Re: Syndicate: moral responsibility

[Naskov@aol.c]

In a message dated 6/20/99 5:49:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
michael.benson@pristop.si writes:

<<  He was a cunning guy, Tito, and he understood how to keep
 a multinational country together far better than (the understatement
 of the decade!) Slobodan Milosevic. >>


Tito happened to live and work at a time quite different from today.  However 
great or horrible some of his policies and actions might have been, today we 
are experiencing the consequences, bad and good ones.  May we assume that the 
cold war had something to do with keeping a multinational country together?  
The relative security and prosperity of the average citizen of this social 
country, which faded away with the demise of socialism as it had existed.   
The severe repression and persecution of any nationalist or rightist 
movements and/or persons?   I see many contradictions when people glorify 
Tito's regime, but then turn around and make big "human rights" and "free 
market economy" statements.

The end of the cold war meant redefinition of the world order and the former 
Yugoslavia is only one example of the powers at play, albeit a more 
physically violent one.

May we also assume that the situation in Kosovo was a result of Tito's 
policies? Whom should we blame for the Kosovo population and economic 
dynamics during Tito's reign?

And one last thing -- you say that:
"Removal of the autonomous status of Kosovo and Vojvodina was part of
those late-80's moves by the Serbian socialist government under
Milosevic to extend direct rule from Belgrade. This marked the
beginning of the transition from "brotherhood and unity" socialism to
"blut-boden" *national* socialism."  

We should note, however, that in the case of Kosovo, the separation of Kosovo 
which Albanians seemed to cry for did not involve the break up of any other 
Yugoslavian Republic but Serbia.  While Slovenia and Croatia criticized 
Serbia for their treatment of Kosovo, we didn't see them giving any further 
autonomy to any of their minority regions/populations.  While I do not 
dispute the argument that Serbia tended to want to dominate Yugoslavia, part 
of this attitude may have been a result of their feeling threatened by the 
lack of support coming from the rest of the Republics in the Kosovo crisis.  
Moreover, considering the fact that Croatia and Slovenia (the catholic 
republics) had collaborated with the Nazis during W.W.II, I assume that the 
Serbs and other southern Slavs felt some moral superiority as the ones who 
had fought against evil and had been one the "winning /just side,"  as 
defined by the post WWII ideology.


By the way, when was Vojvodina's autonomy revoked? 


Best Regards,

Z. Naskov
------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
 Syndicate network for media culture and media art
 information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
 to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>
 in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress