The fact that many FYROMians have Bulgarian passports doesn't necessarily mean that they feel themselves as Bulgarian. People often prefer to have a citizenship which brings them more advantages, not so much dependent on their political views. You can see this in Cyprus too, where many TCs, who otherwise want to retain their own state, obtain passports of RoC.

My point was that, in my opinion, the majority of the slavic population of FYROM don't think themselves as Bulgarians today, although I suppose they must feel some connection to them. And I don't think they will get united with Bulgaria, even if they lose the allbanian part of the country.
Of course I may be wrong, i didn't meet enough of them to be sure, and I don't know very much about their internal politics. But the important thing is how the they feel themselves, not if it's "right" or "wrong".

Now, if they were Bulgarians 100 years ago, it's a different story. I think there are different opinions on this. The classical irredentist Bulgarian nationalism believed that all Slavs in Macedonia (in the greek, yugoslavian or bulgarian part) were Bulgarians, and from what I know Bulgaria still doesn't recognize a separate Macedonian ethnicity. There is also the claim that a a separate (slavo-)Macedonian ethnic identity was invented by Tito, in order to defend Yugoslavia exactly against this bulgarian irredentism.

Of course, there must be some truth in this, but I think it's an oversimplification of the situation. 100 years ago the national identities in Macedonia (as a whole) were still in a phase of shaping. I imagine it like that: they were many different nationalist ideas colliding with each other among the slavic population of Macedonia, bulgarian nationalism, serb nationalism, perhaps even greek nationalism, and a separate macedonian nationalism. In accounts of Greek officers in the beginning of 20th century, it is mentioned that parts of the Christian slavic population of Macedonia didn't think of themselves as Bulgarians, Serbs or Greeks, but they had more sympathies to the Greeks, because in their eyes they represented the Patriarch (in Costantinople). Also, in the exchange of populations between Greece and Bulgaria, about half of the christian Slavophones in Greece (if data is correct) were not considered as Bulgarians and were not exchanged, as they didn't choose to follow the Bulgarian Church. And about the Slavophones still remaining in Greek Macedonia, I think although there are some of them who feel themselves as Slavomacedonians, none of them feel themselves as Bulgarians (correct me if I'm wrong).

So the equation of Bulgarian nationalism, every Slav in Macedonia = Bulgarian, may not be 100% correct, not even 100 years ago.

Yes, I think too the issue would have been solved right at the beginning with a name like Slavomacedonia, if Samaras wasn't a foreign minister at that time. Unfortunately PASOK also followed the nationalist rhetoric of no-to-composite-name at that time. When this policy was corrected, it was already too late.

Now, at this point, it's difficult for me to see a possible compromiss. Perhaps if Greece accepted a double name, so for example North or Upper Macedonia to be used internationally, and Republic of Macedonia to remain as constitutional name. But it's unsure that FYROM would accept even this compromiss at this point.

So afro, how do you explain to me when ex-President of FYROM Kiro Gligorov says this 1992:

[dohtml]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/o_gjBAhak18&hl=sv&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/o_gjBAhak18&hl=sv&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/dohtml]

This was 1992.Only 17 years ago.Not 100 years ago my friend.Don`t you think that the slavs in FYROM seems to be a little confused about their identity?

So what will these people say in 2030?That they are Persians?I mean come on.

As for Titov, as far as I know, he did everything to create a Macedonian identity for the slavs in FYROM in order to make claims against the Greek part of Macedonia.

And what about FYROM`s bills in the beginning of the 90s where they printed the white tower of Thessaloniki?Should Greece just had remain silent?

This is not only about the FYROMIANS calling themselves whatever they want...not because I see them as a military threat but I think you get the point.

I hope you didn't get me wrong, Evro. I had no intention to defend slavomacedonian nationalism, for which I have no sympathies at all. I also had personal bad experiences with one of them in our german class, who referred to the greek part of Macedonia as unliberated, and to Thessaloniki as Solun, whose name was changed by evil Greeks, and said proudly that he wishes to take part in a war against Greeks as soon as possible. By the way, this guy was the only person I've ever met who was openly hostile to me just because I was Greek.

What I said is that that they don't feel themselves as Bulgarians generally. In the video you posted Gligorov says Slavs, not Bulgarians. Of course, I can believe that many people are still confused about their identity, as the slavomacedonian nationalism was developed later than the greek, serbian or bulgarian nationalism, and may still not be consolidated enough in the society. But I think that is the dominant idea in the last decades, and most of them were raised with it. So I don't think they will just turn into Bulgarians in the next decades, despite the similarities they feel they have with them. But I may have wrong impression, I don't have enough knowledge about this country.

About Tito, it is very possible that he had in mind also some claims against Greek Macedonia when he encouraged a separate Macedonian identity, I heard that too. But the reign of Tito shows that he more or less respected the borders of his neighboring countries at the end. So I think the main reason was defensive: he was afraid of the Bulgarian claims. This was a very real danger, considering the tradition of Bulgarian irredentism, and the fact that this part of Macedonia was annected to Bulgaria during WW2.

Afro, I think you missed my point.There are some(not all of course) people who identify themselves as Bulgarians and as slavs in FYROM today.One of them was Ljubco Georgevski who was FYROM`s Prime Minister until 2001 and who has also obtained Bulgarian citizenship.In 1992 we had FYROM`s President, Kiro Gligorov who said that they were slavs and had nothing to do with Alexander the Great.

If for example, the FYROMIAN Government and the majority of people in FYROM in 20 years say that they are Persians and have nothing to with the Greek Macedonians or Alex the Great and start renaming their streets, airports...raises a statue of Xerxes...changes their name to Persia - should Greece recognize FYROM with the name Persia even if Iran would be against this?

Do you also think that Greece should recognize today FYROM with the name Macedonia?(which Greece opposes)

But you have to take into account that Greece also had a lot of troops stationed along the border with Yugoslavija at that time in order to give a signal to Titov that the Macedonian nationalism he tried to create in FYROM will have a prize if he`s trying invade the Macedonian part of Greece.

Yeah, I had noticed the previous use of the nickname. Anyone who wants to call me "Yahud" is free to do so, but I especially encourage spelling it in a cooler script (Syriac, Greek, Arabic, Hebrew, etc.)

I have had positive contact with the (Slavs popularly known as) Macedonians, so I must say I'm a bit biased toward their point of view, but of course they do seem to have an unnatural hostility toward Greeks, which I can't approve of.

But when I say I'm a bit biased toward their point of view, what I mean is: I think Greece makes too big of a deal of this. Greece's name is not Macedonia. Iran's name is not Azerbaijan. But there Azerbaijan is, right next to Iran! No "Former Soviet Turkic Secular Caucasian Republic of Azerbaijan". Just Azerbaijan.

Why can't you chill out on them, Greece? Take the first step, that's all I'm saying.

Also, you could give them back all that land you owe them JUST KIDDING! DON'T HIT ME!

I think we speak about two different things, and it's better to separate one from each other.

The one thing is, what should be the policy of Greece towards FYROM. Greece naturally can't recognize this country as Republic of Macedonia and their nationality as Macedonian, as there is a part of Greece which is called Macedonia too, and its inhabitants feel both as Greek and as Macedonian. As we all know, Macedonia is in principle a name of a geographical region shared between Greece, FYROM, and Bulgaria. This region is inhabited by many different peoples. One of them claims the name "Macedonian" only for themselves. It's reasonable that Greece doesn't like that.

The better solution would be a composite name, like Slavomacedonia, North Macedonia or Upper Macedonia. This would be an easy goal for Greece in the beginning of the 90s, but it's going to be difficult today, because the slavomacedonian nationalism has really woken up, and the name "Macedonia" is dominant internationally. So, I think the best possibility for Greece now is a double name, as I said before. This meaning that there an international name acceptable by Greece, like North Macedonia, and they can keep the name Republic of Macedonia in their consitution for their own use. But I doubt it that even this would be acceptable by them.


The second thing, is the identity of Slavomacedonians. For me, it's clear that they are Slavs, and I even think that most of them would admit this in one way or another. But this doesn't mean that they are Bulgarians. Gligorov in 1992 spoke of Slavs, not of Bulgarians. They can also have a slavic non-bulgarian identity.

And to repeat: Why is it reasonable for Greece to say Macedonia's name is "theft" but Iran is cool about letting Azerbaijan have its name? Why can't Greece play things like Iran does?

If most of them would have done that today, then the name issue would had been solved yesterday.

But to say that the FYROMIANS aren`t Bulgarians, is like saying that the Montenegrins aren`t Serbs or that the Greek Cypriots aren`t Greeks.

However that they themselves identify as "Macedonians" isn`t really relevant to me imho.I can call myself martian in that case too.

It`s funny if you think about it, FYROM claims that the national hero Goce Delcev is Macedonian but Bulgaria sa he`s Bulgarian.They have the same language, same culture and the same national hero.

For me it`s obvious that the slavs in FYROM are confused about their identity.Don`t be suprised if they start indentify themselves as Persians in 20 years.

No, they won't identify as Persians. They will identify all Persians as Macedonians, and the Greeks will identify every ethnic minority other than the Turks in Iran as Greeks (all descended from Alexander the Great, of course)

Meanwhile, Turkey will declare all Kurds in Iran to be Turks, and the Kurds will claim Nagorno-Karabakh to be part of Kurdistan's integral territory.

And India is naturally part of Greater Hungary!

PEW PEW! LASERS!

Okay, lost my train of thought.

All this being said, I still maintain that there's no reason why Greece can't accept that Macedonians call their country Macedonia and the ethnic group and language there Macedonian. Equally, I can't understand why Macedonians have decided to take this ridiculous controversy as seriously as they have.

Side note: One time, I was buying ice cream from a Turk and he asked me where I was from. As a joke, I told him I was a Macedonian Pomak. He was like "Oh for real? I'm from Bulgaria! Have you ever been there?" and I was like "No, we hate them even more than we hate the Greeks." and he said "Yeah, don't worry, I hate Bulgarians too, that's why I left!"

The moral of the story? The ice cream had peanuts in it. Peanuts in ice cream is even more delicious than unreasonable bigotry.

FYROM school maps a standard


The pics speaks for itself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ab%C3%BClfaz_El%C3%A7ibay

Was actually president. And yet Azerbaijan is still there and Iran has not asked for a name change.

Oh, and can I say how incredibly funny this one is? And I can't even say why, because it's not like there isn't bigotry in Greece (like in EVERY country) but this is just amazingly funny:



Greece, I know you are just shaking in your boots at this scathing and witty criticism.

A few others I found:









Wait, that last one's not even a little funny...

You must have missed this one.Look at the map above while the CURRENT FYROM Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski lays a wreath at Golce Delcevs monument.

You're right, but all that does is make the Azerbaijan comparison equal, and so I maintain my position.

None of this is to say I support how Macedonians view Greeks, merely to say that they have as many rights as Azeris have vis-a-vis Iran.

But this is the current FYROM Prime Minister I posted in the pic above.


Azerbaijan doesn`t claim to be Persians.

They don`t rename their streets, airports... to Darius and Xerxes.

They don`t raise statues of Darius and Xerxes.

I have not seen any maps being printed by the Azerbaijani state that shows a map of a "Greater Azerbaijan" which includes parts of Iran and then being taught to their pupils.

I have not seen Azerbaijan printing Iranian monuments on their bills.