…The Opium Of The People?

Andrew Beaumont RSS / 22.01.2008. u 12:26

Most mornings, I take my dog for a walk in the park.  It usually involves being pulled from tree to tree to investigate who's been where and what they've been doing.  Because I'm not very interested in the  things that fascinate my dog, his stop-start progress lets me look around and see what's happening in the world.  One morning recently, the day of the Orthodox Theophany - the Epiphany, there was a lot of religion happening in the park. 

Just for the record, it was also Timket, the feast of the epiphany in Ethiopia and the Sunni Muslim festival of Ashura, so the Americans were busy protecting religious freedom in  Karbula.  So far as I could tell, neither Timket nor Ashura were being actively observed around here.

Now I've noticed that there's often a lot of Religion happening in Serbia and it's not just that there are more festivals or feast days here than I'm used to.   I'm from the UK, a country where organised religion no longer seems to be a major part of most people's lives, so when I came to live here it was a bit of a surprise to find out that their Church and their religious faith are apparently very important for many Serbs.  I was surprised because I didn't know then about the intricate web of connections between Serbian history and religion and the national identity. I don't claim to know much more about these things now, but perhaps I'm a bit better informed than I was about some of the consequences, in particular some political consequences.

National or political disputes based to some extent on religious tradition are hardly unique to the Balkans.  The troubled history of Ireland's relations with Britain is a tragic recent example of violent conflict between communities divided according to religious faith or dogma and there are too many more.  A less openly aggressive but still worrying example is the influence on US politics of Christian fundamentalism.  In its American incarnation, this fundamentalism has real potential to stimulate conflict, not just the violence of hate crimes against ‘perverts, abortionists and non-believers' but also conflict between intellect and ignorance, between progress and stagnation.    

As a country de facto, if not de jure committed to the separation of Church and State, the practical influence of Christian conservatives on politics in the United States is for me deeply troubling.  The First Amendment to their Constitution says that "...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".  That's fine as far as it goes, but it's not stopped the Christian religious establishment getting deeply ‘established' in politics to the extent that in most states its practically impossible for a declared atheist to get elected to public office.  Even though there are no laws or constitutional amendments which say that to get elected candidates must be God-fearing followers of the Judeo-Christian tradition who wear their faith on their sleeves, unfortunately this seems to be a basic qualification.  Apparently The 2007 U.S. Congress is "...among the most religiously diverse in the history of the institution, including a Muslim, two Buddhists, and the highest-ranking Mormon to ever serve".  Wow!  I bet the 5 million American Muslims are really pleased about that.  So what about all the other 531 Representatives and Senators?

Well, if you're interested - here's the breakdown: Catholic 155; Baptist 67; Methodist 61; Presbyterian 44; Jewish 43; Episcopal 37; Protestant nondenominational 26; Christian nondenominational 18; Lutheran 17; Mormon 15; United Church of Christ 7. Eastern Orthodox 5; Christian Science 5; Assemblies of God 4; Unitarian Universalist 2; African Methodist Episcopal 2; Buddhists 2; Evangelical 2; Seventh Day Adventists 2; Christian Reformed 2; Disciples of Christ 2; Church of Christ 2; Congregational Baptist 1; Anglican 1. Reorganized Mormon 1; Quaker 1; Church of God 1; Muslim 1; Evangelical Lutheran 1; Church of the Nazarene 1; Evangelical Methodist 1. No affiliation 6.

So, quite a God-fearing community then.  And someone thinks that religious affiliation is sufficiently important to justify asking all members of Congress which faith they subscribe to!  Apparently, only six members were brave enough to claim ‘no affiliation' but of these only Democratic representative Pete Stark has ‘come out' as a "Non-Theist".  Good for him!

At the other extreme are the Christian supporters of the insidious and counter-intellectual doctrine of creationism. It's more than a little worrying to know that there are a great many of these in Congress and they can apparently call on the support of the ‘intellectual giant' George W Bush who made his Presidential feelings known in 2005 when he suggested that schoolchildren should be taught about ‘intelligent design'. Intelligent design is a pseudo-scientific view of creation that challenges established scientific thinking and promotes the idea that an unseen force is behind the development of humanity. It has almost nothing to do with facts, only with religious faith and conviction.

 

So what's all this got to do with Serbia?   

During the war in 1995 the Serbian Orthodox Church was accused of "fervent Nationalism" and  it was said that the church's high council of bishops was dominated by hard line nationalists who wielded significant power over the church's supreme leader, Patriarch Pavle.  According to Mladan Zivotić, the church and the supporters of a ‘Greater Serbia' shared "...a common clerical-nationalist ideology, with a vision of a traditional, patriarchal society". He claimed, "This is a fundamentalist, anti-Western ideology,"

If this is true, why did these hard line nationalists of the church establishment feel qualified or entitled to engage in secular politics? Perhaps one reason is the Serbian orthodox story of the Serbs and Serbia, of the Nation and the people. Reading this story, its almost impossible to disentangle the threads of history and mythology; facts, half-truths and plain fiction skilfully woven over the years by the church and its supporters to create a picture of an oppressed people, valiantly surviving against  all the odds.  And of course in this picture, the church is the keeper and defender of the spirit and the values of the nation. 

In the USA too, many Christian churches market themselves as upholders and defenders of what they and their millions of supporters believe to be America's unique contribution to enlightenment and freedom.  One Nation Under God - as long as it's the right God.  The right to self-determination for all - as long as it's not socialist, or liberal or heaven forbid, fundamentalist Muslim self-determination!  Apparently its ok to insist that children are taught to believe in the co-existence of dinosaurs and humans but not it seems in the co-existence of opposing political philosophies.  So despite the fact that politics in the USA should be a God-free zone,  the fact is that the ‘religious right' exerts enormous influence on the business of government there.

In Serbia, there's also a constitutional separation of church and state.  Article 11 of the 2006 Constitution says that "The Republic of Serbia is a secular state. Churches and religious communities shall be separated from the state. No religion may be established as state or mandatory religion."  That's OK then.  But unfortunately, it'll take more that a three line Article to change the convictions and voting habits of many Serbs.  It appears to me that for many the values and traditions you must subscribe to if you're to call yourself a Serb are effectively the values and traditions of Serbian Christian orthodoxy. Serbian politicians who appeal to voters' sense of history and national identity appear to have a captive audience - and a big one at that.  Those who prefer to keep church-inspired dogma, imagery and ritual in its proper place may have a hard time getting elected here.  Not quite such a hard time as an atheist in the American bible belt perhaps, but it'll be tough!

Politicians know that few people actually vote for policies.  Voters prefer aspirations and big rhetoric. They like the candidate who'll tell them what they want to hear, who says what they'd like to say.  Even if they get the chance, very few will ask the difficult questions like.  ...OK, that's a good idea but how will you make it happen, what will it cost and what will you do if it doesn't work?  With genuinely independent mass media, in theory a candidate's or political party's manifesto can be scrutinised and tested and their record of achievement (or otherwise) can be examined.  But even if you've the luxury of a free press (and my jury's still out on the Serbian media), it takes a special kind of voter to scrutinise and test all the words and hot air generated at election time.

I've heard it claimed (mostly by Americans) that the United States is the world's most sophisticated democracy. Yes, well... Is anyone else here following the Fox News coverage of the Republican and Democratic Caucus process?  Ok, The Washington Post and The New York Times and some other ‘Long Words - Low Circulation' papers make an attempt to scrutinise the arguments and to be balanced and objective in their reporting but frankly, they're small islands of sanity in a sea of banality and prejudice. People like to hear what they already believe, they like the big headlines and easy answers offered by most of the mass media and many of them vote accordingly.  Perhaps that's how George W Bush, the inarticulate and ‘intellectually challenged' leader of the Western World got elected - twice!  Is Serbia much different?  No, of course not, and nor are the UK and most other ‘mature' democracies.

So as a Serbian voter, how do you react when political parties say what you want to hear, when they use big headlines and easy answers to tell you they're the custodians of the ‘orthodox' national identity, the defenders of your most cherished values and traditions?  What do you think when they tell you that you're an innocent victim, universally misunderstood and unfairly vilified despite your glorious history of resistance to oppression, your rich culture and your centuries-long struggle for self - determination?  How do you feel if they tell you that Serbia can make it on its own, or perhaps with just a little help from that cradle of political integrity and parliamentary democracy, Russia?  Do you really believe them when they say that Serbia has no need to sell it's soul to the new Europe?  If you're someone who can see through hollow rhetoric based at best on a partial and highly selective church-sponsored view of history, and at worst on a cynical manipulation of some very vulnerable people then maybe you'll not be fooled into voting for unachievable aspirations and unworkable policies. 

But if you are one of those vulnerable people, what do you do?  If you're someone who struggles every day to get by, to pay all the bills and do all the shopping for the family on 250 Euros a month, don't you want to believe them when they promise you a more prosperous future, even though they've not told you how they'll actually make it happen?  And if you're someone who's desperate to work but who's not young or attractive enough, or who hasn't got the right connections to get a decent job, isn't it tempting to put your faith in people who promise to create jobs for all despite the fact that many of the  foreign investors needed to finance economic growth will beat a hasty retreat if these people actually get elected?  And if you're someone who's sick or disabled or, God help you, an older person living on a tiny, fixed pension doesn't the prospect of a fair, universal social security system interest you, even though its not clear who'll pay for it?  Or perhaps you're young and well educated and working in MacDonald's, and you can't help noticing that a few of your friends from school or university seem to be doing pretty well for themselves, even though they don't seem to be working very hard...

If Mladan Zivotić was right, that Serbian nationalism in the 1990's was a "clerical-nationalist ideology, with a vision of a traditional, patriarchal society" then considering what's been said by some ‘leading politicians' recently, you may be tempted to agree with me that even though the message has been updated, the fundamental political philosophy is probably still the same.  If so, it's a discredited political philosophy but one that's still likely to appeal to vulnerable, disillusioned people who have very little except their sense of a national identity, their strong religious faith and their respect for their church and its teachings.  Many people who live with disappointment don't have the time or energy or inclination to think about complex solutions to difficult problems, they're too busy simply surviving.  There are a lot of them here.  Perhaps they're thinking that if the political message echoes the teaching of the church, then maybe its safer and simpler to keep the faith? 

Serbian nationalist politicians exploit these vulnerable people because to get power they offer simple, attractive solutions to complex problems.  To discourage too much scrutiny. they sell their package of insubstantial policies wrapped in a veneer of history, ideas and imagery drawn from orthodox tradition.  The fact is that history, including Serbian history demonstrates the frailty of fundamentalist, nationalist political philosophy in practice. It just doesn't translate into practical, sustainable policies to improve peoples' lives. Governments who've not learned this lesson tend to have a very short shelf-life. 

Fundamentalism is pernicious and it comes in many forms. In the interests of "balance",  fundamentalism inspires apparently intelligent American legislators to support the teaching of a Judeao/Christian creation myth in schools alongside hard science,  but in fact all they do is perpetuate ignorance and prejudice.  Fundamentalism inspires intolerance and discrimination.  If you are a woman who's a victim of domestic violence in Serbia or Saudi Arabia, you'll understand what it means to live in a "..traditional patriarchal society"  The difference is that in Serbia, you can drive yourself to hospital. It's illegal for a Saudi women to drive.  And then of course, it can inspire horrific cruelty in the name of ‘the Cause'.  Ultimately, fundamentalism inspires conflict, not just a conflict of ideas but real, blood in the sand conflict because fundamentalists can't accept the other person's right to disagree. 

A fundamentalist, nationalist political philosophy is by definition, simplistic, dogmatic and inflexible.  It doesn't just stimulate and support conflict, it inhibits progress and encourages stagnation.  There can be few better examples of this process than the experience of Serbia during the 1990's. In that case, why do so many Serbs apparently accept the discredited, fundamentalist and nationalist philosophy of some politicians here who make promises they can never keep? You could equally ask why so many Americans were foolish enough to re-elect a president who had taken them into a disastrous ‘war on terror' against an ‘axis of evil' that existed if at all, only in his distorted imagination.

The answer probably has a lot to do with power, the power of the few over the many to do things they could otherwise not get away with.  The power to exaggerate, to manipulate, to control and ultimately to convince voters where their ‘best interests' lie.   In America, real power is exercised by an unholy alliance which includes the military-industrial complex and the oil companies, who'll use any means at their disposal including extraordinarily large amounts of money to ensure the election of an administration which will serve their interests.  If that means supporting political representatives of the fundamentalist Christian far right, so be it.  They'll put up with the fact that their children will believe Darwin was a heretic spawn of the devil, so long as the dollars keep rolling in. 

And in Serbia too, if getting power (and maintaining your luxury lifestyle?) in a country plagued by disadvantage and disillusion means that you must exploit vulnerable people's genuine fears, if you must tell them that contrary to all the evidence, there really are simple solutions to complex problems, or if you must manipulate them by cynically appealing to their religious convictions, then for some that seems to be ok.

So the question is, will the people of Serbia let them get away with it? Will they choose insight or ignorance, progress or stagnation?  As I write, it appears that more than 1.6 million people, around forty percent of those who voted in the first round of the presidential election have accepted the nationalist, fundamentalist message.  The good news is that some sixty percent rejected it!  It remains to be seen whether the next round will produce a similar result with just two candidates.  To be honest, if it doesn't, I'm not sure that I'll want to live in a fundamentalist state where political policy is dictated by people whose imagination and insight is constrained by parochial self-interest and by their slavish commitment to distorted and misleading images of past glory.  I'm here because I want to live in a country with a future.  I don't believe that a fundamentalist, nationalist Serbia has a future.



Komentari (43)

Komentare je moguće postavljati samo u prvih 7 dana, nakon čega se blog automatski zaključava

dunjica dunjica 12:55 22.01.2008

Request

Andrew,
I would like to read the whole post, but I miss some structuring into chapters, for example. Could you make it easier for the readers to get through?
vidomir pavlovic vidomir pavlovic 13:02 22.01.2008

Re: Request

Da li postovi moraju biti ovako dugački i da i je neophodno da budu na engleskom. Ne verujem da svi blogeri znaju engleski. Primetio sam da postovi na engleskom obično imaju veoma malo komentatora, što govori koliko ljudi znaju toliko dobro engleski da bi mogu komentarisati.

Sa izvinjenjem
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 14:23 22.01.2008

simplifikacija:

FUNDAMENTALISM is pernicious and it comes in many forms. In the interests of “balance”, FUNDAMENTALISM inspires apparently intelligent American legislators to support the teaching of a Judeao/Christian creation myth in schools alongside hard science, but in fact all they do is perpetuate ignorance and prejudice. FUNDAMENTALISM inspires intolerance and discrimination. If you are a woman who’s a victim of domestic violence in Serbia or Saudi Arabia, you’ll understand what it means to live in a “..traditional patriarchal society” The difference is that in Serbia, you can drive yourself to hospital. It’s illegal for a Saudi women to drive. And then of course, it can inspire horrific cruelty in the name of ‘the Cause’. Ultimately, FUNDAMENTALISM inspires conflict, not just a conflict of ideas but real, blood in the sand conflict because FUNDAMENTALISTs can’t accept the other person’s right to disagree. A FUNDAMENTALIST, nationalist political philosophy is by definition, simplistic, dogmatic and inflexible. It doesn’t just stimulate and support conflict, it inhibits progress and encourages stagnation. There can be few better examples of this process than the experience of Serbia during the 1990’s. In that case, why do so many Serbs apparently accept the discredited, FUNDAMENTALIST and nationalist philosophy of some politicians here who make promises they can never keep? …. If that means supporting political representatives of the FUNDAMENTALIST Christian far right, so be it. …..As I write, it appears that more than 1.6 million people, around forty percent of those who voted in the first round of the presidential election have accepted the nationalist, FUNDAMENTALIST message. The good news is that some sixty percent rejected it! It remains to be seen whether the next round will produce a similar result with just two candidates. To be honest, if it doesn’t, I’m not sure that I’ll want to live in a FUNDAMENTALIST state where political policy is dictated by people whose imagination and insight is constrained by parochial self-interest and by their slavish commitment to distorted and misleading images of past glory. I’m here because I want to live in a country with a future. I don’t believe that a FUNDAMENTALIST, nationalist Serbia has a future.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 15:13 22.01.2008

Re: simplifikacija:

It would have been far better if you analyzed the causes of nationalism in Serbia rather than creating a simplistic comparison between Serbian, USA and Saudi Arabian "fundamentalism". It is interesting to see how a dogmatic mindset creates and perpetuates Serbophobe myths.

Don't you think that there is a rational cause for the swing towards nationalism? If there is a change, there must be a cause for this change, or perhaps your believe in some Darwinist genetic predispositions.

Croatian nationalism and genocide in WW2 Bosnia and Croatia was caused by Serbophobia of the Ustashi. Nationalists in the "golden age" of Yugoslavia in the 1970s were the Croatian Spring leaders. Apparently they were dissatisfied with the amount of taxes they were paying in comparison to the rest of the country. Tudjman's extremist nationalism is well documented in the English language and speaks in itself. Re-emergence of Tudjman's Serbophobia spawned many negative reactions in the Bosnia-Croatia regions in the 90s and led to the wars.

Serbian nationalism comes only as a reaction and a defense against rape already committed by others. Currently, since Serbs have no practical influence in Kosovo since 1999, it is the West which is raping Serbia this time. I fully sympathize with the majority vote and I understand their feelings of helplessness.

It would be better to address the cause of nationalism than to perpetuate Serbophobia.
Andrew Beaumont Andrew Beaumont 16:11 22.01.2008

Re: Request

I'd love to help. The piece was more organised when I sent it - maybe I've been sabotaged! Perhaps it's my '"simplistic analysis", sorry Vladimir but it didn't seem simple when I was writing it... As for perpetuating 'Serbophjobia', that was the last thing on my mind and I don't think that's what I've done. Maybe there's scope for someonje to offer their views on 'Serboparanoia'?

your view

Andrew, it is interesting to read about your views.
I am wondering what made you live in Belgrade.
I was also suprised to learn that there are no Scietologists in Congress :)
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 17:54 22.01.2008

Re: Request

You said:
I'm not sure that I'll want to live in a fundamentalist state where political policy is dictated by people whose imagination and insight is constrained by parochial self-interest and by their slavish commitment to distorted and misleading images of past glory.


That sounds like Serbophobia to me, with a tinge of paranoia too. What is a fundamentalist state and who is planning to establish it? The Talebans tried it. Good thing NATO was here to free the Afghans and they are also not too far from Belgrade. So I would't be too worried. Besides there are a lot of whistleblowers in Belgrade who will call NATO to the rescue. I suggest that you just relax and don't worry about people
whose imagination and insight is constrained by parochial self-interest and by their slavish commitment to distorted and misleading images of past glory


Could you name a few "parochial self-interests" for the sake of mutual understanding?
Milan M. Ćirković Milan M. Ćirković 22:31 22.01.2008

Re: Request

vidomir pavlovic
Da li postovi moraju biti ovako dugački i da i je neophodno da budu na
engleskom. Ne verujem da svi blogeri znaju engleski. Primetio sam da
postovi na engleskom obično imaju veoma malo komentatora, što govori
koliko ljudi znaju toliko dobro engleski da bi mogu komentarisati.

Sa izvinjenjem

Pa delimicno se ljudi ustrucavaju ako nisu sigurni bas u svaki zarez, ali delimicno to jeste nas ozbiljniji problem - imamo premalo ljudi sa znanjem svetskih jezika - i treba da *radimo* da to sto pre promenimo!

(Partially, people hesitate if unsure in all language niceties, but it is partially our far more serious problem - we have too few citizens with working knowledge of global languages - and we should working towards changing that circumstance!)
dunjica dunjica 23:17 22.01.2008

Re: Request

Mislim da nije pretjerano očekivati od nekoga tko živi u Srbiji da razumije srpski.

Milan M. Ćirković Milan M. Ćirković 05:05 23.01.2008

Re: Request

dunjica
Mislim da nije pretjerano očekivati od nekoga tko živi u Srbiji da razumije srpski.


Kad bi srpski politicari dali u tome primer, ne bi bio problem... Ali zemlja koja i po zvanicnoj statistici ima 16% nepismenih, a broj ljudi sa znanjem stranih jezika se meri jednocifrenim procentom, ima ITEKAKAV jezicki problem. Druga stvar: ako neko zivi u Srbiji privremeno, zbog posla, kao strucnjak ili diplomata ili trgovac, ne vidim zasto ne bi bilo ne samo gostoljubivo (inace po mom misljenju lazno "tradicionalno gostoljublje", vec i lepo da mu se ponekad obratimo i jezikom koji mozda bolje razume, zar ne? Potpuno isto kao sto je lepo da ako znamo da neko bolje vari piletinu nego svinjetinu (sto ne znaci da ovu potonju mora da odbije), kad ga zovemo na veceru, i mi vodimo racuna o tome, ne?
dunjica dunjica 10:18 23.01.2008

Re: Request

Milane,
moje je iskustvo da se ljudi doista trude obraćati se strancima na engleskom (s ostalim stranim jezicima je nešto teže). Svuda na Balkanu, i u okviru vlastitih mogućnosti. Eto, znam mnogo primjera stranaca koji su naučili Jezik, nastojali ga svuda koristiti, i bili ponosni na to, a uporno dobijali odgovore na engleskom. Ili, nemali broj puta, ako sam u njihovom prisustvu i ovi (stranci) se obrate nekome na Jeziku, taj netko se obrati meni i kaže: "Recite mu da..." (i tu slijedi odgovor na pitanje). Ali ovo zadnje je već drugi problem.

Ovo, naravno, ne isključuje ono o čemu pišeš i sa čime se u principu slažem. Važno mi je naglasiti princip uzajamnosti.

metanoia metanoia 15:08 22.01.2008

Quesition of faith and national identity

Congratulations Andrew on this very good post. My only remark would be related to its length considering the non English speaking audience. You made excellent observation concerning the relation between religious heritage of Serbian people and its constant abuse in favor of ideological and political goals. According to my opinion, Orthodox faith is inseparable from identity of our people, but on the other side, it must be separated from the states policies. The problem of manipulation with religious feelings and questions of national identity has longer historical and ideological roots, which brings us to idea of slavophilism in 19th century and its later protagonists in Serbia: St. Nikolaj Velimirovic and Justin Popovic. The idea of slavophilism is being revived in political rhetoric of Serbian nationalists, creating the distorted image toward Western world as totally secularized and alienated world with ultimate goal to destroy the unity of Serbian and other Slavic people. This way the West is becoming not only political enemy but its being represented as spiritual enemy also, hence, the problem of nationalism in Serbia is very deep and deeply connected with misuse of religion issues and questions of spiritual and national identity. On the other side, the basic problem of Western approach toward Serbia, the misunderstanding of connection between faith and nationality. Neglection of this link has been repeated once more in strong Western support for Kosovo's independence, which for Serbian people represents the soul and cradle of national identity. Therefore, misunderstanding of this problem within Western politicians is only making the position of radical and extreme elements in the our country stronger and their arguments firm.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 15:19 22.01.2008

Quesition of faith and national identity

Pravi jagićevski pristup sa primesama staljinizma:


According to my opinion, Orthodox faith is inseparable from identity of our people


the problem of nationalism in Serbia is very deep and deeply connected with misuse of religion issues and questions of spiritual and national identity
metanoia metanoia 15:31 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

Vladimir Maričić
Pravi jagićevski pristup sa primesama staljinizma:


According to my opinion, Orthodox faith is inseparable from identity of our people


the problem of nationalism in Serbia is very deep and deeply connected with misuse of religion issues and questions of spiritual and national identity


A zašto to mislite?
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 17:44 22.01.2008

Quesition of faith and national identity

Vasa shvatanja su u osnovi jagicevska. Teorija po kojoj su Srbi pravoslavci a Hrvati katolici je njegova.
Najrasprostranjeniji slucaj u Evropi je da se narod zove po svom jeziku. Drugi slucaj je da se narod zove prema drzavi. Vatroslav Jagic je tvrdio da su Srbi i Hrvati jedan narod, ali da se razlikuju po veri.

Srbi su u 18 veku bili narod bez svoje drzave. Narod koji je odrzavao takozvano svetosavsku tradiciju medjutim nije bio jednoveran. Nemanjici su u svojoj famili imali i pravoslavce i katolike.
Mnogi Srbi su presli na Islam, a drugi u katolicanstvo, moramo uzeti u obzir da je bilo i protestanata i ateista. Dositej Obradovic, Jan Kolar, Jernej Kopitar, Dobrovski, Safarik kao glavni istrazivači tog perioda su postepeno otkrivali da jednim jezikom koji su austrijske vlasti zvali Ilirski, govori veliki broj ljudi koji su se identifikovali prema svojim regijama. Vuk Karadzic, kao lingivista, je istrazivajuci terene zakljucio da srpskim jezikom govore pravoslavci, katolici i muhamedanci, i da su prema tome svi ovi Srbi. Jagićevo mišljenje je preovladalo tek u Kraljevini Jugoslaviji, jer su vlasti pravile svakakve ustupke Hrvatim nebili ih privoleli na zajednistvo. Jagiceva teorija je stvorila u Bosni tri naroda -- a svaki je druge vere. Unikatno u svetu.

Razni staljinisti kasnije ubacuju u svoja razmisljanja o naciji razne druge kriterijume -- kulturu, religiju, poreklo, teritoriju, psiholoska svojstva, itd.
dunjica dunjica 18:44 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

Vladimire Maričiću,
zaboravili ste Nijemce, odmetnuto srpsko pleme. O tome se ozbiljno (hm, kako za koga) pisalo na starom Blogu (šifra/nick: čika Miloje. Ili ste Vi taj?)
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 19:29 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

dunjica
Vladimire Maričiću,zaboravili ste Nijemce, odmetnuto srpsko pleme. O tome se ozbiljno (hm, kako za koga) pisalo na starom Blogu (šifra/nick: čika Miloje. Ili ste Vi taj?)



draga dunjica,
pojasnite o cemu vi govorite
metanoia metanoia 19:34 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

Ne smatram da svi Srbi nužno moraju da budu i pravoslavne mere, uostalom, postoje i slučajevi koji o tome svedoče. Kada sam napisao da je Pravoslavna vera neodvojiva od identiteta i etosa našeg naroda onda sam mislio na većinu srpskog naroda kao i na kontinuitet, uticaj, ulogu i pre svega važnost koji je pravoslavna vera imala u istoriji našeg naroda. Sasvim je sigurno da neko ko je Srbin a druge je vere ne gubi svoj nacionalni identitet i tu tom smislu ne postaje Hrvat ili osoba neke druge nacionalnosti. U ovom kontekstu ne vidim kako bi moje mišljenje mogu biti u paraleli filološkom teorijom Jagića.
dunjica dunjica 19:40 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

Vladimir Maričić
dunjica
Vladimire Maričiću,zaboravili ste Nijemce, odmetnuto srpsko pleme. O tome se ozbiljno (hm, kako za koga) pisalo na starom Blogu (šifra/nick: čika Miloje. Ili ste Vi taj?)



draga dunjica,
pojasnite o cemu vi govorite


Na žalost, nije više moguće naći originalnu prepisku/blog, ali evo jednog na kojem se to spominje:
LINK

I pitanje:
Re-emergence of Tudjman's Serbophobia spawned many negative reactions in the Bosnia-Croatia regions in the 90s and led to the wars.

Serbian nationalism comes only as a reaction and a defense against rape already committed by others.

Da li stvarno vjerujete u ovo ili je trebalo biti "samo" provokacija? Iskreno se nadam da je ovo drugo. Iako bi mi bilo najdraže da se manemo djetinjastog natezanja "tko je bio prvi" i crno-bijele slike svijeta.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 21:30 22.01.2008

Quesition of faith and national identity

dunjice,
Koliko se secam Hrvatska je bila drzava "Hrvata, Srba i ostalih" . Verovatno se nisu sami Srbi ispisali iz hrvatskog ustava.Mislim da je to bio tezak udarac i neshvatljiv postupak mnogim Srbima u Hrvatskoj osim u kontekstu ustaske srbomrznje. Otud i to nepravedno poistovecivanje Tudjmana i hadezeovskih crnokosuljaskih mitinga sa ustastvom, pravastvom itd. Pa i desekracija ostataka zrtava izvadjenih iz medjugorskih jama je mozda uticala na pojavu srpskog nacionalizma, priznajte barem malo.

metanoia: O PROMENI IDENTITETA:
Interesantni su slucajevi Nikole Tomazea (Niccolo Tomaseo 1802-1874) rodjen u Sibeniku u srpskoj trgovackoj porodici, Skolovao se u Italiji, sahranjen je u Panteonu kao slavni italijanski nacionalni pesnik i knjizevnik.. U poslednjem izdanju svoje knjige "Iskrice" gde god je pisalo "ilirski", "slavenski" ili "jugoslovenski" kao ime jezika, on je promenio u srpski, jer je prihvatio Karadzicevu filolosku teoriju.

Drugi slucaj je Sandor Petefi najveci madjarski pesnik (1823-1849) rodjen od oca Srbina Aleksandra i majke slovakinje, koji je bio madjarski nacionalista.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 21:44 22.01.2008

Re: Quesition of faith and national identi

metanoia:
Sasvim je sigurno da neko ko je Srbin a druge je vere ne gubi svoj nacionalni identitet i tu tom smislu ne postaje Hrvat ili osoba neke druge nacionalnosti. U ovom kontekstu ne vidim kako bi moje mišljenje mogu biti u paraleli filološkom teorijom Jagića.


Identitet se moze izgubiti i promeniti i to se desava stalno. Jedino se poreklo ne gubi osim ako se ne zatre i zaboravi. Nacionalni identiteti su promenljivi jer nacija je vezana za politicku zajednicu ili drzavu. Jagiceva teorija nije samo filoloska nego je i politicka jer on prvo govori o identitu pa onda o jeziku:"Srbi i Hrvati su jedan narod koji se razlikuje po veri. To nije tvrdio Karadzic, on je govorio kao filolog da srpskim jezikom govori jedan narod sa tri konfesije, pritom nije smatrao da su Slovenci, Cakavci, Kajkavci i svi Stokavci Srbi ili srpskog porekla.

Prenaglasavanje religijskog elementa je nepotrebno, nisam primetio da se u ovoj kampanji uopste naglasavaju pitanja religije.
deadbeat deadbeat 17:09 22.01.2008

religion & nationalism

If "religion is the opium of the people" and "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel", how powerful is the combination of the two when applied to the feeble mind of an average Serbian voter, who desperately needs both the opium and the refuge? Very powerful, apparently, considering how oblivious it can make him regarding the misery they brought upon our country. Not many revelations about Serbs and religion in this blog, at least not for those who lived here for the last 20 years and who must be aware of the constant clericalization of the state. Still, a decent analysis of the unyielding power of religion (and nationalism, as they can hardly be separated) throughout the modern world. It's been established that clerical influence to the state is by no means a Serbian exclusivity, but a question of differences between Serbian and, say, American fundamentalism should be asked. I don't want to discuss the latter, as there are many patriots who crave the opportunity to kick the evil western empire. Anyway, I've never been to USA and I live in Serbia, so I know a thing or two about Serbs and Orthodox church.

Serbs are not genuinely religious - after all, with some exceptions, vast majority fully enjoyed 40 years of atheism - they like to uphold the image of "good Christians" because it's convenient: either because of the omnipresent "flock mentality", or as means of aiding and justifying their far more mundane goals and needs, personal or national. And that would be just fine, if only it wouldn't influence to such extent the lives of those who don't share the same medieval convictions and who don't think that clergy should be the predominant force structuring and directing our lives, our future and our country. The majority of Serbs, knowingly or inadvertently, partake in, support or simply tolerate this malignant process - and it drives me crazy.

p.s. za "govori srpski da te ceo svet razume" raju - niko vas ne bije po usima da citate blogove na engleskom, ali vi se uporno javljate sa jednim te istim pricama. Oladite bre, i ne povecavajte broj komentara i citanost imperijalistima koji bi da vam otmu ćirilicu.

Re: religion & nationalism

I (born to family with Orthodox Christian tradition) have been wondering about the de-secularistion trend in Serbian poltics as well. However, I am not surprised (that much) to observe the rise in nationalism, because it has been happening in other European countries (ie France and Germany), as a response to globalisation.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 18:04 22.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

deadbeat said:
the constant clericalization of the state
Is this in the region of mythomania perhaps? Or is this Serbophobia also?

Serbs are not genuinely religious
A sudden change of mind? Make up your mind deadbeat.

..... clergy should be the predominant force structuring and directing our lives
, Pure imagination! When is the last time a priest structured your life?

majority of Serbs, knowingly or inadvertently, partake in, support or simply tolerate this malignant process - and it drives me crazy.
Generalization. Of the 60% that voted 40% perhaps fits your definition. Is that called a majority? That is just over 25% of the population.

Is this all about
the feeble mind of an average Serbian voter
?
Milan M. Ćirković Milan M. Ćirković 22:37 22.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

Vladimir Maričić

Generalization. Of the
60% that voted 40% perhaps fits your definition. Is that called a
majority? That is just over 25% of the population.

You're waaaay too optimistic. First, this is at least 40% of what can be called participating citizenship - and there are many reasons of both theoretical (i.e. developed in political theory) and practical reason to consider only this subset of the total population. Second, you underestimate the power of disguised support (or Milosz' "ketman" which has been practiced here for centuries - there are many people whom I know who are right now supporting democratic factions, voting for pro-European parties, etc. - but only since their underlying reason is "they [meaning primarily Croats, Bosnians, Albanians] got stronger this time, but we need to wait and prepare, attract money and possibily alliances of great powers - in order to get our revenge later". I guess this is as malignant as any open fascism, marching in the streets for Himmler's birthday, celebrating war criminals, etc.
Milan M. Ćirković Milan M. Ćirković 22:41 22.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

Vladimir Maričić
pure imagination! When is the last time a priest structured your life?

Just the other day I had to pay "voluntary" tax fee for restauration of Hilandar or building of St. Sabas, or whatever clerical issue.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 10:07 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

Ćirković:
You're waaaay too optimistic. ................I guess this is as malignant as any open fascism, marching in the streets for Himmler's birthday, celebrating war criminals, etc.


It is better to be optimistic in life than to be a Serbophobe, Islamophobe, anti-Semite or to hate any other race or nation (as it seems you do).
deadbeat deadbeat 11:53 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

@Vladimir Maričić
I don't want to engage in a discussion with you, because we're obviously of such disparate mindsets that it would be futile, to say the least. While you speak in terms of nation and "who started first", I consider the concepts of both religion and nation to be obsolete. In other words, I don't hold religious or national affiliation relevant for evaluating people (including myself) - taking pride in something your countrymen did centuries ago, or having religious doctrine as a guideline for your life is absurd, or just plain stupid (being ashamed of the deeds of one's countrymen is a different thing). I can't take pride in the qualities given at birth: i.e. if one is born intelligent, one has only luck to thank for it. So, the only thing a person can take credit for is personal endeavour - what you do makes you who you are.
Although I said I want no argument with you, your overzealous efforts to discredit me and other participants of this blog compel me to reply to your attempted vivisection of my comment.

Vladimir Maričić
deadbeat said:
the constant clericalization of the state
Is this in the region of mythomania perhaps? Or is this Serbophobia also?

No, it's in the region of living in Serbia, which can often induce Serbophobia. Priests imposing bans on festive rallies, priests in RRA, priests being exempt from taxes and criminal prosecution, priest having a say in matters of state - I'd call that clericalization (or desecularization) of the state. If you want to disregard all that (and much more), there is still a fact that state politics is guided by religious concepts of the past, like sacrifice, "spiritual heritage" and whatnot, instead of rational planning for the future and caring for its citizens.


Serbs are not genuinely religious
A sudden change of mind? Make up your mind deadbeat.

There is a huge difference between being religious, in the sense of honoring the ten commandments and moral standards preached (and seldom practiced) by the church, and practicing religious rituals, which is what Serbs do.

..... clergy should be the predominant force structuring and directing our lives
, Pure imagination! When is the last time a priest structured your life?

Already answered this, but the question makes me wonder if we live in the same country. Do we? I’d appreciate an answer.


majority of Serbs, knowingly or inadvertently, partake in, support or simply tolerate this malignant process - and it drives me crazy.
Generalization. Of the 60% that voted 40% perhaps fits your definition. Is that called a majority? That is just over 25% of the population.
What do voting percentages have to do with this? I’m talking about PEOPLE in the streets, in buses, offices, people on TV and other media. Again, do you live in Serbia? Btw, by dabbling in these percentages, you’ve (unconsciously) admitted that it IS a malignant process.

Is this all about
the feeble mind of an average Serbian voter
?

Yes, it most definitely is.
deadbeat deadbeat 12:11 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

One more thing - there is nothing wrong with religious doctrines of compassion, loving thy neighbor and earning a place in heaven through your life on earth. But this is not the religion which is the subject of discussion here - it's the religion that wages wars and burns witches. I know of a lot of clergy that exemplifies the latter, and almost none of the former (or at least they're not the ones with the influence). Although I'm a Serb baptised as an Orthodox Christian, I don't feel like that. I am religious, though, but that has nothing to do with any specific church.
metanoia metanoia 15:20 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

From you statement it is clear that you have pretty bad opinion about Orthodox Church. Don't forget that church represents community of sinners, therefore the clergymen are also people like you and me, sinful and in constant need for repentance, and they can make mistakes. You said that you are religious, but that has nothing to do with any church, how then you practice your religion? How do you know that your practice isn't false?
deadbeat deadbeat 17:34 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

metanoia
From you statement it is clear that you have pretty bad opinion about Orthodox Church. Don't forget that church represents community of sinners, therefore the clergymen are also people like you and me, sinful and in constant need for repentance, and they can make mistakes.

What should my opinion be of a church whose (prominent) clergy members are bigger sinners than its followers? Although they may be in a dire need for repentance, they do not seek it - instead, they seek absolution from secular laws and use their influence on the state to obstruct the course of justice and get away with crimes that make a normal human being sick. I won't give examples for this, as they are either very well known criminal deeds (with who knows how many still undisclosed), or commonly recognized and accepted sins among lower ranks of clergy, like greed, vanity, gluttony etc.. Can you give me an example of the opposite - priests who stand out for their virtues, instead of sins; and please, don't make it be Patriarch Pavle. I actually do know of such an example - two young priests from Vranje who wouldn't lie on behalf of Pahomije, and took the side of the abused boys. The church immediately excommunicated them, and used its influence to get the pedophile off the hook. Does that sound like seeking repentance?
Since you got me going, I'll mention other things I know of first hand. Among many other benefits granted to the church, it can import cars with low taxes and customs. Influential members of the clergy misuse this privilege to import cars which are subsequently commercially sold for large profits. Nepotism is also widespread among the Orthodox Church ranks. It wouldn't be that big a deal, if young priests from influential families were exemplars of virtue - but that's not the case. Instead, a lot of them are spoiled, power-crazy brats with money and expensive cars who feel they can't be touched; debauchees and even drug addicts and downright criminals. Yet, it doesn't stop them from advancing in the church ranks ahead of modest and truly virtuous students who don't have the backing of powerful fathers. I stress that this doesn't apply to all, but there are examples I know of first hand.

You said that you are religious, but that has nothing to do with any church, how then you practice your religion?
I practice it by trying to live a decent life, trying not to succumb to dark impulses, not to do harm (to those who don't deserve it - I don't believe in turning the other cheek), not to judge people based on their nationality or religion, by trying to be understanding and help those in need. Of course, I'm far, far away from being a saint, but I don't aspire to be one; still, I'm far less of a sinner than many of the clergy.
How do you know that your practice isn't false?
Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the inquisition? I can't believe there are people in the 21st century capable of asking this? HOW THE F**K DO YOU KNOW YOU WON'T BURN IN MUSLIM HELL? (or whatever equivalent they have)
metanoia metanoia 21:39 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

In the end of your answer you got very angry. First of all I am sorry that my question caused such a reaction from you. There is no need for coursing. My question simply came from my professional curiosity (I am scholar - theologian) You asked me how do I know that I wont burn in Muslim hell? The answer is simple, because I believe I wont. I believe in redemption and as a Christian i am convinced in that. I am Actually I agree with some facts that you stated, concerning the the privileges of the clergy, the cases of obstruction of justice, etc. There are some significant members of the Church that can be a good example of good and honest priesthood, for example, fr Radovan Bigović, fr Aleksandar Đakovac, fr Radomir Rakić, bishop Lavrentie... The most important thing that we all my realize that we are not going to Church because of the clergy but because of God, that way we wont be distracted because of mistakes of individuals.
Milan M. Ćirković Milan M. Ćirković 22:25 23.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

Vladimir Maričić
Ćirković:
You're waaaay too optimistic.
................I guess this is as malignant as any open fascism,
marching in the streets for Himmler's birthday, celebrating war
criminals, etc.


It is better to be optimistic in life than to be a Serbophobe,
Islamophobe, anti-Semite or to hate any other race or nation (as it
seems you do).

How in the world did you come to such a bizarre conclusion that I hate some race or religion??? Those were the attitudes I used as a *negative* example.
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 01:18 24.01.2008

Opium for the masses.

deadbeat:
I consider the concepts of both religion and nation to be obsolete.



Sure, I can say that I consider human beings to be obsolete, but that does not mean that human beings do not exist. So I rather deal with realities and facts than utopian wishes.

PLUS

And about "who started first". I do consider it important to know who raped whom, especially if it was the rapist who cried RAPE! It is very unfair when the person who has been raped is also accused of raping the rapist.


The host of this blog is quoting Marx. He is an Englishman who "chose" to live in Serbia where Marxism was applied for 50 years and has moulded the minds of many generations. If I were to live in England I would not have the tenacity to demand that the English abolish the Church of England or their Royalty. I call his behavior Serbophobic because it is irrational.
deadbeat deadbeat 09:56 24.01.2008

Re: religion & nationalism

@metanoia
You're right, I did get very angry. The reason being that this question represents exactly the kind of dogmatic thinking that brought misery and death to billions of people in the past, and it enrages me to see that even good people (which I believe you are), intelligent and educated, still get caught in the same trap, thus perpetuating the endless cycle of evil done in the name of One True God. You being a theology scholar makes things a lot clearer; despite my argument that "religion is obsolete", I respect your chosen occupation/lifestyle, and I can understand and identify with people who take that path... to some extent:) Anyway, regardless of what you've been taught, I hope you agree that you should keep your mind open to different ideas and ways of thinking, and you won't take this as preaching:)

You have a problem with epistemology. You say that you know something because you believe in it. Knowing and believing are not synonyms. To know something is not needing to believe in it; to believe in something is not being able to know it. Not only that but, when you believe, you don't need to know; you don't even want to know. To believe, you shouldn't know. Take some time off your curriculum and read "The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy" - you'll find an episode about a theologian who logically constructs a proof of God's existence. By establishing that God exists, he makes the need to believe in God redundant - you know that God exists, therefore you don't need to believe in God's existence. Since religion and God are based on belief - there is no religion, and there is no God. Frivolous, but it makes sense.
I'm sure there are many honest and virtuous people within the Orthodox Church. The problem is - they're not the ones calling the shots. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing" - I'm sure you're familiar with the quote.
The most important thing that we all my realize that we are not going to Church because of the clergy but because of God, that way we wont be distracted because of mistakes of individuals.

And the most basic thing you need to realize is that you don't need to go to church to feel close to God. If God prefers a murderer that hangs a cross under the rearview mirror of his BMW to a non-christian whose greatest sins reach as far as vanity or envy, then it is not the God I want to believe in. My religious feeling can be summarized into believing that things appear to happen randomly, but often have a lot more meaning than it could be attributed to pure chance. In other words, that there is a power that takes care to "reap what you saw". I have a problem with reaping what someone else saw, and I believe that turning a blind eye to injustice is a sin.
Hugh Griffiths Hugh Griffiths 16:28 24.01.2008

Re: Opium for the masses.

Good blog Andrew, a sure sign of which seems to be when the haters denounce you for some imagined crime. It's always nice to read comments by the rational, enlightened cosmopolitan type of people to remind one that the papac don't have a monopoly in cyber space.

Vladimir - if you lived in England and demanded that the English abolished the Church of England, that's perfectly okay. We have something called freedom of speech.

You are welcome to say what you like about the Church of England and on the subject of the Royal Family, you'll find many people agreeing with you.

Mind you, the CoE doesn't have such a bad name as the orthodox church in the rest of the Balkans, thanks to the fact that CoE priests haven't been caught on video blessing murderers and war criminals as shown on that Skorpions video. Or excusing genocide in Bosnia.

Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 19:22 24.01.2008

Opium for the masses

Hugh, since when does racism, anti-Semitic speech or Islamophobia come under freedom of speech?
If you do not recognize Serbophobia as racism that is not strange, neither was slavery considered anti-ethical when the British traded humans for cotton.

Serbophobia has its roots and exact history. It started with the persecution of the so called, schismatics in the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Turkey. Later it bacame endemic among Croat nationalists as a rival national project to the Serbian liberation movement. Later Serbophobia escalated to become Genocide commited by the Ustashi. Around 600,000 Serbs were murdured in the Jasenovac concentration camp and probably around a million in present Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. Communists instituted Serbophobia among Serbs too. Tudjman's revival of Serbophobia in the late 80s and in the 90 was a continuation of this Serbophobic policy. Since the 90s Serbophobia has become widespread in Europe and the USA among the media and politicians. As a result of this, it is now perfectly acceptable to trash anything which is a part of Serbian nation, culture, religion.

Just take a look at this blog. One guy mentioned the case of pedophilia in the Serbian Orthodox Church. That is an unfortunate and a shameful case, and yes there are one or two similar cases. But that does not represent the religion as a whole. Regarding blessing of soldiers -- even in your mother country you have chaplancy in the army and in jails. During a civil war into which people are conscripted not everyone can be considered a criminal or a murdurer. Your insinuation that all Serbian solders are war criminals and murderers is shameful.

Look at another case Mr. Timothy John Byford came to live in Belgrade sometime after WW2 - while at the same time hundred thousands of Serbs were not allowed to return to Communist Yugoslavia or where departing Yugoslavia because of Communist persecution. This Mr. Timothy John Byford was given a very nice job in Belgrade to create a children's TV series. Everything fine, no one in accusing Mr. Byford because he was luckier than many hosts in his country. But the son of this man, a certain Jovan Byford is now a leading Serbophobe and propagandist in Serbia AND England. I am at loss for words about this kind of treachery and ingratitude. If these Englishmen come to Serbia just add insult to the injury then don't expect me to shut up.

As one Scythian said: "My country shames me, but you are a shame to your country."
Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 09:48 25.01.2008

Re: Opium for the masses

PS. I don't know where you picked up your papac slang. But as it means something like porker, it does fit into the general scheme of things descibed above.
Hugh Griffiths Hugh Griffiths 11:11 25.01.2008

Re: Opium for the masses

Yes, well, I think somebody earlier suggested the substitution of "phobia" with the word 'paranoia" which would be fitting in this case.

History is not as clear cut as you would like it to be, in addition to the mass murder of Serbs, gypsies and others at Jasenovac organised by the war-time authorities in Zagreb, the war-time Belgrade government, led by Serb general Nedic presided over an operation which saw Belgrade's Jewish population deported to the death camps, earning the Serbian capital the dubious distinction of being declared the first "Juden frei" capital in Nazi Europe.

The point I am making is that you can't define history in terms of an ethnic group, blood and soil, "historical right to land" etc. because you will find fascists in every country.

You should watch that Skorpions video, and you should visit Srebrenica to understand the gulf between the narrative representatives of church present and actual historical reality.

The word Serbia carries negative connotations for many people in Europe, not because it is part of some great, continuous historical thought, but because of what happened in Bosnia and Kosovo during the 1990s, and the fact that Serbian politicans such as the gravedigger and Kostunica, like the orthodox church, continue to make excuses for that sort of behaviour.

Vladimir Maričić Vladimir Maričić 22:58 25.01.2008

Opium

the war-time Belgrade government, led by Serb general Nedic PRESIDED over an operation which saw Belgrade's Jewish population deported to the death camps, earning the Serbian capital the dubious distinction of being declared the first "Juden frei" capital in Nazi Europe.


Hugh, is it really necessary to say that Germans occupied Serbia and that they installed a caretaker government? For instance, what you know as Novi Beograd and Zemun was part of the Independent State of Croatia and that is where the biggest death camp was located. It was the Germans who “presided” over the deportations. Furthermore, Serbia had an insignificant Jewish population. Anti-Semitism was a marginal issue before WW2 and was not the cornerstone of anyone's ideology, even of Ljotic's or Velimirovic's ideologies. Nothing like the Iron Guard movement existed in Serbia.

You and others are making a connection between the Serbians who were caught up in the WW2, with the Serbians who were caught up in the carving up of Yugoslavia and you are claiming that Serbian “fascists” are to blame for both. You are wrong. In both cases the causes were not to be found in some sort of inherent nationalism of the Serbs, but in the wars that were imposed upon Serbs in both cases. It is a fact that Serbs did not PREPARE themselves for wars, as logic would require.

When politically motivated persons join the historical debate at a point in time when political circumstances are such that a nation has to be discredited in order to accommodate other nationalist political processes, then it is quite normal that they will stress only those elements which are of use to their current projects. Serbia and Serbs have been victims long enough because up to the present time there has been a necessity to justify the creation of so many new states on the territory where Serbs live or have lived.

The Serbs about whom I am writing about are a community which has been created by political processes in the past, they are not some “blood and soil” nonsense. They still exist as a community. The current catch phrase at state-building crash courses is that the nation is "an imagined community" and I suppose that is where you come from when you make your point above. But if you start doing to any established nation in Europe the same as you are doing to Serbs and Serbia you will make “fascists” out of much of the population. Nationalism is not contained and found in the genes of an ethnic group, or in its blood or its soil. It is a political process and usually a defense mechanism.

In order to maintain and support all the newly created states which are in many ways connected to Serbs and Serbia (economically, politically, blood relatives, religion, culture, language) you have two choices. One is to cause confrontation and blast us out of existence, and the other is to accept our existence as valid as that of any other nation in Europe – the French, Italian, or Bulgarian, and take our interests into account. Your actions consistently show to us that you have chosen the first option. And your use of terms such a fundamentalism, fascism, blood and soil, show that you want to treat us confrontationally, and consequently you will create corresponding reactions.

There is no need for me to watch your recommended video or to visit Srebrenica, neither do I have to go to Auschwitz or Jasenovac to understand human tragedies. Just watch the photographs of the Hague prisoners in today’s Blic on the internet and have someone translate the text for you. Perhaps you will be able to perceive humanity in prisoner’s faces and stories. You can also follow up on the Slovenian leaked documents about the US instructions for Kosovo. No one in the Global Village has picked up on the story yet. Look to the real movers and shakers of this world for answers and stop victimizing the victims.
Rasina Rasina 22:50 22.01.2008

Andrew,

Quite a long post and pretty superficial at best.
Didn't quite get your point - Are you afraid that Serbia IS or WILL BECOME a "fundamentalist" state?

Or the point is hidden somewhere in "...To be honest, if it doesn't, I'm not sure that I'll want to live in a fundamentalist state where political policy is dictated by people whose imagination and insight is constrained by parochial self-interest and by their slavish commitment to distorted and misleading images of past glory. ..."?

A lot, and I emphasize, A LOT of BS you piled up here Andrew. Too many loose adjectives, too few substantiated ideas - for a pragmatic, linear "to do point", factual (I wont say "anglo-saxon-protestant" since I dont know where are you coming from - and will put some wider frame around it...) "western" train of thought.

No hard feelings, but this is bleak.


Dragan Pavlicevic Dragan Pavlicevic 08:53 23.01.2008

???

National or political disputes based to some extent on religious tradition are hardly unique to the Balkans.


The religion was not and is not driving force behind the conflicts in Balkans. For 50 years people lived without religion, and today most of the religious people just recently ressurected from atheism without having a real grasp of religion they 'believe' in and they take as their own. Religion in nineties came back as an answer to retreat of communism, as a first thing to turn to when people got overwhelmed with crush of belief system they cherished all of their life, together with frightening decline in living standard. So it was not a cause but a consequence.

The disputes among different nationalities ( turks vs serbs, srebs vs croats vs muslims, serbs vs albanians) is of geopolitical not religious character, where every one of Balkan ethnicities try to reach the all-in-one-state target or protect themselves against others trying to reach this goal.

yes serbs,croats, monenegrians and muslims(bosnians) are the same people in root and have different political incl. religios experiences because of historical reasons.Religion might come here as an occasionaly suitable vehicle for firing up some of the masses, that is true. With very shallow understanding of it, unable to put their common origines in perspective they primarily tend to follow not religious leaders but strong ones, devoted to Greater _______ (whatever nation in Balkans) project, even to a disastrous conflict. So, still, it is wrong to assume that religion plays an important role in the, at least recent, history of Balkans.

Tiana Tiana 08:40 27.01.2008

hmm

Just for the record, it was also Timket, the feast of the epiphany in Ethiopia and the Sunni Muslim festival of Ashura, so the Americans were busy protecting religious freedom in Karbula. So far as I could tell, neither Timket nor Ashura were being actively observed around here.



Ashura is SHIA Muslim day of mourning for the martyrdom of Husayn Ibn Ali ( nephew of Prophet Muhammad ) who was killed in Karbala. Maybe these events are not actively observed around here but i remember this information from the school days. You were refereeing to this Ashura ( there is Suni Asura as well which is something else and does not have importance for Suni as it has for Shia). Anyway....just for the record.

Why would i read more? Nothing assures me that you will be accurate in your further text about Orthodox Church and Serbs which concerns me.

Arhiva

   

Kategorije aktivne u poslednjih 7 dana