Alternative history: Yugoslavia
- Thread starter innonimatu
- Start date
Unlikely. The King was pretty unpopular and the ethnic issues already clouded everything. Yugoslavia was a powder-keg by this point - the Croats were especially problemati - which is unfortunate, as they likely had the best government in their short history in 1941.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
The US already are a federation, but Mexico and Cuba are not among the member states.
Just merge the Mexico federation with the US federation. And let's see how it will be working.
Open the borders for Mexican immigrants. As far as I know they are not welcomed guests among the Southernerns in the US.
And I am not saying that the hatred towards Mexican immigrants is justified nor supporting it. Just stating facts.
Federalism in itself isn't the problem. But in Yugoslavia majority were separatists and they were not allowed a couple votes. Federalism in itself isn't the problem, but artificial federalism when various parts of the federation have not much in common and not much of common interests, is a problem.
According to the opinion of Lord Baal presented in this thread, when people don't want to be in a federation (for various reasons), you should forcefully change the people's minds, rather than change / disband the federation. This is not working like this. This is not democratic. People should decide.
Majority of inhabitants of Yugoslavia did not want to be a political unity. So why not let them split into several states?
Silurian
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,567
You missed out the Macedonians from the ethnic hodgepodge of Macedonia.
Silurian
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,567
Well people from what is now the Republic of Macedonia were describing themselves as Macedonian before Yugoslavia came into existence.
not sure what you would have to put on the front of FYROMians to take that into account.
There was fighting in Macedonia. In 2001 my wife watched the aircraft attacking Aracinovo from her flat in eastern Skopje.
not sure what you would have to put on the front of FYROMians to take that into account.
There was fighting in Macedonia. In 2001 my wife watched the aircraft attacking Aracinovo from her flat in eastern Skopje.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Most problems regarding Mexicans is the result to government restrictions towards Mexican immigration. Their illegality makes them particularly easy to coerce by employers, suppressing the availability of work. Much of the problems would be solved if Mexicans were simply able to enter the USA. Though that won't be happening, because of what you already mentioned.
SeekTruthFromFacts
King
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2009
- Messages
- 667
The Russian Federation has even less balance, a federal constitution, and many more ethnic groups.
Perhaps Yugoslavia needed a space programme and a Security Council seat?! I'm semi-serious: maybe it would have lasted longer if it had something as an entity that was worth keeping - colonies, oil, whatever.
So how about:
(a) Yugoslavia has even more of a Prague Spring type thing in the 80s, but the fear of Warsaw Pact intervention forces the leaderships to get used to working together
(b) They are offered rapid EC membership in the mid-80s because the West wants them to defect. Moscow kicks up a stink but....
(c) ...by the time Accession Day comes in 1990, the Warsaw Pact is a dead letter and they join.
(d) The terms of accession somehow make clear that anyone who leaves the federation also leaves the EC. Everyone sees what side their bread is buttered on and although the football matches are pretty vicious nobody dies in a shooting war.
As you can tell, I'm a great fan of the EC/EU's peace-creating possibilities.
Perhaps Yugoslavia needed a space programme and a Security Council seat?! I'm semi-serious: maybe it would have lasted longer if it had something as an entity that was worth keeping - colonies, oil, whatever.
So how about:
(a) Yugoslavia has even more of a Prague Spring type thing in the 80s, but the fear of Warsaw Pact intervention forces the leaderships to get used to working together
(b) They are offered rapid EC membership in the mid-80s because the West wants them to defect. Moscow kicks up a stink but....
(c) ...by the time Accession Day comes in 1990, the Warsaw Pact is a dead letter and they join.
(d) The terms of accession somehow make clear that anyone who leaves the federation also leaves the EC. Everyone sees what side their bread is buttered on and although the football matches are pretty vicious nobody dies in a shooting war.
As you can tell, I'm a great fan of the EC/EU's peace-creating possibilities.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
But in the Russian Federation one ethnic group (the Russians) comprises ca. 80% of entire population, while all other ethnic groups (and there are in total around 76 of them, while according to some sources - even over 100 ethnic groups) comprise only ca. 20% of inhabitants.
In Yugoslavia it was different because there was no ethnic group which had more than 50%.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,060
If it had any influence at all, the EU encouraged the beginning of the wars there.
rollo1066
Warlord
Either of these scenarios:
1. Tito lives to at least 100.
2. Tito names a Vice-President who is to take over on his death/disability. I agree that the collective Presidency wasn't a good idea.
1. Tito lives to at least 100.
2. Tito names a Vice-President who is to take over on his death/disability. I agree that the collective Presidency wasn't a good idea.
Nice of you to put words in my mouth. I made no mention of the morality, or even desirability, of forcefully maintaining the Yugoslav state - though it is very difficult to believe that doing so would be worse than what actually occurred - merely offered an opinion as to how to maintain the federation. Morality and politics are seldom the same thing. If you would like a discussion on the principle of self-determination, I would be happy to engage in one with you in another thread, but this is not the place for it.
Instead of attacking me in multiple threads simultaneously while making erroneous claims, perhaps you should simply read my posts and respond to them in a sensible manner, or not at all? You'll notice I don't follow you from thread to thread making erroneous statements about your beliefs. If anything, I try my best to ignore you, since you seem to favour the 'wall of text, little of it contextually important' method of posting, which hurts both my eyes and brain.
No, I mentioned the Bulgarians.
Correct. I think the Russians even had an absolute majority in the USSR, though it was nowhere near as great as their majority in Russia itself.
Sadly, I don't think even Tito could have held Yugoslavia together for much longer. You'll note that it didn't really begin to fall apart until the latter stages of the Cold War, when it was no longer worth propping up by either the USSR or US. With the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe (to avoid Domen or anyone else screaming at me about this term, I'm splitting Europe down the middle into East and West for this point, not thirds, quarters, fifths, or any other combination) it would have been very difficult for Tito to maintain any degree of political legitimacy. He did have the near-fanatical support of the military and secret police forces, which is something no one else ever achieved in post-Tito Yugoslavia - not even Milosevic in Serbia - which may have given him a fighting chance, but it would have been difficult.
The two communist leaders in Eastern Europe most likely to maintain their grip post-Cold War - Tito and Hoxha - managed to die before it ended. Yugoslavia and Albania may have followed Belarus's footsteps if they'd lived. Or they cold have joined Ceaucescu in hell, we'll never know.
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
No you would've probably ended up with the Cvetkovic-Macek agreement which split Yugoslavia into greater Croatia and greater Serbia. The royals surviving is another issue altogether.
Yugoslavia was never meant to hold...it was a failed state from the beginning all that held it together was at first the aftermath of WW2 and later the topaz fist of Tito. It would've been much better if we had peacefully split but a unified Yugoslavia to this day, highly unlikely.
Silurian
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,567
The majority of Macedonians regard themselves as Macedonian.
How people regard themselves influences their actions.
aronnax
Let your spirit be free
So how did or why did the Croats, Slovenes and Montenegrins end up in Yugoslavia again?
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
As a result of the fall of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia were part of the AH empire by 1878. By that time Serbia and Montenegro were independent Kingdoms. Serbia managed to gain control over Macedonia during the Balkan Wars. In the three nations + 1 province (Vojvodina) that were in the AH empire there were pro Yugoslav factions....one such started WW1 (was funded by Serbia) by killing the Archduke. You all know how WW1 ended for the AH empire. When the AH empire broke up a state called the State of SHS was formed it contained Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia while Vojvodina joined the Kingdom of Serbia and the Kingdom of Montenegro was annexed by the Kingdom of Serbia. On the 1st of December 1918 The Kingdom of Serbs Croats and Slovenes was formed. It unified the Kingdom of Serbia (Containing modern day Macedonia, Serbia, Vojvodina, Montenegro) and the State of SHS (Containing modern day Slovenia, Bosnia and Croatia). This state which was later renamed the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was an utter and total failure because of internal dismay, bad economic policy and so on...if WW2 hadn't destroyed it, it would've been split up between a centralized greater Croatia and a centralized greater Serbia.
Also why forget the Bosniaks and FYROMians while enlisting the Montenegrins
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Yugoslavia shows some interesting similarities with early 19th century Netherlands. Both countries' border configurations were set in stone in international treaties signed shortly after a major conflict. In both cases, it led to ethno-religious conflicts. In the Netherlands' case, it led to the secession of Belgium.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
"Ethnic hodgepodge" are words used by H. Himmler when describing Poland on 25.05.1940 in "Einige Gedanken uber die Behandlung der Fremdvolkischer in Osten".
NedimNapoleon
Weird Little Human
Nobody knows what Macedonia really is, to be fair it is a hodgepodge.
