Yugoslavia - What Really Happened

You were not even born then and yet you are so sure?
I have very fond memories of my early teenage years and I can assure you this is absolutely not true.
I was born in 88. I have traumatic memories of the war, but I'm not basing my opinion on that. I'm trying to study the history as objectively as I can. And that's my point, you can't base your position on any given subject by referring back to your fond memories of early teenage years. They're bound to be skewing your view.
 
I was born in 88. I have traumatic memories of the war, but I'm not basing my opinion on that. I'm trying to study the history as objectively as I can. And that's my point, you can't base your position on any given subject by referring back to your fond memories of early teenage years. They're bound to be skewing your view.
Well my hindsight back to those times is crystal clear to remember that statement "living in a dump and absolutely horrific times" is absolutely not true.
 
There's an excellent article on Sott.net about the war in Kosovo that I'm currently reading, which is very informative on the subject. I apologise if this article has already been posted on the thread. By the way, a very moving article. The horror of the situation is terrible.

 
There's an excellent article on Sott.net about the war in Kosovo that I'm currently reading, which is very informative on the subject. I apologise if this article has already been posted on the thread. By the way, a very moving article. The horror of the situation is terrible.

It is a well-written article that effectively describes the situation in Yugoslavia during that period. Today, all ex-Yugoslav countries have become vassal protectorates of Western powers. On paper, they are "states," and some people call them "independent democratic countries," but in reality, they are far from being truly independent.

Young people are rapidly leaving these countries, while their "elites" are strengthening nationalism and committing to EU and NATO integration. None of these countries can form a government without pledging to their Western patrons that they will pursue full EU and NATO integration. Without this repeated mantra, they have little else to offer for improving the lives of their citizens.
 
Every time the subject is revived in the forum, I think to myself "here we go again".
The problem is identity politics. When one's ego is attached to an identity, it inherits its irrational rationalizations.
In a war like this one, everybody looses. However, it's easier to lose a war than to admit that all involved parties were played by the Western powers. For the ego, recognizing that one has been deceived (and still being deceived) is very difficult, hence the continuous finger pointing and the blame game. Still seeing NATO as saviors and protectors after all this time is a very bizarre delusion indeed.
 
I was born in 88. I have traumatic memories of the war, but I'm not basing my opinion on that. I'm trying to study the history as objectively as I can. And that's my point, you can't base your position on any given subject by referring back to your fond memories of early teenage years. They're bound to be skewing your view.

Throughout the 1980s, Yugoslavia (Dalmatian coast) was a popular summer holiday destination for Western Europeans. I have family members who went there regularly. Not that that speaks definitively to the state of the country then, but it does suggest it wasn't some dystopian hovel.

@Revolucionar, for the sake of clarity, can you explain your position in simple terms? What I'm getting is that you are Croatian from Zagreb and have an enduring hostility towards the Serbs in the way that they behaved during the war.

Is that it, more or less?
 
Every time the subject is revived in the forum, I think to myself "here we go again".
The problem is identity politics. When one's ego is attached to an identity, it inherits its irrational rationalizations.
In a war like this one, everybody looses. However, it's easier to lose a war than to admit that all involved parties were played by the Western powers. For the ego, recognizing that one has been deceived (and still being deceived) is very difficult, hence the continuous finger pointing and the blame game. Still seeing NATO as saviors and protectors after all this time is a very bizarre delusion indeed.
Same here. It is a neverending story where the fault is always on the other side. When I see endless discussions about whose fault it was I want to drop it and don't read it anymore. I am honestly tired of that approach.
Throughout the 1980s, Yugoslavia (Dalmatian coast) was a popular summer holiday destination for Western Europeans. I have family members who went there regularly. Not that that speaks definitively to the state of the country then, but it does suggest it wasn't some dystopian hovel.

@Revolucionar, for the sake of clarity, can you explain your position in simple terms? What I'm getting is that you are Croatian from Zagreb and have an enduring hostility towards the Serbs in the way that they behaved during the war.
Yugoslavia was a decent place. Compared to the present time, oh my god it was like a fairytale.
There is a constant hostility between Croats and Serbs, Serbs and Albanians, and Albanians vs all Balkan Slavic nations. Macedonians vs Greeks, Bulgarians and Albanians. It is a mess. Everyone is against everyone and the other side is always wrong.

Let's stop with accusations of who was right and who was wrong. It can last forever. Let's just see the real facts and stop identifying with any nation so you can calm your ego and your programmed beliefs.
 
Well my hindsight back to those times is crystal clear to remember that statement "living in a dump and absolutely horrific times" is absolutely not true.
You're not addressing the arguments with counter arguments, you're just saying that it's so because you remember it being so.

I didn't say "living in a dump". I said the standard of living was in the dumps, in other words, not good. I said the 80s were horrific in terms of the economy. If you look at GDP per capita, Yugoslavia in the 80s was pretty much the same as it was in the 50s. Paired with failing state enterprises, rising unemployment, internal social tension, political instability and the general unreliability of basic products like fuel, I dare say that it was a pretty horrific situation (but I can concede that that word may be just a tad too much). Here's an article I found about the Yugoslav economy. YU Historija... ::: Welcome ... Economy
Haven't read the whole thing yet, but what he's saying is that Communism held back the country tremendously. And basically the only thing keeping it afloat was foreign debt (coming from the west). Which, once it came time to service the debt, caused huge problems across the board.
Every time the subject is revived in the forum, I think to myself "here we go again".
The problem is identity politics. When one's ego is attached to an identity, it inherits its irrational rationalizations.
In a war like this one, everybody looses. However, it's easier to lose a war than to admit that all involved parties were played by the Western powers. For the ego, recognizing that one has been deceived (and still being deceived) is very difficult, hence the continuous finger pointing and the blame game. Still seeing NATO as saviors and protectors after all this time is a very bizarre delusion indeed.
I'm trying to steer clear of the identity politics and look at the facts. Maybe I'm failing, but that's my intention. Not trying to play the blame game, just trying to figure out what actually happened, and if that sounds like playing the blame game, then so be it.

Throughout the 1980s, Yugoslavia (Dalmatian coast) was a popular summer holiday destination for Western Europeans. I have family members who went there regularly. Not that that speaks definitively to the state of the country then, but it does suggest it wasn't some dystopian hovel.
I didn't say that it was a dystopian hovel at any point. It was a relatively functioning state with beautiful natural resources that any amount of mismanagement couldn't destroy. It was also pretty civilized, so no wonder your family members felt good going there.
I'm saying that it was far from some sort of Communist utopia that many here are trying to paint it as. By the late 80s, it was barely functioning and it had nothing to do with external forces working to break it up and everything to do with the incompetence of the Communist leadership and their refusal to make any meaningful reforms.
In fact, the only reason it even worked out for so long, is because the West jumped onto the opportunity to stick it to the Soviets after the 1948. schism between Tito and Stalin, and decided to finance Yugoslavia to the tune of billions and billions of dollars. If you look at it that way, Yugoslavia was the West's poodle almost since its inception.
@Revolucionar, for the sake of clarity, can you explain your position in simple terms? What I'm getting is that you are Croatian from Zagreb and have an enduring hostility towards the Serbs in the way that they behaved during the war.

Is that it, more or less?
No. My only goal here is to unearth the reasons for the breakup and the war. I didn't even want to talk about the war itself too much.
What I've been seeing, and this thread is confirming, is that there's this enduring misplaced nostalgia for Yugoslavia and the idea that the West is the main culprit for the breakup and the ensuing conflicts. I just don't see these positions being borne out by the facts that I can gather.
I seriously have no ill feelings towards the Serbs. I have many Serb friends, from Croatia and from Serbia. I had a long time girlfriend who was a Croatian Serb and I feel like we are brotherly nations. I don't bear ill feelings towards anyone here either for anything they may have said. I hope we can have a civilized discussion.
As I said earlier in this thread, my goal was to try to rectify the, IMO, malconceived notion that the West was entirely to blame for what happened by propping up nationalists in Croatia and elsewhere and that the Serbs were somehow anti-imperialists who the West smeared, etc, etc...
There were plenty of articles on SOTT that carried this basic idea and I set out to pick apart some of those lies, misrepresentations and omissions.

Above all, I'm interested in the history, per se. I don't care about finger pointing or anything, just want to deal with the facts as they are to be found. I think it's a very interesting area with a lot of rich history that goes back millenia.
 
Yugoslavia was a decent place. Compared to the present time, oh my god it was like a fairytale.
Indeed, for those of us who remember 'before' and see 'after' - it is like heaven and earth.
Before ( up until mid 1990) there was a sense of prosperity and positive outlook for the future, there was a sense of security and stability.
Now there is mostly sense of gloom and doom all the way from Slovenia to Macedonia. And I feel sorry for younger generation who grew up only with that sense not knowing anything else.
 
What I've been seeing, and this thread is confirming, is that there's this enduring misplaced nostalgia for Yugoslavia and the idea that the West is the main culprit for the breakup and the ensuing conflicts. I just don't see these positions being borne out by the facts that I can gather.
There is enough material just in this thread that shows the role of the West in all that was happening on the Balkan.
 
By the late 80s, it was barely functioning and it had nothing to do with external forces working to break it up and everything to do with the incompetence of the Communist leadership and their refusal to make any meaningful reforms.
Actually this is not true, Ante Markovic's reforms that started in the late 80-ies were working and the economy was doing pretty well by 1990 but then soon the civil war erupted.
I remember fall 1990 and buying Yugoslav dinars at JFK Airport in New York, something that never happened before in the whole history of Yugoslavia.
 
While we at it, a bit lighter tone, ours Obodin fridge lasted some 40 years, and was working all that time. The last 20 years it was in our country house. At the end we replaced it with new Gorenje because it is using less electricity (smaller energy bill).

And you wouldn't believe, no one does, my neighbour have working Gorenje washing maschine from 1969. He doesn't use it any more, but fires it up from time to time.
 
There is enough material just in this thread that shows the role of the West in all that was happening on the Balkan.
Seems to me like all of it is cojceture or extrapolating facts from later years onto past conditions.
Actually this is not true, Ante Markovic's reforms that started in the late 80-ies were working and the economy was doing pretty well by 1990 but then soon the civil war erupted.
I remember fall 1990 and buying Yugoslav dinars at JFK Airport in New York, something that never happened before in the whole history of Yugoslavia.
It was too little, too late. From the article I linked earlier:
These obstacles to a relatively quick solution to the problem of foreign debt made it very difficult to start up economic production in improved macroeconomic conditions, which ultimately resulted in the economy stagnating for a whole decade with the constant acceleration of inflation and growth of the unemployment rate. Only at the end of 1989 the government of Ante Marković embarked on changing these systemic characteristics, which in the short term led to improved economic trends in 1990, but also to a renewed economic crisis at the end of that year and finally to the break-up of the country in 1991.

During that entire decade, the advocates of liberal economic solutions and democratic political legitimacy could not garner public support for the necessary changes while, at the same time, the influence of the nationalists grew until they finally prevailed in Serbia, after which the break-up of the country was inevitable. The more developed republics repeatedly highlighted the inequity of the fiscal system, which was the alleged cause of the overspill of their assets to less developed regions, while in Serbia the interest in new territorial delimitation along ethnic lines prevailed. While fiscal problems were solvable, territorial delineation along ethnic lines naturally signified the end of the common state.
 
the idea that the West is the main culprit for the breakup and the ensuing conflicts.
Just watch this documentary, at least from minute 12:56 to 31:00
Especially pay attention from min 28:40 and then a marvellous piece of propaganda from min 30:35.
While watching it now, remember the same tactics used now during i.e. COVID.
And that is how you start a war.

I just don't see these positions being borne out by the facts that I can gather.
Because your source is Wikipedia.

. Almost all of these companies became utter garbage by the 80s.
Garbage or not is again matter of discussion. You completely missed the point. The point was that the country produced everything that was needed and didn´t import that much, which means that all the money stayed in the country to build hospitals, schools, etc. Read again Z´s post.

But, hey, now Balkans don´t buy domestic garbage; we evolved and now we buy imported garbage from China. :rolleyes:
 
No. My only goal here is to unearth the reasons for the breakup and the war. I didn't even want to talk about the war itself too much.
What I've been seeing, and this thread is confirming, is that there's this enduring misplaced nostalgia for Yugoslavia and the idea that the West is the main culprit for the breakup and the ensuing conflicts. I just don't see these positions being borne out by the facts that I can gather.

But you just wrote:

the West jumped onto the opportunity to stick it to the Soviets after the 1948. schism between Tito and Stalin, and decided to finance Yugoslavia to the tune of billions and billions of dollars. If you look at it that way, Yugoslavia was the West's poodle almost since its inception.

As I said earlier in this thread, my goal was to try to rectify the, IMO, malconceived notion that the West was entirely to blame for what happened by propping up nationalists in Croatia and elsewhere and that the Serbs were somehow anti-imperialists who the West smeared, etc, etc...
There were plenty of articles on SOTT that carried this basic idea and I set out to pick apart some of those lies, misrepresentations and omissions.

I don't think anyone can reasonably think that the West was entirely to blame, they rarely are in such conflict, but when people see clear US meddling in the affairs of another state(s) I think it is understandable that the biggest fingers are pointed in that direction because, without that interference, we can never know if there would have been any war at all, or if the war may have been less destructive or protracted, and the outcome different.

Anyway, what is your position, given that it's not, as you say "the West was entirely to blame for what happened by propping up nationalists in Croatia and elsewhere and that the Serbs were somehow anti-imperialists who the West smeared, etc, etc..."

?
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom