The fallacy of imposing a third identity on them.

[Vasiliye]

I have seen many participants here and I have heard opinions from elsewhere that since the current "Macedonian" identity of FYROMians is absurd and historically invalid, that this population should find a new identity, which would serve to establish demarcation points around them.

Various names have been proposed: Vardarska Banovina (obviously unsuitable since that division of the Yugoslav Kingdom embraced territories further to the north and because of its association with the heavy-handed regime in interwar Yugoslavia) or Paeonia (defines the region in a more accurate sense but as a term is without recent tradition).

Perhaps main motivation behind these proposals is the observed intolerance of Pseudomacedonians to all neighboring regions, including Serbia and especially Bulgaria, which is all-pervasive throughout their agenda.Therefore, a "third", non-Bulgarian, non-Macedonian identity would harmonize the frictions from the present status quo.

On a practical note, as Petros noted, such third identity would at the same time eliminate FYROM's overbearing historical and cultural pretension to authentic Macedonia and also eliminate the creation of Greater Albania and Greater Bulgaria on the Greek northern border, states that would have little or no historical grounds for claiming Macedonia proper, but which would be by their sheer size much more effective threats to Greece on purely forward-looking geopolitical basis.

Knowing the present mentality of most FYROMian and starting from the conclusion that the present moment always contains traces of certain determinism, I can, perhaps in a laconic way to a certain extent, offer reasons why this is not possible.

1."Macedonisation" as a process which has some thin roots in decades immediate to WWII, but which definitely starts en masse only after 1944 was a process sponsored both by newly-created, self-confident centers of power (Communist states),with its enormous experience in the field of grassroot activism which suited one mentality which is obsolete today and which cannot be reactivated.The population in 1944, if we are to make a sketchy snapshot of the states of mind prevalent at that time, consisted mostly of Bulgarians who saw brief unification, but also sensed that history gave them the looser ticket and which with nostalgia from the brief liberation had to adapt themselves to the newly created situation.Other elements are Bulgarian, which welcomed the Bulgarian regime, but felt in dissatisfaction with the practical matters which it failed to provide-in other words, people of materialist type,sorts of pragmatists.The third and fourth elements were the latent Serbophille elements of the extreme north and Vlach in the south-West, with various mentalities with regard to current politics and various shades of loyalties to ideas, old and new.

The "Macedonisation" was an one time success of homogenizing these various elements into a new, non-traditional element without roots and with a fake identity, simply because for the Bulgarians, with all of their individual differences, compliance with the political situation of the early Cold War was better then rebellion, which especially after Tito's breakup with the Soviet Union, would not find any support in the West.Allocation of central funds for the development of this new nation plus the promotion of a moderate, non-separatist nationalism suppressed any Bulgarian idealism, whose rare exponents were effectively dealt with by the strong repressive aparatus.Serbophile element (excluding Serbs) were content with the interrupted circulation with Serbia.Vlach affirmed themselves as men behind the scenes of the little state's economic and cultural life.

But common to all elements is that prior to the 1944, feudal-ottoman traces in their mentality, in their ethos were so great and all-pervading, that the mass-education projects plus the illusion of social stability and modest prosperity emancipated them to the extent that their identity was, so it seemed, secured.They identified themselves with the Yugoslav microcosm to the extent that they lived with its up and downs.And when that state disappeared in the well-known manner, one good (sic) circumstance for all those who want the end of Pseudomacedonism is that this, FYROMian society took a more radical and more absurd form of identity.It is no coincidence that there were more (sic) pro-Bulgarian initiatives in the early 1990's, precisely when the Pseudomacedonian euphoria, with its specific iconography and rhetoric was at its peak.

We are witnessing two opposite poles on the political spectrum of FYROM: the Probulgarian and the Pseudomacedonian.The "Yugoslav Macedonian" ideology as a mixture of Marxism, soft-core ideologically purified, historically non-existent "Socialist VMROvism", emphasis on Slavdom and tracing of ethnic origin in the 19th century (with certain "retroactive anachronisms") has been totally outdated.The newly reinvented Probulgarian-Pseudomacedonian dichotomy is all that remains of vital forces in FYROM, with most citizens in the middle.This situation, as it is, together with the fact that the "third identity" although more realistic than the quasi-Macedonian one and more
grounded in local differences than the Bulgarian nationalism with its emphasis on the prestige of Eastern type and language, explains why such ahistorical idea cannot take roots.It is simply because it lack either imagined (and by now, very finely polished, although of course, unreal) historicity of the "Ancient Macedonian" identity or the realistic Bulgarian projection.

Finnaly, many latently Pro-Bulgarian FYROMians may sympathize with the
"Ancient Macedonism" as a modus vivendi which provides better expansionist agenda towards Greece and better excuse for keeping the Albanian dominated areas of FYROM than an open Bulgarian idea, especially if it is not supported by the geopolitical weight of annexation by Bulgaria.That relations of the Pro-Bulgarians towards Pseudomacedonians is not reciprocal, but it gives an incentive to most members of both parties to resist any novel, "third identity".

Both Serb and Vlach factor are largely irrelevant in this "identity battle", for demographic reasons, regardless of the fact that Serbs and Vlachs are the most educated citizens of FYROM and wealthiest non-Muslims.The states to whom they may owe loyalty are not irrelevant, but in this concrete issue, the identity politics, they have little to say, since the FYROMian mindset resist solutions in such matters from outside.

That's why I think that rebulgarization, with all the risk it carries, is the only process which should be encouraged in FYROM.

[Makedonas]

piss off with your bulgarian crap, id rather fyrom under serb or albanian rule then under bulgarian tatar nazi rule.

[Truth Bearer]

Makedonas are you serious?/What's yr beef man?Vasiliye is the messenger why are u so angry??

[Truth Bearer]

Originally Posted by Makedonas

piss off with your bulgarian crap, id rather fyrom under serb or albanian rule then under bulgarian tatar nazi rule.

And by the way what do YOU care what happenes to fyrom?????
You have some strange inclinations young man I must say......

[Makedonas]

what happens if the bulgarians take control of fyrom, very bad news for greece,use your head about it, bulgaria can aid the fyromians to say the people of Macedonia under Buglaria are the real Macedonians. this will be the worst thing that can happen to greece sovereignty at the moment.

[Truth Bearer]

And what do you think they have been sayiong over the past 80 years???Do u not bother to read what Bugarash is posting??Why don't you go and read some of his posts and then go tell me what you think?With Vasiliye you are way out of line mate please pull up lad.....

[Tsontos]

Makedonas take a break from posting for a few days for personal attacks.

[Victor]

IF fyrom collapses,who says BUlgaria would get it all?
Albanian claims are obvious.
SErbs are still rebuilding from the Yugo wars but I have no doubt they would claim the northern part.
Dont know if Greece would claim any land but Greece would have a say about the future of fyrom because of its investments.
And before all that fyrom might become a UN or EU protected zone for years or even decades.

[Drama]

Originally Posted by Makedonas

what happens if the bulgarians take control of fyrom, very bad news for greece,use your head about it, bulgaria can aid the fyromians to say the people of Macedonia under Buglaria are the real Macedonians. this will be the worst thing that can happen to greece sovereignty at the moment.

WAKE UP! Bulgaria is in EU now. Do you think Bulgaria would have ill meanings against a Brother- state? Oh come on .....Never heard about European Union Agreements? Or the idea why we have the political construct..

[Drama]

Originally Posted by Victor

IF fyrom collapses,who says BUlgaria would get it all?
Albanian claims are obvious.
SErbs are still rebuilding from the Yugo wars but I have no doubt they would claim the northern part.
Dont know if Greece would claim any land but Greece would have a say about the future of fyrom because of its investments.
And before all that fyrom might become a UN or EU protected zone for years or even decades.

Yes I think the Albanians would claim the wohle region around Tetovo in FYROM.. Just like rebells did 2001 I think.. And that's why FYROM doesn't want a autonomous Kosovo.. maybe with a Serbian and a Albanian region.. In case of an "independent" Kosovo the FYROM-Kosovo borders would be unstable..that's what FYROM fears... that Albanians draw a new border.

No, I don't think that Greece would claim any territory.. the years of the "megali idea" are over.. And I think that approaching on territory as an EU and Nato-Member is more than a brashness..It's imho the Albanian way of doing it! We have enough territory! I think Greece would breath a sigh of relief in terms of claimed Greek Macedonia and history.

And most of all.. the EU or UN would never accept a "occupied fyrom".. don't forget the FYROMians...