Jugonostalgia

[Kan Yuvigi Asparukh]

I returned from Macedonia soon and there I found a lot of people being sad about the separation of Yugoslavia. There was some kind of nostalgia about the "better" socialistic times (the big united country, the powerful economy, no wars and ethnic conflicts, free travel and etc.) I'm interested in how wide spread is this phenomenon in your country. I'll be glad if you share your opinion.

[Ostrogorski]

Well, Macedonians are like that, a real socialist Yugoslav product, that's why they can't identify neither with Serbian nor Bulgarian ethnos.

But that obviously didn't stopped their government in the '90ies from seceding from Yugoslavia, so I find their claims totally dishonest.

In Serbia generally except few nut cases and even fewer old people (or to say better old school commies), no one gives a damn about Tito's Yugoslavia.

Anyway, have you ever read Alexander Dugin's proposal about the common state of Serbia and Bulgaria, where Macedonians should play a key factor?

[Marulus]

A more appropriate and a more accurate title to this thread would be: necrophilia.

[M.R.]

This Jugonostalgia is a big joke and is promoted by the media and other weapons of the system. Mainly because any kind of anti-capitalism would be linked to this stupidity, so if you say you're against capitalism people will most likely thing that you're one of "it was better in YU" kind of freaks.

[Marulus]

Originally Posted by Ostrogorski

In Serbia generally except few nut cases and even fewer old people (or to say better old school commies), no one gives a damn about Tito's Yugoslavia.

OK. But it remains the fact that Serbia and Montenegro were united in a federation which bore the name Yugoslavia, until March 1, 2003. Why such a long insistance on that name and on that concept - albeit in a reduced form?

[Monolith]

Originally Posted by Marulus

Why such a long insistance on that name and on that concept - albeit in a reduced form?

The name was usurped by these two states, or to be more precise by their political leadership, in order to claim the legal successorship of the ex-federation and its vast monetary supplies abroad. I believe this was due the isolation of the Serbia and Montenegro during the war, which brought the skyrocketing inflation and unemployment, so they needed the capital in order to prevent their economies from reaching the bottom.
There is another possible explanation and it says that their "elites" didn't give a s*** about their economy, and did it because they wanted the money for themselves.

[Vincent]

It's the main street in Sarajevo. It's still called 'Ulica maršala Tita' or just 'Titova ulica'.

[Ostrogorski]

Originally Posted by Marulus

OK. But it remains the fact that Serbia and Montenegro were united in a federation which bore the name Yugoslavia, until March 1, 2003. Why such a long insistance on that name and on that concept - albeit in a reduced form?

Good question. Probably because of Milošević's latent communism. After all Socialist party of Serbia was nothing but League of communists of Serbia that just changed it's name. His wife's party was called Yugoslav united left, and was made by various parties including League of communists - the movement for Yugoslavia, which was a party that JNA generals formed few months after the war started.

But generally after 1995 the very name Yugoslavia, for a union of Serbia and Montenegro, was just a formality. No one in Serbia believed in Yugoslav "brotherhood and unity" crap anymore, except those commies in the government.

Even after the 1991 they continued to bullshit about 2 "separate but friendly nations", how they called Serbs and montenegrins. Having this in mind it's pretty amazing that 40% of people today in Montenegro still consider themselves as Serbs. Titoist ideological madness of Milošević family almost destroyed us. Luckily democratic politicians sponsored by west are here to finish the job. We don't need foreign enemies as nation, we already have loads and loads of inner enemies.

As for legal succession, Serbia is indeed only legal successor to Yugoslavia, not just because other republics seceded, but also because Serbia was only country (except Montenegro) that had internationally recognized status that was transfered to Yugoslavia the day Yugoslavia was created.

[Heretik]

Originally Posted by Marulus

A more appropriate and a more accurate title to this thread would be: necrophilia.

Coprophagia.

[Kan Yuvigi Asparukh]

Hah, I really meant mostly Bosnia when I started the thread. I presume that there are larger number of jugonostalgicari there, just like Macedonia, because they are both a Yugoslav product. I'm just wondering how long can sustain this Balkan phenomenon - Republic of Bosnia&Hercegovina.

[Monolith]

Originally Posted by Ostrogorski

As for legal succession, Serbia is indeed only legal successor to Yugoslavia, not just because other republics seceded, but also because Serbia was only country (except Montenegro) that had internationally recognized status that was transfered to Yugoslavia the day Yugoslavia was created.

I hope you understand what you wrote here. Nonetheless, you've deserved yourself a

Anyway, we're already off topic so I won't further discuss that matter in this thread.

[Marulus]

Some freemasonic and pro-globalist circles may be involved in spreading this sentiment.

[Heretik]

Originally Posted by Kan Yuvigi Asparukh

Hah, I really meant mostly Bosnia when I started the thread. I presume that there are larger number of jugonostalgicari there, just like Macedonia, because they are both a Yugoslav product. I'm just wondering how long can sustain this Balkan phenomenon - Republic of Bosnia&Hercegovina.

[I.M.R.O.]

That's not true.
Maybe old Macedonians have Yugo nostalgy but Young are more nationalists

[Sergius]

"IMRO," nice name. Good to see a FYROManian proud of being Bulgarian.

[Marulus]

Originally Posted by Faustas

"IMRO," nice name. Good to see a FYROManian proud of being Bulgarian.

IMRO? What is that? I know only of VMRO (Vnatrešnja Makedonska Revolucionarna Organizacija).

[Marulus]

Originally Posted by Ostrogorski

As for legal succession, Serbia is indeed only legal successor to Yugoslavia, not just because other republics seceded, but also because Serbia was only country (except Montenegro) that had internationally recognized status that was transfered to Yugoslavia the day Yugoslavia was created.

I think you are wrong here. I mean, I am not questioning your assumption on principle, whether or not Serbia and Montenegro should be considered as the only legal successors to Yugoslavia. That is a topic for another discussion. I am referring to the fact that Serbia is not considered the only successor of Yugoslavia. As far as I can remember, there were negotiations on succession, several years ago, involving all states of the former Yugoslavia. And I am not sure whether they ended. I think not.

It is another matter that the so-called Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" (Serbia and Montenegro) had de facto taken over the succession of the former Yugoslavia in 1992. It had happened due to war and the messy break-up of Yugoslavia in general.