The communism/ Old yugoslavia(and others) thread

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
personal said:
You're right about everything except about who brought destruction to Yugoslavia and its peoples. It's Milosevic and serbian nationalism.
You are forgetting that he started whole thing years before other republics of Yu even had non-communist goverments.

Soldiers with red stars on the caps were killing my and other peoples in the 1990-ties same as in 1940-ties so I disike the thing for a good reason. Even though I am aware of the fact that many lived decently during communist years.
And nostalgia is mostly thing of longing for ones youth. When you are 60 you will remember your 20-ties fondly even if you then worked in the coal mine.

But, we are seriously digressing. Maybe mods should move this tread to Cafe?

There were atrocities carried out by all sides during the wars and all sides also have responsibility for what happened. You can not absolve the actions of Tudjman etc, or any of the post-Tito political leaders for their actions. All the leaders whipped up nationalist sentiment in order to shore up their positions in the 1980s and 1990s.

As for nostalgia. It isn't just about age or class, lots of people for lots of reasons remember the past fondly for different reasons. A few weeks back I was on a train and the guy sat opposite me got talking to me. Midway through the journey some girls came up begging (they were maybe 7 and 10) and they had a note explaining that their parents were dead. The guy gave them some money and said to me 'this would never have happened under communism'. For him the loss of the system was about the amount of social protection people got and the things that were provided for.

Was he nostalgic for the shortages of the 1980s or the brutality of the 1950s? I doubt it very much. But he didn't see a society where children are begging on trains as a much of an improvement on the system that went before.

Likewise, my friends some of whom were victims of the Yugoslav conflicts see the peace of the Tito-era as a far better time that what followed.
 
Jun 2, 2010
376
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
There were atrocities carried out by all sides during the wars and all sides also have responsibility for what happened. You can not absolve the actions of Tudjman etc, or any of the post-Tito political leaders for their actions. All the leaders whipped up nationalist sentiment in order to shore up their positions in the 1980s and 1990s.

The biggest responsibility (by far) is on the side which started the whole mess and which started actuall fighting.
Without Serbian attack on Slovenia, then Croatia, then Bosnia, then Kosovo there would be no wars and casualties at all. None.

Mrs John Murphy said:
As for nostalgia. It isn't just about age or class, lots of people for lots of reasons remember the past fondly for different reasons. A few weeks back I was on a train and the guy sat opposite me got talking to me. Midway through the journey some girls came up begging (they were maybe 7 and 10) and they had a note explaining that their parents were dead. The guy gave them some money and said to me 'this would never have happened under communism'. For him the loss of the system was about the amount of social protection people got and the things that were provided for.

Was he nostalgic for the shortages of the 1980s or the brutality of the 1950s? I doubt it very much. But he didn't see a society where children are begging on trains as a much of an improvement on the system that went before.

Likewise, my friends some of whom were victims of the Yugoslav conflicts see the peace of the Tito-era as a far better time that what followed.

Much more people were killed and suffered during and by Tito's regime then during 1990-ties.
His regime created much more orphans but they were not allowed to beg or in any other way publicly display it or talk about it. Happened to my family.

Guy you mentioned maybe doesn't care. Maybe he was among those whose life was great then (as Party members, communist elite and such). Maybe he even doesn't even know about it (communists were very good in hiding things and covering the inconvinient truths).

Nostalgia is mostly matter of remembering the youth (as I said before) and tendency of people to forget the ugly and remember the good.

You're right - some, even maybe many people lived decently in communism but those who had it hard and ugly and bad had it REALY hard and ugly and bad.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
To argue about numbers is to miss the point. An atrocity is an atrocity, whether it is in the thousands or the hundreds, or the tens. A victim is a victim irrespective of their nationality. There were war criminals on all sides.

People also suffered under the Ustaše, the Chetniks, IMRO, the Royal dictatorship etc etc, so lets not think that Yugoslavia was a land of milk and honey before or after.

The point is that it is it is your opinion that the Communist regime was the worst thing, it is your opinion that the Serbs are to blame, just as it is the opinion of my friends who were victims that things were better before, just as it was the opinion of that guy on the train that things are worse now than before.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Mrs Murphy if you think that nation or country fighting for freedom (you call it atrocity, which pretty much explain all) is privilege of just few big nations you are so wrong, and basically you will never understand whereas Sagan is German or Russian.
We settled things here without your help, and you can be ****ed of what ever you like.

P.S. I am sure that your country has such a shiny history, so do not patronize us, i am sick and tired of such a human rights experts:D

Over and Out:cool:
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
Simmer down tiger

If anyone is being patronising it is you. You are the one who assumes that where I come from and what my background is.

You think that some how you have a monopoly on suffering and victimhood and that no one else can understand or know.

The reality is that you weren't gang-raped, nor were you forced to be a refugee, you didn't watch your family being shot. So don't lecture me about not knowing because I know only too well what happened so pointed headed nationalists can wax romantic about their 'freedom'.
 
@personal
I'm really not going to get into 'who's more to blame for war'. but i will say this - nothing is ever that simple, nothing is black and white.

About communism nostalgia - I don't think people are nostalgic because they love communism very much. They are nostalgic because after communism came war [in which lot of people, from all ex-Yugoslavia republics died] and economic crisis [current one is nothing compared to what we had in 90's]. To say that nostalgia for communism is just about people remembering their youth is quite cynical and even tasteless.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
If anyone is being patronising it is you. You are the one who assumes that where I come from and what my background is.

You think that some how you have a monopoly on suffering and victimhood and that no one else can understand or know.

The reality is that you weren't gang-raped, nor were you forced to be a refugee, you didn't watch your family being shot. So don't lecture me about not knowing because I know only too well what happened so pointed headed nationalists can wax romantic about their 'freedom'.

So why do not tell us where you come from?
** editd by mod ****
So where are you come from?
I suggest taking some therapist, it can really help you out;)

About nationalists if that mean that I love my country and will fight, oh yes I am and proud of it;)

Maybe Human watch rights can help you out:eek:
 
oldborn said:
So why do not tell us where you come from?
If you were raped or your friends did, you are Muslim from Bosnia, cos only Serbs raped Muslim womans.
So where are you come from?
I suggest taking some therapist, it can really help you out;)

About nationalists if that mean that I love my country and will fight, oh yes I am and proud of it;)

Maybe Human watch rights can help you out:eek:

Wow, really showing class here. And sense of humor.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
slim charles said:
@personal
I'm really not going to get into 'who's more to blame for war'. but i will say this - nothing is ever that simple, nothing is black and white.

About communism nostalgia - I don't think people are nostalgic because they love communism very much. They are nostalgic because after communism came war [in which lot of people, from all ex-Yugoslavia republics died] and economic crisis [current one is nothing compared to what we had in 90's]. To say that nostalgia for communism is just about people remembering their youth is quite cynical and even tasteless.

Totally agree. Elsewhere in the region those who are nostalgic because of things like joblosses, pensions being cut, inflation, etc. It is tough to look on the present or future positively when you think you have no future.

The reality is that there are nostalgics in almost every society for every political regime of all hues.
 
oldborn said:
Well that was high school 3rd grade lecture, i sucks in Marxism cos it is "ideology of envy". Do you know why we had not real communism? Cos communist always found someone to eliminate on and on.

Well, not really, because we haven't really had proper "Communists" either. Marxist theory was predicated on waiting until "Capitalism" reached its logical conclusion and could sustain itself no longer. The previous stages in Marx's historical timeline lasted hundreds, thousands of years. But no modern "Communists" were willing to wait that long. They wanted to effect communism in countries that Marx would never have considered ready for it. Hence why Lenin had to write his own doctrine for how to impose Communism from above (and why his New Economic Policy saw a return to a level of controlled Capitalism under Bolshevik rule). By the time we get to Stalin, it's almost an afterthought, a mere justification for autocratic rule. Stalin's idea of "Socialism In One Country", for example, runs completely antithetical to anything Marx wrote.

A lot of the so-called Communists were opportunists willing to pay lip service to an ideology that wasn't practical at the time in order to manoeuvre themselves into some more power.

We have never had "real Communism" because even if we assume that Marx was 100% correct, we've never reached the point in time at which the Capitalist state of development is at its logical conclusion around the world.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
I only ask him where he might be at that time or what his nationality is;)
Those people who did it has names and nationality too, so just to clarify things that people do not think that war was "big mascenbal orgy";)

Let me think, he might be Albanian form Kosovo too, Serbs has a nice reputation there, no wonder communsim fall apart.

Communism is land of nationalism, if just look at Russian domination in ex CCCP, or Han domination over Uighurs in China, or Serbs in ex Yu, or Khmer Rouge s treatment of minorities etc .

So do not think that communism where so "we are all same" ideology, those are myths which are still exists in some reds sympathizers.

Although even Jesus would not have anything against it, but this not the case.;)
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Well, not really, because we haven't really had proper "Communists" either. Marxist theory was predicated on waiting until "Capitalism" reached its logical conclusion and could sustain itself no longer. The previous stages in Marx's historical timeline lasted hundreds, thousands of years. But no modern "Communists" were willing to wait that long. They wanted to effect communism in countries that Marx would never have considered ready for it. Hence why Lenin had to write his own doctrine for how to impose Communism from above (and why his New Economic Policy saw a return to a level of controlled Capitalism under Bolshevik rule). By the time we get to Stalin, it's almost an afterthought, a mere justification for autocratic rule. Stalin's idea of "Socialism In One Country", for example, runs completely antithetical to anything Marx wrote.

A lot of the so-called Communists were opportunists willing to pay lip service to an ideology that wasn't practical at the time in order to manoeuvre themselves into some more power.

We have never had "real Communism" because even if we assume that Marx was 100% correct, we've never reached the point in time at which the Capitalist state of development is at its logical conclusion around the world.

I did not saying that we had real communism, thanks God we did not. Well, I am not saying that I ever understand what they are talking about or learning Marxism in high school.

Most of them never read Das Kapital, it was too Utopism in that text, so as you said they start with world revolution, which Marx beleive:"the transition from capitalism to socialism is an inevitable part of the development of human society".

Marx idea was primarily economic nature, but in that transformation there is allways someone who is on "our way"; church, Bourgeois, peasent, Jews, land owners (my wife familly lost lot of land by night), intellectuals, doctors, students, guess who else? Everyone who is standing on their way.

Although we can discuss about different communists regime in Cuba, Cambodia, China etc, they all have something specific for that region.

Ex. Yu had a "socialism with humam face" as someone called it, we were alowed to have passports (not all like political prisoners, military etc), we had a prety much high standard of living (compare with Russia, or Hungary) but that was all "artificial" US loans, and we now how it is ended. Beast were sleeping for 45 years. So there is a lot of that.

Often communist leader were poorly educated aparatčiki monsters.
 
oldborn said:
Although we can discuss about different communists regime in Cuba, Cambodia, China etc, they all have something specific for that region.
But they all have one thing in common - not one of them has occurred in a country that Marx would have considered ready for it. Or even close.

Marx's theory was based on 4 distinct phases of human development: Asiatic, Feudal, Capitalist and Socialist. Only when one reaches it's logical conclusion can we move onto the next. Most of the places that have attempted to effect Communism have not fully entrenched Capitalism. Hell, some of them had barely overthrown Feudalism.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
But they all have one thing in common - not one of them has occurred in a country that Marx would have considered ready for it. Or even close.

Marx's theory was based on 4 distinct phases of human development: Asiatic, Feudal, Capitalist and Socialist. Only when one reaches it's logical conclusion can we move onto the next. Most of the places that have attempted to effect Communism have not fully entrenched Capitalism. Hell, some of them had barely overthrown Feudalism.

Agree with that.
Dude they were hungry for power, few "now how" politicians and millions miserable people who is hardly waiting for something to throw land owner (feudalist as you said), overtake a factory (but no one knew to push button:eek:)
Now we can only imagine how they manipulate with masses;), same as nazism.

And that Lenin was just a German spy:eek:
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
One thing allways fascinated me about reds.
In Cambodia Khmer Rouge s revolution is only one who started in villages and moved in urban area.

So brilliant reds hated mostly (although they did not spare ammo on their others opponents) educated people and everything related with them.
One day they said ; "what the hell we do not need money", other day they said; "what hell from now on, people will cross steets on red light only, not green, red:D"

We do not had such idiots but we had idiots who organized those open festival birthday for our lovely leader:rolleyes:, delirium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO1EBh5g8Ww&feature=related
 
Very interesting thread. Let's keep our cool though people, not need to harp too much on each other.

I'm old enough to remember the Cold War and studied it quite a bit, visiting the former Soviet Union in 1999 after it opened up.

What has always fascinated me most though was Marxist or simply leftist influence in Latin America, especially in the 70's and 80's. Both the corruption within it, and the hard line and swift actions by the US against it, regardless of the consequences in many instances.
 
Jun 9, 2011
177
0
0
oldborn said:
One thing allways fascinated me about reds.
In Cambodia Khmer Rouge s revolution is only one who started in villages and moved in urban area.

So brilliant reds hated mostly (although they did not spare ammo on their others opponents) educated people and everything related with them.
One day they said ; "what the hell we do not need money", other day they said; "what hell from now on, people will cross steets on red light only, not green, red:D"

We do not had such idiots but we had idiots who organized those open festival birthday for our lovely leader:rolleyes:, delirium
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO1EBh5g8Ww&feature=related
Of course, here in the U.S. there seems to be a cynical anti-intellectualism among the far right wing. (Dear God, please don't let Scott SoCal find this thread. :eek:)
 
Jun 2, 2010
376
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
To argue about numbers is to miss the point. An atrocity is an atrocity, whether it is in the thousands or the hundreds, or the tens. A victim is a victim irrespective of their nationality. There were war criminals on all sides.

People also suffered under the Ustaše, the Chetniks, IMRO, the Royal dictatorship etc etc, so lets not think that Yugoslavia was a land of milk and honey before or after.

The point is that it is it is your opinion that the Communist regime was the worst thing, it is your opinion that the Serbs are to blame, just as it is the opinion of my friends who were victims that things were better before, just as it was the opinion of that guy on the train that things are worse now than before.

Serbs are to blame for the wars in the 1990-ties. Only them.
Serbs started war against Slovenia, then against Croatia and then in Bosnia and against Kosovo. They have this "Great Serbia" imperial ideas and ideology since 19th century. It is well documented and it is not really a secret. I am realy surprised by anybody not undrestanding this simple truth: without them starting it there would be no wars and attrocites at all.

It is wrong in so many ways to say it is everybody is equaly guilty. If you come to my house and start beating me and my family and you start robbing me and you too come out of it bloody nosed, who is to blame for that? Me and you equaly? Come on!

I do appreciate your interest in things East European and ex Yu and I believe stories you heard from some people. But your expirience seems not to be first handed, number of people you talked with is probably way to small to be realy repressentative and your opinion on the "blame" is simply wrong.

Let me just point to double moral standards ragarding wars recently waged in Afganistan, Iraq and Libya and those in ex-Yu. westerners are allowed do defend their (oil) interests and kill and torture thousands, cause hundreds of "collateral" casualties without anybody being blamed od punished for it while in Croatia defending and liberating your own country is seen as a crime. Most of the media subscribes to such hipocrisy and many opinions by the people like you are based on that.
Well, it is wrong. Factually and moraly.
 
Jun 2, 2010
376
0
0
slim charles said:
@personal
I'm really not going to get into 'who's more to blame for war'. but i will say this - nothing is ever that simple, nothing is black and white.

About communism nostalgia - I don't think people are nostalgic because they love communism very much. They are nostalgic because after communism came war [in which lot of people, from all ex-Yugoslavia republics died] and economic crisis [current one is nothing compared to what we had in 90's]. To say that nostalgia for communism is just about people remembering their youth is quite cynical and even tasteless.

No, thing are not black and white. Some aspects of life were great in socialism. Some were terrible. For many life was decent, for some was realy good, and for some it was hard and ugly.
Those who had it good miss that, of course. Talk to some members of communist aristocracy (Communist Party leaders, diplomats, high officers and members of their families) and they will cry a river after what they lost.

Ask about it people whose families worked hard and had nothing or enemies of the communism or non-serb partiots who were beaten and jailed for singing a song and see what they will say.

And I know that reminiscencing youth and remembering good and forgeting the bad and ugly is for many main cause of nostalgia.

Yes there was a crisis. In communism crisis was regular state of the afair - nothing to buy in the stores. No gasoline. No electricity. No coffee. No laundry detergent. High inflation.

One more thing about Yugoslavia - and this is important - for non-serbs it was double tyranny - by the communists and by the Serbs. Fall of communism in SSSR was opportunity to liberate yourself from both. It is not fall of communism by itself that brought wars. Desire of non-serbs to be independent and serbian wish to keep their "colonies" brought fighting.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Very interesting thread. Let's keep our cool though people, not need to harp too much on each other.

I'm old enough to remember the Cold War and studied it quite a bit, visiting the former Soviet Union in 1999 after it opened up.

What has always fascinated me most though was Marxist or simply leftist influence in Latin America, especially in the 70's and 80's. Both the corruption within it, and the hard line and swift actions by the US against it, regardless of the consequences in many instances.

Oh yeah, CIA "secret wars", well IMHO you was really just tried to preserve bananas, oil or sugar resources. Anti-reds campaign was just a cover up or JFK obsession with Fidel:eek:
In 70 s that Chavez Dude would not live any much longer.
 

oldborn

BANNED
May 14, 2010
1,115
0
0
Rouetheday said:
Of course, here in the U.S. there seems to be a cynical anti-intellectualism among the far right wing. (Dear God, please don't let Scott SoCal find this thread. :eek:)

Every anti-intellectualism movement is dangereus, we need them. Although they could be very nasty when get crazy, but if you look at most nazi, reds, executer or lower planer, they are just mediocracy merchants, craftmens, bankars, peasents etc. not really intelectuals.
Mediocracy killers are afraid of "brains":eek:
 
Sep 1, 2011
3
0
0
In my experience of life in the Czech Republic I can say that there is no possibility of any violence - especially since none of the Czechs and Moravians would not do anything that could disrupt deliveries of beer