Volga Kiptchacks denied NATO membership....

[Furious Mental]

This is the 21st century. No one cares about your medieval ethnic grudges or who "owns" Alexander the Great. If the intention of your government was to frustrate its allies and make your country look like a petty little third world banana republic, it succeeded brilliantly.

[Geoffrey S]

What "Matsedonian"? Some Volga Kypchaks that came in 7th cent AD? So should the Volgan Administrative Area in Russia around Volgograd be renamed "Matsedonia"? Oh and if some of the Kyptchaks are trying to plagiarise a history while lacking one of their own what should we do? Bend over?

I'm tempted to point out the tenuous links at best between modern and ancient Greece.

[hellenes]

I'm tempted to point out the tenuous links at best between modern and ancient Greece.

Im even more tempted to quote what Dirty Harry said about opinions....

[Crazed Rabbit]

Adrian brings up a very good point. Greece should be kicked forthright out of NATO. If they don't honor the treaty, let's not give them our protection.

Let them take their whining about millennia old pissing matches elsewhere. You don't see the US going on about how we kicked British butt at New Orleans in 1813. Of course, we also have done other important things since then, so our whole national pride isn't based on that one event.

CR

[Conradus]

Im even more tempted to quote what Dirty Harry said about opinions....

Why should the Greeks be allowed to call their country Hellas, if they won't allow their neighbours to be called Macedonia? The ancient Greeks have very little in common with the Greeks now. They've had about 2000 years of occupation and immigration to thank for that.

[Geoffrey S]

Im even more tempted to quote what Dirty Harry said about opinions....

Go ahead, make my day.

[seireikhaan]

So, a Greek, a Macedonian, a Kosovar, an Albanian, a Turk, a Croat, a Serb, and a Bulgarian all walk into a bar, and...

[LeftEyeNine]

So, a Greek, a Macedonian, a Kosovar, an Albanian, a Turk, a Croat, a Serb, and a Bulgarian all walk into a bar, and...

All walk out with different banners.

" Hellenic Genocide !!11"

" Alexander The Macedon And Some Genocide !!11"

" Kosovan Genocide !!11"

" Albanian Genocide !!11 "

" Probably A Croatian Genocide !!11 "

" Serbian Genocide !!11 "

" Bulgarian Genocide !!11 "

" We Didn't Kill Anyone Dammit !!11 "

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

You don't see the US going on about how we kicked British butt at New Orleans in 1813.

Probably because you ended up losing that war.

[Sarmatian]

Macedonia has the same problem as all artificially created nations have, namely "who are we and what is our past". Usually becoming a nation takes some time and happens naturally but in case of Macedonia, it happened in the blink of an eye. It was like "WTF, we have a state, what we are supposed to do with it???".

They started to claim anything that happened in the area of their present country or that have some resemblence to it (like to the name) as theirs. Naturally that's supposed to piss off those to who it really belongs to. It's like Serbs claiming that Constantine the Great was a Serb because he was born in what today is Serbia (in the lack of a better example). A point that modern Greece haven't got much in common with ancient Greece is valid, but Alexander and all that stuff still is part of their heritage, and it isn't unimportant.

To an alliance of around twenty countries that alltogether have almost one billion population an argument between countries that have 10 and 2 million people might seem silly, but what's the point of Nato if not all members have a say? If Greece and other smaller countries aren't supposed to have a say, why did Nato give them Veto power?

Kicking Greece out of Nato would be fun to see. Not that it will ever happen of course. There are two possible scenarios: 1) Greece cave in under pressure, 2) Macedonia doesn't get in. Greece out of Nato is just unthinkable...

BTW, hellenes, how did you manage to clasify them as Volga Kipchaks?

[Geoffrey S]

Macedonia has the same problem as all artificially created nations have, namely "who are we and what is our past". Usually becoming a nation takes some time and happens naturally but in case of Macedonia, it happened in the blink of an eye. It was like "WTF, we have a state, what we are supposed to do with it???".

I think, in its relatively short history as a modern state, it has plenty of achievements of which to be proud, not the least the transformation into the modern state it is now from a relative backwater in non-ideal circumstances. Not as flashy as Alexander, perhaps, but the fact that states can't be proud about what they consider mundane or natural frustrates me.

They started to claim anything that happened in the area of their present country or that have some resemblence to it (like to the name) as theirs. Naturally that's supposed to piss off those to who it really belongs to. It's like Serbs claiming that Constantine the Great was a Serb because he was born in what today is Serbia (in the lack of a better example). A point that modern Greece haven't got much in common with ancient Greece is valid, but Alexander and all that stuff still is part of their heritage, and it isn't unimportant.

I find that doubtful. Alexander is no more Greece's heritage than he is that of any nation influenced long ago by the classical cultures. Geographic affinity does not compensate for a distinct lack of cultural ties between now and two thousand years ago.

[Viking]

Macedonia has the same problem as all artificially created nations have, namely "who are we and what is our past". Usually becoming a nation takes some time and happens naturally but in case of Macedonia, it happened in the blink of an eye. It was like "WTF, we have a state, what we are supposed to do with it???".

What do you mean by "artificially created"?

[LeftEyeNine]

What do you mean by "artificially created"?

He meant American way of "Liberation", maybe ?

[Sarmatian]

I think, in its relatively short history as a modern state, it has plenty of achievements of which to be proud, not the least the transformation into the modern state it is now from a relative backwater in non-ideal circumstances. Not as flashy as Alexander, perhaps, but the fact that states can't be proud about what they consider mundane or natural frustrates me.

Well, that is incorrect. The political stability, employement, average salaries, etc... were higher when Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia than now. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be proud of those achievments, but in case of FYROM, those didn't happen. Pretty much all ex-yu countries have worse standard of living than when they were a part of Yugoslavia, with the exception of Slovenia. Croatia is close to having the same standard as in YU but still some way off.

But, anyway, it is hard to have a coherent nation based on: "Hey look, our GDP is 3% higher than it was last year!".

I find that doubtful. Alexander is no more Greece's heritage than he is that of any nation influenced long ago by the classical cultures. Geographic affinity does not compensate for a distinct lack of cultural ties between now and two thousand years ago.

Another valid point indeed. But I still think that modern Greeks can relate more to Alexander than modern French, for example.

What do you mean by "artificially created"?

I mean that no Macedonian nation existed pre ww2. The population identified itself as either Serbian, Bulgarian or Greek in a lesser extent, usually depending in which area of Macedonia they lived. Only a small part of the population was considered to be "slavic macedonians", meaning they were neither of the three, but it wasn't really clear what they were. So to cut a long story short, modern Macedonians are a mostly a mish-mash of Bulgarians and Serbs.

Now, this wasn't so big a deal when they were a part of Yugoslavia but as an independent country, it did present some problems (see Bosnia). So the authorities quickly started to "create" a nation. They adopted Samuilo (bulgarian medieval tsar) as their own, Alexander the Great as their own, trying to portray themselves as descendants of ancient Macedonians... in general anything to arouse national fervor in the population.

[The Wizard]

"Macedonia" has been an entity since Tito took over Yugoslavia in 1944-1945. In fact, from what I've read, there were specifically Macedonian groupings, outside the Greek part of the area, from the early 20th century onwards.

Oh, and:

This is the 21st century. No one cares about your medieval ethnic grudges or who "owns" Alexander the Great. If the intention of your government was to frustrate its allies and make your country look like a petty little third world banana republic, it succeeded brilliantly.

All walk out with different banners.

" Hellenic Genocide !!11"

" Alexander The Macedon And Some Genocide !!11"

" Kosovan Genocide !!11"

" Albanian Genocide !!11 "

" Probably A Croatian Genocide !!11 "

" Serbian Genocide !!11 "

" Bulgarian Genocide !!11 "

" We Didn't Kill Anyone Dammit !!11 "

Posts of the month.

[CountArach]

Go ahead, make my day.

Do you feel lucky punk? Well, do ya?

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Greek troll using Turkic tribal names as curse words again. Hilarious!
.

[Sarmatian]

"Macedonia" has been an entity since Tito took over Yugoslavia in 1944-1945. In fact, from what I've read, there were specifically Macedonian groupings, outside the Greek part of the area, from the early 20th century onwards.

Where did you read that? At the beggiing of the 20th century, there were two groups of people in Macedonia - Greeks and Slavs. The problem was who those Slavs were... there were a lot of incertanties, in no small part due to Serbian and Bulgarian propaganda, but in general, all scientists from France to Russia agreed that slavic Macedonians are a mix of Bulgarians and Serbs, slightly more Bulgarian influence.

Anyway, this is not the topic. If we agree that modern Greeks don't have that much in common with ancient Greeks, slavic Macedonians certainly have even less...

[Geoffrey S]

Well, that is incorrect. The political stability, employement, average salaries, etc... were higher when Macedonia was a part of Yugoslavia than now. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be proud of those achievments, but in case of FYROM, those didn't happen. Pretty much all ex-yu countries have worse standard of living than when they were a part of Yugoslavia, with the exception of Slovenia. Croatia is close to having the same standard as in YU but still some way off.

But, anyway, it is hard to have a coherent nation based on: "Hey look, our GDP is 3% higher than it was last year!".

All considered, I think Macedonia has done better than could be expected out of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. It may not be much to be proud of, but countless failed states worldwide show that such a situation is not as self-evident as may be supposed, let alone in a transition to a free market economy. There is undoubtedly plenty of room for improvement, but I think the groundwork is there. Things like harking back to some imagined collective heritage only hold the country back.

Another valid point indeed. But I still think that modern Greeks can relate more to Alexander than modern French, for example.

Why would that be?

[Sarmatian]

All considered, I think Macedonia has done better than could be expected out of the dissolution of Yugoslavia. It may not be much to be proud of, but countless failed states worldwide show that such a situation is not as self-evident as may be supposed, let alone in a transition to a free market economy. There is undoubtedly plenty of room for improvement, but I think the groundwork is there. Things like harking back to some imagined collective heritage only hold the country back.

I wouldn't agree there. When you have a country that is behind by a big margine from where it was 15 years ago, I wouldn't exactly call that advancement. Anyway, Yugoslavia was as close to free market economy as communist country can get. If it weren't for the international support for nationalists like Milosevic, Tudjman and Izetbegovic, Yugoslavia would have made painless and quick transition to confederacy and free market economy in a few years, and would probably become a member of the EU in 1995 or so, without all the bloodshed....

Why would that be?

I don't know... Genes, language, geographical proximity?

[Adrian II]

I wouldn't agree there. When you have a country that is behind by a big margine from where it was 15 years ago, I wouldn't exactly call that advancement.

What nonsense. Their economic troubles are not their own doing. And Greece plays a major part in them.

The Republic of Macedonia is landlocked and traditionally has few major trade partners. Serbia was the largest, followed by Greece. The first was substantially diminished when, at the outbreak of the Yugoslav wars, international sanctions were imposed on Serbia and Montenegro. Following that, Greece imposed its own trade embargo on Macedonia.

What else would you expect but an economic slump?

Now look at their achievements.

Macedonia has split off peacefully from Yugoslavia, which was an accomplishment in itself. It has suffered severely from the 1999 Kosovo episode (hundreds of thousands of refugees fled to Macedonia) and the 2001 Albanian breakdown, resulting in an influx of (partially armed) Albanian refugees and a destabilisation that led to civil war in 2001.

This civil war was settled admirably in the Ochrid Agreement under Nato and EU supervision and arbitration. The Albanians were officially recognized as a minority and given concomitant rights in Macedonia (something Greece has yet to accomplish with regard to its owm minorities).

Despite civil war, refugee crises and the massive loss of exports, Macedonia has seen modest, but constant economic growth of about 3% for more than a decade now. Unemployment is high but not as officially reported (37%) because many Macedonians work in the 'grey economy'. Inflation is 2% (whereas it is 3.5% in Greece). Foreign investment is booming.

Not bad at all for an upstart.

Sure, they have corruption and repression issues that they will have to work on. I think they are not ready for membership, but they are working very hard to earn it.

And let me repeat what I wrote above. The Greek attitude vis-à-vis Macedonia has nothing to do with Alexander or any other historical propaganda item. It has to do with Greece's refusal to recognise the sizeable Macedonian minority within its own borders. There's the rub.

[Sarmatian]

They should have thought of that before they seceded. It's not like it wasn't known what severing economic ties with Serbia would do to Macedonian economy. My father was head of some pharmaceutical firm before the the war and in talk he had with the head of Krka (that was the largest Macedonian pharmaceutical "factory" (I'm not sure if factory is the right word) who told my father "I don't get what they (macedonian goverment) are trying to do. Three out four workers in Krka work for Serbian market." That was true for entire Macedonian economy, it was dependant on Serbian market.

And 3% GDP growth isn't really something to brag about. 3% growth for countries like US, France or Germany means something but for countries whose GDP is very low, 3% is nothing. Serbia has stable GDP growth of 4-6% in the last decade and it still isn't even near what it used to be before the war. Macedonia is in even worse situation.

And Macedonia becoming an independant country wasn't actually their plan. They didn't really have a clear idea what they want. When it all started breaking apart they didn't "achieve" independence, they got "stuck" with it...

I mean, I wish them all the best, truly. But being in a lot worse situation in 2008 than you were in 1991 isn't really an accomplishment in my book...

[The Wizard]

You misinterpret what Adrian said. Macedonia only got into economic troubles once Serbia started mucking around in Yugoslavia trying to establish and maintain its hegemony over the area and it got sanctioned by international bodies to which the country was a signatory. Greece then boycotted it because Greeks like to break the treaties they signed and spurn their allies.

Where did you read that? At the beggiing of the 20th century, there were two groups of people in Macedonia - Greeks and Slavs. The problem was who those Slavs were... there were a lot of incertanties, in no small part due to Serbian and Bulgarian propaganda, but in general, all scientists from France to Russia agreed that slavic Macedonians are a mix of Bulgarians and Serbs, slightly more Bulgarian influence.

IMRO

Admittedly, after this was crushed not much was left. But still, "Macedonia" as a seperate entity with a seperate identity is a lot older than 1991.

Oh, and as for achievements: Macedonia is the only part of former Yugoslavia to have seceded from Yugoslavia peacefully and without any violence, to my knowledge (I'm not counting Montenegro because they seceded after the end of the Yugoslav Wars).

[Sarmatian]

You misinterpret what Adrian said. Macedonia only got into economic troubles once Serbia started mucking around in Yugoslavia trying to establish and maintain its hegemony over the area and it got sanctioned by international bodies to which the country was a signatory. Greece then boycotted it because Greeks like to break the treaties they signed and spurn their allies.

No, I was just saying that it was known that secession would hurt Macedonian economy. Sanctions imposed on FRY didn't help and made matters worse, no doubt, but it wasn't the only reason...

IMRO
Admittedly, after this was crushed not much was left. But still, "Macedonia" as a seperate entity with a seperate identity is a lot older than 1991.

Oh, and as for achievements: Macedonia is the only part of former Yugoslavia to have seceded from Yugoslavia peacefully and without any violence, to my knowledge (I'm not counting Montenegro because they seceded after the end of the Yugoslav Wars).

Well, if you read that article (not to mention that it is wikipedia article whose neutrality is disputed furthemore) you'll see that it was essentialy an organization of Bulgarian Macedonians. And I never mentioned 1991, I said pre-ww2...

You don't have to explain to me achievments of FYROM. I don't have any problems with that, but that can't be used as a mean to get national unity and arouse national fervor. That was my point. A politician can't speak in front of 100,000 people and hope to raise national awareness with "We had a GDP growth of 3% and we left Yugoslavia peacefully." But if he says "We are the heirs of Alexander the Great, we are the heirs of Samuilo, we have been fighting Romans, Ottomans, Bulgars, Serbs, Greeks etc... and finaly we have our freedom blah, blah, blah...", now, that is another thing... You get my drift? I didn't try to downplay anything but to point out that such logical and practical stuff don't have much impact on great masses of the people, expecially on people who weren't sure leaving Yugoslavia was a right thing to do... They wanted to know why did they left Yugoslavia, not how they did it...

[hellenes]

I would parallelize my reading of these replies with some observations that Ive made during a tour in a Mental institution part of my course....
I observe same level of denial of reality and people living in a complete fantastic world....
Its tragic and hilarious at the same time....

[LeftEyeNine]

I would parallelize my reading of these replies with some observations that Ive made during a tour in a Mental institution part of my course....
I observe same level of denial of reality and people living in a complete fantastic world....
Its tragic and hilarious at the same time....

Would you like an ad hominem paradox ?

[Geoffrey S]

No, I was just saying that it was known that secession would hurt Macedonian economy. Sanctions imposed on FRY didn't help and made matters worse, no doubt, but it wasn't the only reason...

Considering the other possibilities illustrated by the various times of Balkan strife, I doubt economic matters were at the top of their list of concerns.

You don't have to explain to me achievments of FYROM. I don't have any problems with that, but that can't be used as a mean to get national unity and arouse national fervor. That was my point. A politician can't speak in front of 100,000 people and hope to raise national awareness with "We had a GDP growth of 3% and we left Yugoslavia peacefully." But if he says "We are the heirs of Alexander the Great, we are the heirs of Samuilo, we have been fighting Romans, Ottomans, Bulgars, Serbs, Greeks etc... and finaly we have our freedom blah, blah, blah...", now, that is another thing... You get my drift? I didn't try to downplay anything but to point out that such logical and practical stuff don't have much impact on great masses of the people, expecially on people who weren't sure leaving Yugoslavia was a right thing to do... They wanted to know why did they left Yugoslavia, not how they did it...

Merely shows a lack of originality on the part of the politicians. It's a cheap shot they take. There is plenty to be proud of in a newly independent nation, finally standing on its own feet, avoiding the violent fate of various nations, and doing so in a difficult position. To present a different view of things.

Its similar to certain reactionary Polish nationalist attitudes (say hi to KrooK!), and quite frankly a number of more eastern European nations, which I find so disappointing. There is no sensible reason for constantly measuring oneself against imagined heroes and enemies, when such progress has been made towards a better future in ways far more relevant.

Edit: removed quote. Isn't worth responding to really.

[Husar]

I would parallelize my reading of these replies with some observations that Ive made during a tour in a Mental institution part of my course....
I observe same level of denial of reality and people living in a complete fantastic world....
Its tragic and hilarious at the same time....

Yeah, now stop looking into the mirror and maybe the situation will improve.

[HoreTore]

Oh, and as for achievements: Macedonia is the only part of former Yugoslavia to have seceded from Yugoslavia peacefully and without any violence, to my knowledge (I'm not counting Montenegro because they seceded after the end of the Yugoslav Wars).

Didn't Slovenia also go peacefully? If so, then both the north and the south as gone through peace, it's all those bastards in the middle who can't work it out like civilized slovenians and macedonians

[CountArach]

I would parallelize my reading of these replies with some observations that Ive made during a tour in a Mental institution part of my course....

Wow, the mental institution guards in Greece must be really intelligent people

But seriously hellenes - are you going to quote any actual evidence or are you just going to say "You're wrong, shut up!" With your fingers stuck in your ear?