugoslavia?

[Awar]

Originally Posted by Zrinski

I am sorry, but thats not true. The last communist congres issued a demand that more richer countries(Croatia and Slovenia) give more money into the Yugoslav central budget. This demand was issued because Serbia and the rest of Yugoslavia were stagnating while the mentioned two countries above were prospering and were getting more and more developed. This was the main reason why Croatia and Slovenia opposed to it what led to an open conflict.

Even though that's not fully true, it can only be explained by what I
said earlier: CORRUPT LEADERSHIP.
Who in their right mind would expect to give out such a decision,
and not expect tension afterwards.

But, what's sad is that people are sheep, and thus Croats and Serbs see eachother as enemies, while those who ignited the conflict ( and made a huge ammount of money and power ) weren't even blamed.

I suspect these people worked for foreigners, and for their own interests,
not interests of any people.

Also the reason why Croatia and Slovenia propsered opposed to the rest of Yugoslavia was not in Tito....especially since this all was happening 10 years after his death...

It's funny how you try to twist the facts around, I give you that,
you're quite humorous.

Something one does today has effects that go on into the future.
Or is that a problem for you to comprehend?

During the Balkan wars, WW1, WW2, and during the 1990's up until 1999,
the most affected areas were Serbia and Montenegro.
Croatia and Slovenia were out of it.

There's no wonder why Serbia wasn't as developed as other countries which weren't as war-torn.

During the XX century, Serbs managed to build their country up from scratch several times. Which then asks the question why some other countries which evaded wartime destruction didn't succeed more.

Quo