Slovenian-Austrian/German controversial issues

[Marcus Marulus]

Originally Posted by M.R.

Anyway, we can continue with Maribor/Marburg question if you want, since I'm interested what you'll say about that, Agrippa. There's a banner on The Thing forum (I don't know if you're there) claiming Maribor (Marburg) to be Germanic city. Do you agree with that?

I am interested in the name Maribor. A Slovenian historian (who is, by the way, quite nationalistically minded) once told me that the town in question was called Marpurg by Slovenians until 1918 and that it was in the interwar period that the more Slavic sounding name Maribor was invented. I am just referring what he told, don't have any clue whether it's true.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by M.R.

I don't really think this thread is necessary since this discussion is over, as everyone, more or less, said what he wanted to say on this subject.

Anyway, we can continue with Maribor/Marburg question if you want, since I'm interested what you'll say about that, Agrippa. There's a banner on The Thing forum (I don't know if you're there) claiming Maribor (Marburg) to be Germanic city. Do you agree with that?

Obviously it is a German city, like many others where too, just to mention cities like Prag and Pressburg:

Volkszählung 1890 ergab 19898 Einwohner, davon 2653 slowenischsprachig

Maribor - Wikipedia

So an overwhelming German majority even in the early 20th century.

Actually its such a clear case, one doesnt have to discuss it even, more interesting is the history of cities like Prag, Pressburg (Bratislava) and of course, Laibach:
Ljubljana - Wikipedia

Those cities were largely German foundations, but became Slavic due to the constant influx of immigrants from the surrounding rural areas in later time, when the urbanisation began to increase and the cities lost their special status.

[M.R.]

Ljubljana not really, but Maribor is a different case. However I don't care much about those 2 cities, as I consider rural areas to be the real backbone of nation and it's land.

I just wanted to make sure that this 80% before WWI is true.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by M.R.

as I consider rural areas to be the real backbone of nation and it's land.

A) You are right, because of the contraselective tendencies of the cities. They attract usually the better elements of a population, but those dont reproduce on the long run as successfully as the rural population. This means that the "urban inhabitants" being usually "refreshed" or even "substituted" on the long run, even more so if the urbanisation is rising - an interesting exception were the Jews which managed better than others to survive in urban areas, which their culture and racial variants might partially predict actually.

This is a very negative and dysgenic trend and now even worse all over Europe because the countryside is "culturally urbanised" and became more Liberal-Marxist as well. So "the reservoirs" are drying out themselves. This was bad from medieval times on already, but not its drastically worsening as everybody can see.

The above mentioned was of course the great problem of all the German cities in the East, which were founded by those early occidental culture bearers, often in an area which had low population densities, a low cultural development and so on. But on the long run, the outcome was clear if the surrounding areas couldnt be Germanized...

B) Because of the above mentioned, as a Slovenian, you have to say that, because the Western culture came to you through Germans and Italians respectively, Slovenians had no larger cities on their own.
Germans functioned as a transmitter of higher occidental culture to the East - not just Germans, but also Dutch (which were at that time largely the same anyway), Wallonians, French and Italians, but primarily, if considering numbers and impact, Germans of course.

The problem of Slavs, this is my personal opinion, was that they were not really thankful but became envy of the Germans and since those had a dominant position, began to hate them in an often rather primitive way. The Germans, in a privileged position, on the other hand, began to fear the rising numbers of the Slav peasantry and their hate. They also had a strong feeling for their function and position as culture bearers and at the beginning even tried to help many "underdeveloped" nations to develop their own national culture in a rather romantic way. But again, this early romantic Nationalism of Germans, which wasnt driven by hatred at all, wasnt thanked by the others, but intensified the conflicts already present...

Poles f.e. had this envy and hate the same time, and had a similar position in the Ukrainian-Belorussian areas, since they were again, closer to the cultural centre of Europe than those were.

Also compare:
The European family, "Banana" and the Hajnal Line

In a way, Slovenians are culturally "Germanized Slavs". Beside the language, there is little which makes them that different by culture.

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

B) Because of the above mentioned, as a Slovenian, you have to say that, because the Western culture came to you through Germans and Italians respectively, Slovenians had no larger cities on their own.

Western culture is too broad term and doesn't mean much. I rather call it European culture, adn it didn't come to us trough Germans and Italians, it was already here as we're part of Europe and European culture. After the fall of Roman empire we were equal part of Catholic Europe just like Germans or Italians. If you want to speak about "western culture" in terms of Greek and Roman culture, than I have to inform you that our ancestors brought that culture to you and not the other way around, since we were part of Roman empire and you were not. But than again, I'm not that big fan of Roman empire anyway.

Europe itself is more or less based on Catholicism, which has it's roots also in Roman and Greek civilization. No one brought culture to us as we had our culture already, it was just influenced trough history by other cultures and we were part of the European civilization since the begining.

Germans functioned as a transmitter of higher occidental culture to the East - not just Germans, but also Dutch (which were at that time largely the same anyway), Wallonians, French and Italians, but primarily, if considering numbers and impact, Germans of course.

Slovenia is not on the east of Europe, but the same as most of Germany in central Europe. You transmitted this Roman and Greek culture to them and Roman empire transmitted that to you.

The problem of Slavs, this is my personal opinion, was that they were not really thankful but became envy of the Germans and since those had a dominant position, began to hate them in an often rather primitive way. The Germans, in a privileged position, on the other hand, began to fear the rising numbers of the Slav peasantry and their hate.

Slavs is again too broad term and doesn't really mean much in this context due to difference between different Slavic nations.

They also had a strong feeling for their function and position as culture bearers and at the beginning even tried to help many "underdeveloped" nations to develop their own national culture in a rather romantic way.

This is again Germanic imperialist crap, speaking about developing other nation's cultures. I don't see anything wrong with our culture in rural areas, we're maybe farmer nation, but those were honest people who cared about themselves and lived more healthy life than degenerates in cities. It's better to be a peasant than be a part of so called "culturalized" world which later destroyed or tried to destroy other cultures in most barbaric and unculturalized way as possible.

But again, this early romantic Nationalism of Germans, which wasnt driven by hatred at all, wasnt thanked by the others, but intensified the conflicts already present...

Of course it was driven by hatred and it didn't have much to do with nationalism in the first place. Your superiority complex about having some kind of higher culture than us is what inspired Germanic imperialism. Even today, so-called nationalists from your country still think that way (not all though).

In a way, Slovenians are culturally "Germanized Slavs". Beside the language, there is little which makes them that different by culture.

You don't know much about Slovenian culture if you're making that kind of claims. We have our own culture, but it's influenced by other culture depending on the region. Northern Slovenia (Styria and Gorenjska) have been influenced greatly by German culture, I can't deny that and there are really much similiarities between those two regions and Germany. The problem however, and also the reason why you and many others make that claim, is that popular image of Slovenian identity is many times more connected with northern Slovenia and ignores rest of Slovenia, so that's why when someone thinks of Slovenia, he has the image of Triglav and Alps and rest of Gorenjska.

You'd be surprised if you visited my region, in eastern Slovenia, which by the way never was under any Germanic rule neither was there any process of Germanization, that there are very little similarities with Germany, if there are any. Or in southern Slovenia like Bela Krajina for example, which was influenced by Balkan culture during history. As I said in some other thread, there is no Slovenian identity as a whole, but rather it consists of several regional identities and the fact that we share some common history. We're also in the middle of Europe, where northern Europe meats southern Europe, between Balkan and Germanic lands.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by M.R.

Western culture is too broad term and doesn't mean much. I rather call it European culture, adn it didn't come to us trough Germans and Italians, it was already here as we're part of Europe and European culture. After the fall of Roman empire we were equal part of Catholic Europe just like Germans or Italians. If you want to speak about "western culture" in terms of Greek and Roman culture, than I have to inform you that our ancestors brought that culture to you and not the other way around, since we were part of Roman empire and you were not. But than again, I'm not that big fan of Roman empire anyway.

Read the link posted. European cultures and occidental culture of the Romano-Germanic kind, born in the Frankish core areas and Northern Italy, is not the same obviously, since the early Balts were of course European already without a doubt, to use an example, but they werent occidental in the same sense as 11th century France and Germany f.e.

Europe itself is more or less based on Catholicism, which has it's roots also in Roman and Greek civilization. No one brought culture to us as we had our culture already, it was just influenced trough history by other cultures and we were part of the European civilization since the begining.

Well, the newer developments, to put it that way, came from somewhere else. A simple proof is that Slovenians had no larger cities of their own, structured in an occidental-Western way.

Slovenia is not on the east of Europe, but the same as most of Germany in central Europe. You transmitted this Roman and Greek culture to them and Roman empire transmitted that to you.

Germanics became part of that culture with time too, but the difference is the were founders or at least co-founders and spread it.

Slavs is again too broad term and doesn't really mean much in this context due to difference between different Slavic nations.

Well, there were just two really important influences on all Slavic nations if talking about occidental culture, "the West" (Frankish Empire) and "the East" (Byzantine Empire). Most came from those two influences and like you said yourself, Slovenians were mostly on the Western side (Catholicism, German and Italian culture).

This is again Germanic imperialist crap, speaking about developing other nation's cultures. I don't see anything wrong with our culture in rural areas

Its not about right or wrong, but organisation, the kind of and its effectiveness.

we're maybe farmer nation, but those were honest people who cared about themselves and lived more healthy life than degenerates in cities.

Depends. Living as a farmer didnt helped European people to evolve on, but rather degenerate too. I dont say cities are better, since they are worse, even if the better rural elements usually go to the cities (more often).

Of course it was driven by hatred and it didn't have much to do with nationalism in the first place. Your superiority complex about having some kind of higher culture than us is what inspired Germanic imperialism. Even today, so-called nationalists from your country still think that way (not all though).

This was no "superiority complex", but reality. It might have become a "superiority complex" in some cases though, like it was an "inferiority complex" for many Slavs. It was the result of the Eastern-Central European developments as they were.

You don't know much about Slovenian culture if you're making that kind of claims. We have our own culture, but it's influenced by other culture depending on the region. Northern Slovenia (Styria and Gorenjska) have been influenced greatly by German culture, I can't deny that and there are really much similiarities between those two regions and Germany. The problem however, and also the reason why you and many others make that claim, is that popular image of Slovenian identity is many times more connected with northern Slovenia and ignores rest of Slovenia, so that's why when someone thinks of Slovenia, he has the image of Triglav and Alps and rest of Gorenjska.

Going after your descriptions, the Northern part is what is Slovenia is about (Germanized Slavs), because otherwise they could be Croatians...

[M.R.]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Read the link posted.

No thanks, too much, I don't have time.

European cultures and occidental culture of the Romano-Germanic kind, born in the Frankish core areas and Northern Italy, is not the same obviously, since the early Balts were of course European already without a doubt, to use an example, but they werent occidental in the same sense as 11th century France and Germany f.e.

Occidental or western culture if you want, is a myth. There's only European culture and even this in some very very broad sense, since obviously cultures of different nations are different. What we share in common is Catholicism and some historical ties. In that way it's impossible to speak that any kind of western culture was brought to us by Germans. As I said before, we have our own culture that is in some larger picture part of Europe and it was part of Europe since the begining.

Well, the newer developments, to put it that way, came from somewhere else. A simple proof is that Slovenians had no larger cities of their own, structured in an occidental-Western way.

What part of history do you talk now? Of course we had cities, back in the Roman times and later. Or maybe Emona, Poetovio etc were build by Germanics... I wouldn't be surprised if you'd claim that after reading your other posts. Also, cities aren't needed to have a culture, rather the opposite, since cities are more opened to multiculturalisms of all kind.

Germanics became part of that culture with time too, but the difference is the were founders or at least co-founders and spread it.

No they weren't founders. When Rome was an empire you were still living in forrests somewhere in Germania. And yes at that time our ancestors lived in cities ("structured in an occidental way"). Or maybe for you, city structured in an occidental way means Germanics living in the middle of forests in some huts.

Well, there were just two really important influences on all Slavic nations if talking about occidental culture, "the West" (Frankish Empire) and "the East" (Byzantine Empire). Most came from those two influences and like you said yourself, Slovenians were mostly on the Western side (Catholicism, German and Italian culture).

We're only on "western side". And we were there before you, way before you. We don't have German and Italians culture, but our own Slovenian culture, how long do you want to repeat that crap without even trying to back it up?

Its not about right or wrong, but organisation, the kind of and its effectiveness.

Effectiveness? How is culture effective? How is culture organized?

Haha Germans....

Depends. Living as a farmer didnt helped European people to evolve on, but rather degenerate too. I dont say cities are better, since they are worse, even if the better rural elements usually go to the cities (more often).

Yes we evolved... To what? Some degenerates living in capitalist modern world waiting to leave whatever's left of our countries to immigrants.

This was no "superiority complex", but reality. It might have become a "superiority complex" in some cases though, like it was an "inferiority complex" for many Slavs. It was the result of the Eastern-Central European developments as they were.

This is what I was talking about when I said superiority complex.

Going after your descriptions, the Northern part is what is Slovenia is about (Germanized Slavs), because otherwise they could be Croatians...

-

I don't really care what you guys from Germany think about us, we know what reality is even though there's still much confusion about our true identity because of all those lies of all kinds of imperialists. You'll see that majority of Slovenian wouldn't feel close to Germans and neither would they feel much closer to Slavs and Balkan. And it's the right thing to do, since I don't think it's good to trust any of our neighbours after experiences from the past or feel close to them.

[Agrippa]

We don't have German and Italians culture, but our own Slovenian culture, how long do you want to repeat that crap without even trying to back it up?

Of course you have your own Slovenian culture, but many parts of it come from other Western nations which is just natural if considering the regional development.

Effectiveness? How is culture effective? How is culture organized?

Culture is more than a dress and some sing-sang, its about how you live and organise life, f.e. how you use the soil, the ressources, how build up a house, breed animals, make tools and weapons, form a state etc.

Effective is in that way which gives the greatest potential. Our current problem is a degenerated policy not the techno-civilisation-progress to call it that way in itself. And thats largely the result of two wars Germans lost by the way - and to which they were partly forced to due to the unfair conditions they had to suffer from after WWI and I repeat that there should have been free decisions about of the local populations about whether they want to go to the German or any other state for that matter. But thats something the Hungarians in Oedenburg and Slovenians in Marburg prevented - as well as had been prevented by force in Czechoslovakia and Poland.

[M.R.]

The Austrian populist nationalism is a big joke, those parties got so much votes with empty populist rhetoric which sometimes sounds more nationalistic, sometimes less but in anyway much of the votes probably came from 16, and 17 year old who are bullied by Turkish immigrants.

I'd rather see Austria run over by immigrants than to see any "Austrian nationalism" gaining power there, because when the latter has any success, Slovenians have a problem.

[Weltschmerz]

Originally Posted by M.R.

The Austrian populist nationalism is a big joke, those parties got so much votes with empty populist rhetoric which sometimes sounds more nationalistic, sometimes less but in anyway much of the votes probably came from 16, and 17 year old who are bullied by Turkish immigrants.

I'd rather see Austria run over by immigrants than to see any "Austrian nationalism" gaining power there, because when the latter has any success, Slovenians have a problem.

Here we go. The slovenian "nationalist" who so dearly wishes the destruction of his neighbours is on the loose again.

[M.R.]

You have mistaken my point again. I don't wish the destruction of any nation (it is debatable whether Austrians are really a nation), I was referring to 'Austrian nationalism' which is populist and anti-Slovenian and wishes destruction of my nation, or at least tearing it to pieces as Austria was doing through all it's shameful history. 'Austrian nationalism' which is not really a nationalism as such but some sick joke should have never even existed.

I would even support nationalism there if it was honest (meaning get the hell out of Slovenia), Austrian nationalism haiderstyle simply is not.

[Lutiferre]

Originally Posted by M.R.

You have mistaken my point again. I don't wish the destruc