Talk:Croatian nationalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Maps

I have been seeking the web to find a map which would suit this site. In 2001 I came accross a map published by a Croatian extremist group. Trying to find it now, it seems I cannot remember its name, OR it has been closed down - the content was rather unpleasant I have to be honest... but what I liked was the map of a "proposed" Croatian state originally drawn during the early 40's in the Nezavisna Republika Hrvatska. It placed within Croatia - Istria, including the north peninsula (Koper and Portoroz etc) which went to Slovenia, plus Western Slovenia AND the regions now in Italy (Gorizia and Trieste) etc. It encompassed much of Southern Hungary and went into Romania too plus it took all of Vojvodina as well - if this rings any bell to anyone. There was a caption under Vojvodina quoting that the Serb majoritry had only moved there in the 17th century and that the Croatian minority was present beforehand. Apart from that, I dare not argue with anyone that there was a "Serbianization" of Orthodox followers in the West Balkan and it may have even happened in Vojvodina. It is not to say that I agree or disagree with any of these extreme policies but the map is one that I'd love to see again and it would go well on this page. I hope someone can find it and I am sorry I know no more. Celtmist 9 March 2006


MY OPINION!

I think this definition of Croatian Nationalism is wrong, there were different types of nationalism. Anything in this acticle refers to the most far right wing view there is, it's disappointing that's for sure,they do not mention anything else about positive nationalism which is based upon and internationalistic view point. Any Croatian minority where there used to be a majority has never had any sort of uprising or crazy view that it should be switched back to Croatia. Yes Vojvodina used to be Croatian for example, so you would expect a small percentage of people to go on about this, but do you honestly think a Croatian nationalist would put these sorts of views before peace? I think they go on about this to make sure they are respected and have equal rights... It is like an Italian saying "wouldnt it be great if Rome was once as powerful as it was" do people turn around and start shouting "oh no its an Italian nationalist, he must be some sort of terrorist!" And imagine for example and Italian national living in Austria and he is injured or harmed for whatever reason and the embassy wants to know whats going on...this is normal, but if a Croatian in Vojvodina goes to church or wears a soccer jersey "oh no its the evil Croatian nationalists!! Hey look at the nazi's everyone! look what they did" GET OVER IT! You want a map Celtmist? i put a Croatian flag on the planet earth once in photoshop..ohh no i have just let lose our biggest Croatian nationalistic secret, we are claiming the world is our and will take it over, all 4 million of us that is... MA. User:58.107.135.104

And when exactly "Vojvodina used to be Croatian" according to you? Check any population census in history and you will see that number of Serbs in Vojvodina was always larger than a number of Croats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Vojvodina#Results_of_different_censa_in_Vojvodina_between_1880_and_2002 And not to mention that even those Croats that live in Vojvodina are not Croats at all, but Croatized Bunjevci and Šokci most of whom did not had Croatian national consciousness before the 20th century. PANONIAN (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

And regarding what Celtmist saw on the map which claim that "Serb moved to Vojvodina in the 17th century", it is very popular story among Croatian, Hungarian and Serbian expanzionists. The story claim that Serbs moved from Kosovo to Vojvodina in the 17th century (in 1690) and that after this Albanians moved to Kosovo. This story was used by both, Hungarian and Croatian expanzionists to justify their claims to Vojvodina and Serbian expanzionists to justify their claims to Kosovo. But what are real facts about this "Great Migration of the Serbs":

  • 1. The migration was not so large as some people claimed.
  • 2. Serbs lived in Vojvodina and Albanians lived in Kosovo before this migration (both facts are confirmed by Ottoman defters).
  • 3. Serbs from the great migration settled only in one part of Vojvodina (parts of Bačka), and only some of them settled here, while others settled in what are now Hungary and Slovakia.
  • 4. Only part of the Serbs from the great migration originated from Kosovo and others originated from other neighbouring locations.

So, the Great migration of the Serbs in 1690 did happened, but much what is said about it is rather a myth than a history. PANONIAN (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why is there a special section for this subject?

I do not see the need for a special section for this subject. Why is there a section on Croatian nationalism, whereas there is no section whatsoever regarding Serbian nationalism? It seems odd that there would be one and not the other.

I propose that the article be be deleted and its content moved to the "Greater Croatia" article where it would add some relevant context. If there are no objections within a week I may take initiative.

- r.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.183.154 (talk • contribs)

There are similar articles like Bosniak nationalism, German nationalism, etc, etc... Furthermore, the Croatian nationalism is not same as Greater Croatia because it can also refer to ethnic cleansing of Serbs within "smaller" Croatia, etc... PANONIAN (talk) 23:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


The Bosniak nationalism article to which you make reference "is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy." The "neutrality and factual accuracy" of that article is disputed. This article - questionable itself in regards to neutrality and accuracy - should be similarly nominated for deletion as well in my opinion. Your disinclination as to explain why there is no similar article on Serbian nationalism is noted. - r.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.183.154 (talk • contribs)

YEAH, Serbs should talk about Serbian nationalism on the Croatian nationalism talk page to prove themselves to you. If you want to write such an article, go ahead. PANONIAN or I won't stop you. There is no conspiracy, it's just no-one's been bothered to write that article yet. --estavisti 07:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

- How is it that members of WikiProject Serbia had the time to contribute an article about Croatian nationalism but seemingly did not similary have the time to write an article about Serbian nationalism? Your reply is obviously disingenuous in the extreme. If you are unable to contribute articles that are unbiased, you should refrain from doing so in my opinion. - r.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.183.154 (talk • contribs)

Since this is article about Croatian nationalism I do not see why we should discuss about Serbian nationalism. Anyway, you can still compare this article with German nationalism. Also, Croatian nationalism have much connection with Serbia (just remember WW2 events in the Serbian part of Syrmia). PANONIAN (talk) 01:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I ask again: what are members of WikiProject Serbia doing writing articles about Croatian nationalism and not Serbian nationalism? I cannot imagine your motivations are altruistic. - r. 70.70.183.154 08:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

You should be making or countering points, not insinuating things about other editors. Anyway, those editors may have their own personal interest in the subject - many families today in Serbia were heavily affected by the Ustasha genocide in the Independent State of Croatia. // estavisti 16:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

For user 70.70.183.154: if the fact that I am member of WikiProject Serbia bother you, then you can see that I am also member of WikiProject Croatia, and by your logic that would allow me to work on this article, right? :) Second thing: anybody on Wikipedia could work on any article that he choose. I work on the articles that are interesting to me and since Serbian nationalism is not very interesting subject for me here, I do not work on that article. If we use same logic, I can ask you why you do not work on articles about villages in Uganda. Obviously because they are not interesting to you, right? PANONIAN (talk) 01:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ANY POINT IN IT'S HISTORY???

"This concept implies that all territories that belonged to Croatia at "any point in its history" are "rightfully" Croatian and should again be part of the Croatian state."

THAT IS NOT AT ALL THE MOST POPULAR CONCEPT OF CROATIAN NATIONALISM. This is very much not neutral point of view. There are different forms of the nationalism, which seek different borders. The most extreme one is to get back the land Croats occupied before the turks came, and to include what they call Muslim Croats and Orthodox Croats who converted under Ottoman rule into their society. You are only writing this "at any point in history" just to make the idea of Croatian independence ridiculous. Really, the most extreme view should be stated as, "seeking the territory were the Croats first settled, and formed their first Kingdom". Serbian nationalism can be simply put as "any point in history", because Serbs spread into Croatian territory, CROATS NEVER DID THIS. This article defines Croatian nationalism only in it's extreme terms, with the least popular (BASED ON ELECTORAL VOTES, HRVATSKA STRANKA PRAVA only gets like 2% of the votes, where as the SERBIAN RADICAL PARTY HAS VERY RECENTLY BEEN THE MOST POPULAR POLITICAL PARTY IN SERBIA). You still can't compare the two though, because Serbian nationalim is not real, since a Serbian state never controlled Bosnia or Croatia, so they are seeking the lands of others through re-settling/invasion.

Most importantly, you are only defining the extreme nationalism (least popular), to make the whole movement seem evil. And it doesn't even follow the general definition of nationalism. So fucking change it ok.

- Pissed off Croat


me again, I see that I am not the first to bring up the argument that you are only defining the smallest minority philosophy of a Croatian state. You really need to change this propaganda....and as far as the previous discussion have had, you cannot deny that vojvodina was once part of the Croatian Kingdom, and continued to be part of the attonomous Croatian region under the Austro-Hungarian and Hapsburg empires. It was not till after WWI that this was handed over to serbs, even the culture in Vojvodina as many elements of Croatian culture, such the popularity of traditional Croatian Tambura Orchestras in novi sad (and please do not try to deny that the Tambura orchestra is an innovation Croatian music, cause there is no point in arguing this with me. I love music (all kinds of music, even Turkish, Bosnian and Serbian music. I study the musical theory and the history of the melodies so you really don't know who you are messing with here...).

This article is an outrage, and it goes in line with the "all Croats are Ustase" Serbian propaganda common during the early 90's...

- Slightly calmed down Croat


WAIT ONE MORE THING. You mentioned that Bunjevci are not real Croats....you have a silly view of nationalism, you think it only has to to the genetics or something. It is a social phenomena, people choose what culture they will align them selves with, for whatever reason. And I know a Bunjevci Croat, he plays Brac in a Croatian Tambura Orchestra, and he is Croatian, and I have never questioned weather or not he is. And the Bunjevci identified them selves as Croats much longer before the 20th century....you are so primitive to only think in terms of genetics when everyone is different...that's why Albanians and NO ONE ELSE can live with you. and now you will give me some statistic how Serbia is so ethnically diverse, well not when Kosovo goes free. Your ethnically diverse because you are controlling lands that are not yours...

This is not just a Croatian thing either. The Irish, Scotts, and English are largely NOT CELTIC OR ANGLO-SAXON. They are LARGELY NORMANS. Because the Normans invaded them starting in the 11th century. And especially in Ireland, the Normans accepted the Gaelic culture and became Gaelicized. Are you to say that some 30% of the Irish are not Irish, even though they have the same culture...If somebody is American, but descendants of Germans, is he no longer American even though he/she likes American music, TV, movies, and patriotism...Serbs really need to work on themselves. After WWII, Germany was forced by the UN to recognize its crimes, and it was not allowed to rationalize of justify any of its actions. Same thing happened with Croatia (but much worse, since their independence was suppressed), today Ustase symbols and slogans are illegal hate speech in Croatia, and are punishable crimes. Croats was not even allowed to talk about their victims (bleiburg) until 50 years later when they left Yugoslavia behind them. Things like this really helped Germany develop into a modern nation. This same process should happen to Serbia. Parties like the "serbian radical party" should be illegal. Documentaries like "Istina" should be banned. The ICTY and UN are really doing a bad job letting Serbia try to justify and rationalize the war as: "we are all to blame, all sides were guilty of radical nationalism" when Serbia was the one that rolled their tanks. Serbian propoganda is even worse today than it was in 91', cause the youth even believes it. Everything I'm telling you know has everything to do with the ignorance of this article. Really, Serbia needs to move on, and accept their wrongs and guilts and stop playing victim.

- Regular Croat