How do Serbs view Tito??
Posted by Glittering-Poet-2657@reddit | AskBalkans | View on Reddit | 177 comments
So my dad is from Serbia, and one thing he always talks about is his absolute hatred for Tito, and he also constantly calls him a Nazi it a Fascist. He’s never explained why he hates Tito except for the fact that “he hated Serbs (admittedly I don’t know how true that is as I’m not very knowledgeable on Yugoslavian history),” but my Deda (who holds a lot of the same views as my father) doesn’t dislike Tito at all. So could someone tell me how other Serbs view him??
Stverghame@reddit
Faat forward to 2024 and many of his policies still have negative consequences for Serbia's integrity, while positive for other ex-Yu countries. While he nominally supressed all nationalisms in Yugo, he only made sure that Serbs are the ones facing consequences after he's gone, while others remain untouched.
Doranusu@reddit
Kinda unusual to hear Serbs that are against Tito.
Stverghame@reddit
Not unusual at all, you probably live in an internet image of Serbia built by other ex-Yu states rather than talking with people actually living in Serbia.
Doranusu@reddit
I even read that the SFRJ leadership was mostly Croat and Slovene, which is pretty tribalistic for a "Yugoslav"
Stverghame@reddit
Most of the investment and industry went there as well, nothing unusual
Sandstorm_221@reddit
In almost all countries of Balkans with the exception of Croatia, the boomer generation who lived under him tend to view him like a God-like figure. The younger generations have more nuanced views, or at least those who know who he is. But I'd say generally he has significantly more admirers than haters among all age groups, in every ex-Yu country minus Croatia.
Texoraptor@reddit
Funny since he's a Croat
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Well, he's about as Croatian as Mike Tyson. But I know what you mean
Texoraptor@reddit
Mike Tyson's Black.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Yeah sure is.
The point was, if you read about Tito's child hood etc, he would have never called himself a croat, he was a communist before any nationality, when in prison, he said it's not his laws, he will one day create his own laws.
Certainly, if he'd see Croatia today, he'd become an even more staunch communist.
Texoraptor@reddit
Mike Tyson also went to Jail
Magenta_Morua@reddit
I don't know about Tito, but may be it's better to compare with Stalin.
Texoraptor@reddit
Mike Tyson
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
He said it was the best time of his life.
Texoraptor@reddit
I'm guessing he explored his options in there instead of just having female victims then : (
kruska345@reddit
Its pretty weird that youre trying so hard to take away his ethnicity from him
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Its a thing in Croatia too. Its just that older people there are under much bigger pressure to shut about it, so they are not called traitors or whatever.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Part of my family are croats who always lived in Bosnia. They got evacuated to Croatia and they told me, suddenly the people spoke a bit different and it was expected to feel like a croat, social pressure.
They told me they'll always be Jugoslav inside, it didn't feel natural, they had their lives uprooted and half the family killed.
I see it the same way, Jugoslav wherever I am, I didn't attend that pioneer school for nothing:-)
And guess who else feels the same way, the whole diaspora and world, they see that area as collective geographical rubbish bin , with the Serbs having eaten the heaviest PR hits.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
This. This is a good example of what Im talking about. I think this is a correct assesment.
kruska345@reddit
Its funny cause its made up.
Acording to the conducted poll, generations 50+ are more fond of him than not
https://www.jutarnji.hr/vijesti/hrvatska/anketa-a-sto-vi-mislite-ovo-istrazivanje-tvrdi-82-posto-starijih-od-45-godina-smatra-da-se-u-jugoslaviji-zivjelo-bolje-373603
And thats from my experience the most anti-Tito group due to war trauma. Younger generation is neutral to positive.
I'm not really sure who he's basing his opinion on, DP voters? Tito is still pretty controversial but i highly doubt he's more disliked than liked
blodskaal@reddit
Your father is probably a baddie, that's why he didn't like Tito
Glittering-Poet-2657@reddit (OP)
As in a bad person??
Alert_Caregiver_2834@reddit
Ignore him. I know your question was about the opinions of other Serbs, but seeing as everyone here is giving their own opinion, I might as well give mine. Both sides of my family were poor, never held government jobs and they dislike Tito. Hate is a bit of a strong word for someone who has been dead for so long and doesn't have much impact on their lives today.
It doesn't make anyone a bad person to dislike/hate a dictator or to be against communism. I can't believe I even have to type this.
Glittering-Poet-2657@reddit (OP)
It doesn’t bother me that they called him a bad person, because he very much is. I appreciate your input, though.
blodskaal@reddit
Yep. Two types of people hated Tito. Rich people and corrupt people, other than westerners. Those two often colluded. Your father could have been a Coca Cola/Pepsi Andie too. Kokta wasn't good enough for him lol
branimir2208@reddit
Rich people? He took land of my family that they worked day and night to get and that land wasn't big (he wasn't a kulak).
Meanwhile most of Serbias corrupt people can trace their origins in CPY.
blodskaal@reddit
Brother, back then, no one worked day and night to get a land. You were either wealthy and a land owner or a peasant. That's generational. A peasant doesn't become a land owner prior to Tito. It was a fucking Kingdom, a very mismanaged and corrupt one
branimir2208@reddit
No. That was maybe in western Europe, but in Yugoslavia allmost all peasents owned land(not much). Problem was that Yugoslavia had agrarian overpopulation, but thats another topic.
Agrarian reform od 1919? Or in case of Serbia in 1830?
Its kinda ironic that titoist is saying that country is mismanaged when Tito left a mess after his death. Corruption in SFRY was much higher than anything we has before.
My family did.
Ok_Detail_1@reddit
Four. Whistelbowlers and freedom of media like in case "Ljubičica bijela" and othera who speak, draw and publish about how big corruption (also rasism, war crimes and staged trials) inside Communist Party (mostly between start of rebelllion 1941 to death of Tito in 1980) in DFJ/FNRJ/SFRJ and Radicals and Yugoslav Democrats were Kingdom of SHS/Yugoslavia.
And expansionist of either Italy and Soviet Russia, just like Yugoslav exoansionists inside who use their rights to abolish borders or expand borders of their own republic, including ones without any trials.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
The corruption in the communist party gets dwarfed by the corruption of what followed.
The communist have been modest in comparison, but then again, they never had a good grasp of economy matters.
Less knowledge, less exploits.
Tito had some villas and residences here and there, which contradicts him being communist in my opinion.
The Jewish gangsters around him, Pijade and co, as well as all the adjacent people never had a lot of wealth and neither did their off spring. This indicates they didn't steal enough to create a dynasty.
Milo D. probably has much more money then the top 20 communists added together.
They have been corrupt with other things.
31_hierophanto@reddit
His father was also most likely a Chetnik.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Not sure, but likely hard putter right politically.
Did he do many weekend trips to Bosnia during the war and come back with new clothes and TVs?
ZAMAHACHU@reddit
He wouldn't let them genocide the other peoples in Yugoslavia, therefore he hated them.
Alert_Caregiver_2834@reddit
You say that as if his dictatorship and the policy of sweeping ethnic conflicts under the rug weren't the exact thing that led to things that happened in the 80s and 90s.
benjopasha@reddit
Only reason I can think of that some Serbs hate Tito is because during the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, the Serbians and Chetniks held the majority of the power as compared to the other ethnicities. When Tito came in, that stopped and power was shared among the other republics. So there might be some resentment because of that.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Yes, it's as easy as that.
Chetniks missed the train of time, there won't ever be a royal in power there.
They're basically thugs for the royal families and got some welfare money for that.
And being royalist and Serbia first could never attract too many people.
The ustaše gained much more traction, simply because they left out the royalty bs.
Hell, even Izetbegović Got almost every single Muslim behind his idea. And to non Yugoslavs, don't you think the Muslims have been oppressed. Bosnian Muslims have all been croats or Serbs before, they accepted Islam and lived privileged life's during the ottoman reign. Better education , less taxes while Serbs and croats got to pay more taxes , no fair chance to education, held the shit jobs, had to mutilate their daughters so they're not taken away to serve in a harem and you know what happened to the croat and Serb male offspring?
They simply got taken into the janisari forces. I hope this helps to these who didn't know, no offence to the Muslims living in Bosnia now, but many things go way back.
Alert_Caregiver_2834@reddit
This is a fascist view of Bosniaks. We are our own people and we have existed for hundreds of years. The only reason we were 'named' Muslims as an ethnicity in Yugoslavia because we were banned from expressing our real identity. They tried to force us to declare ourselves as either Croats or Serbs, so in order to avoid being assimilated, our people declared themselves according to the majority religion among Bosniaks. It is so disgusting to read that someone still believes something like this in this day and age.
Economic7374@reddit
u have no idea what u are talking about gg
branimir2208@reddit
Of course they had most of power when they were a majority. Have you heard of something called democracy?
benjopasha@reddit
What democracy? It was a Kingdom with a Serbian Dynasty as its ruling family.
branimir2208@reddit
And parlament with free elections. Let me remind you that a assembly was a supreme institution in the country.
That was chosen by representatives of Serbian people(i.e. assembly) and yugoslav committee and confirmed in elections of 1920. I mean king of Italy was from Piedmont or emperor of Germany was from Prussia. Kings do not fall from sky, but from somewhere.
Revolutionary-Sun151@reddit
Spot on.
glavameboli242@reddit
💯💯💯
SamiTheAnxiousBean@reddit
idk.. people here where I am are the exact opposite, they glorify him way too much
bosnianLocker@reddit
In BiH it's understandable, Tito basically turned an Ottoman backwater region with constant ethnic conflicts into an industrial powerhouse where everyone was united under a single banner. No one would consider modern Bosnia as a host country for the Olympics but 40 years ago we did just that mostly funded by the SRBiH republic itself.
Alert_Caregiver_2834@reddit
But the commenter above has a flair that he's in Serbia, so isn't he talking about people in Serbia?
31_hierophanto@reddit
Probably because Yugoslavia was really the only time where BiH was pretty stable.
Economic7374@reddit
Bosnia was thriving during the austrohungarian empire up until WW1
branimir2208@reddit
Lol. Imagine living in feudal system and saying that it was thriving.
Economic7374@reddit
It was the best time though for Bosnia, and your only counterargument is calling it a "feudal system"
branimir2208@reddit
I have many arguments like
And all that in 40 years of so-called "good rulling".
Economic7374@reddit
cite sources for all your claims please
branimir2208@reddit
For feudalism is a fact that they had never abolished feudalism
For education is the fact that they until 1913 oppened 123 elementary schools in Bosnia.
For explotation
And for politics
https://www.parlament.ba/Content/Read/179?title=Periodaustrougarskevladavine&lang=en
Economic7374@reddit
So opening over 100 schools is a bad thing(?) and the politics during an international crisis, this is just cherrypicking and looking at the absolute worst time where everyone had it bad
branimir2208@reddit
They should have opened atleast 1000 schools to make a diffrence. Ottomans in Macedonia opened more schools than "good and great" Austrians that carried "civilization mission" in Bosnia.
It's not cherrypicking its a fact.
You do not close parliament during crisis. Or because they didn't voted for what Austrians wanted them to vote for.
Economic7374@reddit
Yeah, and how long did the Ottoman empire rule over Macedonia and how long did AH rule over Bosnia? Rofl
branimir2208@reddit
What i meant is in that time period from 1878.
Economic7374@reddit
bosnia was under occupation during that time, not annexed
branimir2208@reddit
And? More schools per year were built during occupation years than during period between 1908 to 1914.
Economic7374@reddit
https://www.britannica.com/place/Bosnia-and-Herzegovina/Bosnia-and-Herzegovina-under-Austro-Hungarian-rule
Nothing here says how many schools were built during the occupation and during the annexation, so I don't know how you could make this claim.
SamiTheAnxiousBean@reddit
would make sense, a majority of this region's populaton came from a group of people who fled from the Srebrenica Genocide and settled here
AnjavChilahim@reddit
He was communist so he's a controversial figure with some mistakes over the years. As any other historical person he had his flaws.
Vox populi is divided because people don't love objectively look on someone so they are naturally divided into pros and cons.
But to see what he really was we need to see what Croats and Serbs have in common. Both nazzi subgroups believe that he hated them. Nazzi sympathisers from Croatia strongly believe that he hated Croatia and Nazzi sympathiser from Serbia is convinced that he hated Serbs.
In 1948 KPJ had internal issues so some radical communists ended on Goli otok. Those were the hardcore pro USSR. Tito sends them to prison there.
Until the WW2 end game Communists hated royalists and Nazis from Serbia and Croatia and they hated communism so much that they regularly killed or slaughtered even their family members. Until 1948. After the clash with Comintern right wing pro nazzis and royalists started to adore people who were suffering because of Goli otok and trials against Stalinists.
Both nazzi and royalists try to deny their war crimes so they become saints and partisans become much worse than Satan himself.
Both sides are wrong because the truth is that Ustaše and most of the Chetniks were pure Nazis. Some of them were patriots (at least they believed in that) but they were on the wrong side of history.
Communists believe that he was a "saint". That's also wrong. He did "forget" to punish partisans who did atrocities and he was an autocratic person but not a dictator. He was recognised in the world as a great leader, head of one of the strongest antifashist movements and, it might be his biggest mistake, he built a strong country with industrial potential much stronger than today.
In real life those debates are used for evading to speak about criminals, corruption, poor standards, and hopelessness. He is some kind of "ace" in daily politics to be used in fighting which goal is to stop solving the problems we have. When we fight about Tito legacy thieves can do whatever they want and even accuse others of being eager to speak about nowadays problems.
Communism definitely died in 1990, WW2 ended in 1945 and sick, delusional persons even today see everywhere their invisible enemies and put blame on their grandchildren. And that will never stop. We can't do better.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
This is pretty fair and balanced assessment.
Perazdera68@reddit
And that is typical view for people that liked Tito and communism. Always try to balance that the Croats weren't completelyl bad ones and that the Serbs were. There is no comparison between Serbs and Croats. All Croats were nazis (not people, but state, army etc) while Serbs were either communists or royalists. Chetniks were anti-facists, which Serbian parlament confirmed, and bothe Partizans and Chetniks fought the occupying German forces. I am not denying that Chetniks didn't do any crimes, but it is totally different than Ustashe. Ustashe and Croats were organized on a state level, had concentration camps (even for children!) while Cheniks were regular Yugoslav Royal army. After the war started, they were devided into several groups with no central command and some of the groups might have commited some crimes, but nothing centrally organized or on the level the Croats did.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Nobody is saying that Serbs were bad.
Those royalists were fascists too. And many Croats were communists and partisans. Who cares what Serbian parlament has to say about Chetniks. Would you care what Croatian parliamen has to say about Ustashe?
Imaginary_String_814@reddit
glad your an cetnik expert like many croats but lets see what the President of USA said about him:
— Harry S. Truman, 29 March 1948
The ultimate tragedy of Draza Mihailovic cannot erase the memory of his heroic and often lonely struggle against the twin tyrannies that afflicted his people, Nazism and Communism. He knew that totalitarianism, whatever name it might take, is the death of freedom. He thus became a symbol of resistance to all those across the world who have had to fight a similar heroic and lonely struggle against totalitarianism. Mihailovic belonged to Yugoslavia; his spirit now belongs to all those who are willing to fight for freedom.
to even compare NDH to Cetniks is literally Tudman propaganda and i see it only brought up by croats with lack of education and heavy bias on this matter.
Germans killed 100 Serbs for every death German in occupied Serbia. You cant even compare NDH with occupied Serbia at the time, but you do since you lack knowledge on this matter.
or lets talk about Draza,
"The unparalleled rescue of over 500 American Airmen from capture by the Enemy Occupation Forces in Yugoslavia during World War II by General Dragoljub Mihailovich and his Chetnik Freedom Fighters for which this "Legion of Merit" medal was awarded by President Harry S. Truman, also represents a token of deep personal appreciation and respect by all those rescued American Airmen and their descendants, who will be forever grateful." (NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF AMERICAN AIRMEN RESCUED BY GENERAL MIHAILOVICH – 1985)
"MIHAILOVIC 's troops once fought against our occupation troops out of loyalty to their King. At the same time they fought against TITO, because of anti—Communist convictions. This two front war could not last long, particularly when British support favored TITO. Consequently MIHAILOVIC showed pro-German leanings. There were engagements during which Serbian Chetniks fought TITO alongside German troops. On the other hand, hostile Chetnik groups were known to attack German supply trains in order to replenish their own stocks.""MIHAILOVIC liked to remain in the background, and leave such affairs up to his subordinates. He hoped to bide his time with this play of power until an Anglo—American landing would provide sufficient support against TITO. Germany welcomed his support, however temporary. Chetnik reconnaissance activities were valued highly by our commanders.
Generalfeldmarschall von Weichs, German commander
you should open a history book once in a while,
Perazdera68@reddit
Read about Halyard Mission... Royalists were not fascists. And there were VERY few Croats in partisans. Most of them were Serbs.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Read about battle on Neretva and tell me on whose side wre Chetniks. Very few? Go to Dalmatian cost sometimes and look at the graves and monuments. Almost every village gave some anti fastist warriors. And of the Croats was literally a leader of the movement...
Perazdera68@reddit
Half Slovenian, half Croat. He was a commie. Croatia was liberated by Serbs, multiple times.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
And 0% Serb. Yeah, he was a commie. Commies liberated both Serbia and Croatia. In WWII. Liberation in WWI is debatable. It is truth that Serbia liberated Croatia from A-U Empire, but they way it treated the Croatia after that was pretty bad, so it evens out.
Perazdera68@reddit
Genocide in WW2 is not evening anything
succotashthrowaway@reddit
Same.
My father has always been angered about the fact that he grew up in a country that brainwashed him into idolizing a man who they knew very little about and whose past was off limits except from the prescribed narrative.
That history is written by the Victors couldn’t have been more relevant for the post ww2 Yugoslavia.
They could write anything they wanted and it’d be official history. 1984 much. This includes Tito’s good deeds in a war where nothing was not just not black and white but with serious indications and evidence that the communists committed heinous, large scale war crimes, shootings and killings. Some of which were even publicly talked about and boasted as anti-fascist in nature, and even taught to kids in schools.
Such official narrative promoting the crimes of one side and completely dehumanizing the other made Yugoslavia a very rotten country, held in power only by the sheer grip of one man, that was doomed to fail.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
So he wasn’t a fascist. His whole life was dedicated to ending fascism and when he did it (in Yugoslavia), he made his defining feature as a leader for 35 years after until the day he died.
In terms of opinion you’re always going to encounter a split in the Balkans. I feel most young Serbs feel neutral towards him, and I’d say most older Serbs (60+) like him, while middle aged Serbs are divided, though I’d still say the majority like him.
The real truth as to how Tito was has been very quickly lost to history. Some people look at him through rose colored glasses, others falsely accuse him of things he never did. Some will say they were prospering under his reign and some will say it felt like being a peasant in the Soviet Union.
You’ll have to make up your own mind about him (if you care to do so). Be warned though, you could get a degree in that field and still only be at the tip of the iceberg
HeyVeddy@reddit
No one has claimed it was like being a peasant in the Soviet union. The narrative has always been that it's better in Yugoslavia than in the Soviet union. Those that don't like it didn't like socialism, but there were hardly people that preferred a different type of socialism than titoism. They exist of course but the main narrative was socialism vs capitalism rather than saying Yugoslavia was as poor or poorer than the ussr
BishoxX@reddit
Main criticism is never economic situation.
Its the totalitarianism and opression of certain groups. And the warcrimes at the start of it.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Main criticism is usually nationalism, or lack of nationalism.
Calling Titos regime totalitarian renders that word meaningless. And the warcrimes were mostly commited against fascists at the end of the war.
BishoxX@reddit
Warcrimes are warcrimes regardless who are they commited against, and there were plenty innocent slaughtered.
His regime was absolutely totalitarian. You couldnt speak out at all against him or the party, they had people reporting everywhere, police were brutal and authoritarian. I dont know how you can not call his regime totalitarian . Its like the pure definition of a totalitarian state
SpookyPotato9-9@reddit
They made jokes about tito and yugoslavia all the time. If you don't believe me i can tell you one.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
No, they are not. Warcrimes against innocent civilians and nazi collaborators are very different things morally. What is "plenty"? If some innocent people got mistaken for fascists, how is that on Tito?
No, it wasnt. What is, according to you the difference between totalitarian and authoritarian regime?
You could. Milovan Djilas did it. Koča Popovic did it. You could get harder life, or you may not be able to find a good job, but you were not killed or imprisoned for it automatically.
So what? They had that in USA in 1950s too. Thats not necesarrily mark of totalitarian regime.
Thats because you dont read technical literature. if you actually read books from historians and sociologists, you would see how easy is to not call totalitarian.
Lol, Titos Yugoslavia :D?! A "pure" definition? You really dont know what that word means then.
BishoxX@reddit
You were absolutely imprisoned for it. I had family members imprisoned for speaking out. I had friends of family members imprisoned for singing nationalistic songs(not fascist ones).
Oppresive police is absolutely a mark of a totalitarian regime.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Not always. It depends what your criticizm was and how loud you were. There are straight up movies we have where there are mild critizisms of communist party. Then you communist party criticizing itself, or different groups criticizing each other. So it was not a complete hive mind like in totalitarian society.
Singing nationalist songs is not "speaking out". Nationalism was was also punished selectively, and it depended on time and place, but nationalism was also actively trying to destry the country.
It could be, but it doesent have to be. Is spanish police opressive for beating the Catalonians? Yes, but on its won that doesen make Spain a totalitarian country.
let me ask you again. What is the difference between the dictatorship, autoritarian country and totalitarian country? Or are these words interchangeable for you?
BishoxX@reddit
They are not interchangable but yugoslavia was all 3 until Titos death.
Idk why you are trying to defend it as not totalitarian.
I know of 100s of examples of imprisonment for dissent. I know of 100s of informants who you couldnt speak openly about and who would recieve land or benefits when someone around them got imprisoned. Like in which fantasy world do you live in that you think Yugoslavia wasnt totalitarian.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Ok, so what is the difference between those? If Yugoslavia was totalitarian, what is the example of country that was authoritarian.
Because it was not, and most historians would agree with me.
None of that is the mark of totalitarian society. Things that you described were present in 1950s USA as well.
It is this land called reality. You should try to visit it sometimes.
BishoxX@reddit
You would get imprisoned if you said fuck Eisenhower ? Glad i learned the first amendment was suspended in the 50s, good to know 👍
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
You would, if you sad it as a member of communist party. Also, if you said that about any us president during called war, you could have problems at work, at school etc.
Lol, yeah, I think that is good to know in 2024.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
I will not cite examples, each is free to inform themselves. But with no open mind to be neutral, it's pointless.
The USA to this day are pretty much a republican semi authoritarian regime. For European standards, the American left is still right wing.
The USA is a bs country with incredible racism issues, it is not really governed by the rule of law, but rather by the rule of money. Their free speech thing was always bs , you better not declared yourself a communist there, but they didn't after ww2 , send groups to re education camps.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
The dissolution happened because of folks like Alija , a former re education camp inmate. Not sure if that's good or bad, but it had consequences. And then some folks like Milošević turned from communist to nationalist overnight. How anyone could buy his communist bs is beyond me, he used to be a banker in new York.
Croatia always preferred to rather clean the Habsburgs horses excrement rather than to participate in uniting with anyone else.
Tito's regime worked based on oppression, but economy was good and you could leave for Germany etc.
But all it took was his death and and economic crisis and the rest is history.
Such conflicts are typically happening at the end of dictatorships, not in democracies.
The commies fucked up, easy as that. If there would have been open elections, it'd have helped to indicate some trends.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
I have had family members imprisoned and put into ludnice from both the communists and the fascists.
They lived in almost huts with no water in the house in remote mountains where you get water from a well.
They weren't even literate, let alone politically opinionated.
You know how that goes in the region , the next 2 generations get a first name "ludi" prefix in the village, and the 3rd generation will suffer "they have lunatic lineage".
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Brate, they did worse than imprison. If you had newsletters or such, you end up dead.
For lesser political disagreements, you would be sent to re education camps worse than the Chinese ones today.
Look, fascist croats did jasenovac , they try to play down the numbers , Serbs try to inflate them. Either way it's documented and the folks killed on the death march were exactly the guards of the camps and collaborators.
Not nice, the Bleiburg massacre, but deserved. Even the Nazis were horrified by the brutality of the ustaše.
So let's not whitewash Tito's BS, this will only make sure that something like the yu idea will never happen again.
Tito had the right ideas but commited some hefty mistakes, if these aren't admitted and addressed, history repeats.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Pardon, but it was totalitarian.
By denying that, the croat nationalism will just be fueled.
Lol, Serbia under Milošević was much less totalitarian.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I dont care what corat nationalists think. It was not tolatarian by the definition of that word. Most people dont know what that word means.
Serbia under Miloševic was much worse society ove all. Neither was totalitarian.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Part 1 I agree.
Part two you mean the march to Austria where the UK screwed over the ustaše.
Look, Tito, a croat, ordered that and everyone knows why. Club "J".
Let's leave it at that.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Well I thought so too, until I heard people claiming it was like being a peasant in the Soviet Union 😅
I told them nah. They countered with how they had to wait in line for coffee, there was no bananas, rolling blackouts, didn’t have money to pay for transportation etc…
Turns out that’s all true. I personally don’t think it’s fair to say “peasant in Soviet union”, but Yugoslavia was definitely not even close to capitalist
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Nah, not soooo true.
The shops shelves have been looking alright.
As for train tickets, mate, have you been alive in Yugoslavia? On the trains the tickets checkers would not ask ticket please. They would ask who has a ticket.
They didn't gaf , train was basically free for deliberate lack of enforcement , or kinda you only pay if you want.
Depending which province, some western goods were impossible to get hold of. Like rolling stones records, my family had them and hid them like a treasure.
tipoftheiceberg1234@reddit
Again, I agreed with you until my friend told me the story about how her aunt didn’t finish elementary school (illegal) because her parents didn’t have money to send her on the transport. She said “even if the ticket cost 5 dinars, they didn’t even have that much”
I kind of think she’s lying, but people don’t like when you tell them that
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
Yea to call fascist is way wrong
Correct term is dictator.
Not benevolent. He did little purges, terrorised folks by sending to Goli otok(they didn't know where they go, some really bad treatment, I am pro Tito and pro yu, but that was just wrong).
And Udba would go and murder all kinds of nationalist and regime critic people.
They also went after some Nazis and got them, which is a good thing. One might say no justice no day in court, but the Nazis were on the lam with new identities, they didn't want a day in court.
alpidzonka@reddit
I'm going to quote what I commented on another post:
That last part is the one I hear most often in the wild. Not just the federalization as it was initially, but also the 1974 constitution which made Yugoslavia even more of a loose federation.
Sarkotic159@reddit
Is it true dzonka that the Bare Island was designed for Stalinists but ended up imprisoning a broader cross-section of society?
alpidzonka@reddit
I'd say the vast majority was still people accused of Stalinism. Now, reading Mićunović's memoirs, a thing that stood out to me was that a common way to get that accusation was the comment "maybe we should have sent someone to Bucharest, one of the other parties (meaning Hungarian or Romanian) might have voted in our favor". This is a low bar to call someone a Stalinist, I'm sure you'd agree.
Also, you've probably seen the map of Goli Otok inmates per capita per municipality. It becomes obvious that in Montenegro alone it really could happen to anyone and everyone.
Sarkotic159@reddit
What you refer to is false accusations and coercion?
alpidzonka@reddit
Well yes, obviously. And you'd get sent there without a trial. I thought you were asking were people arrested for accusations of something else like being a Serbian patriot, which is a claim I hear in Serbia every so often.
Sarkotic159@reddit
Oh by no means only that. I thought that most of the 'Stalinist' inmates there would have been genuine Stalinists or in some way aligned to another country or brand of communism.
alpidzonka@reddit
Oh. Not at all. You could say they were Stalinists as in there wasn't even really another brand of communism Yugoslavia was promoting at that point in time. What we might call Titoism nowadays, more precisely "self-managed socialism", was only developed post-hoc. But then both the people in government and the inmates were all Stalinists.
Alternative_Cow_716@reddit
However, wasn’t the 1974 constitution an another legal tool that justified the breakup of Yugoslavia and given Serbia’s power was interpreted as a way to wage armed conflict?
alpidzonka@reddit
Not really. Republics got the right to secede, but to secede legally you'd need to get the approval of all the other republics. Now, Croatia and Slovenia argued that it gave them the right to secede and they didn't need Serbia's approval because Milošević's new constitution (of the republic of Serbia) was already unconstitutional (in the eyes of the federal institutions) so the Yugoslav constitution was null and void.
Not sure what you mean here
sjedinjenoStanje@reddit
He hated Serbs so much that he married one?
AnalysisQuiet8807@reddit
Mate do you know how many croats i know that are married to serbs that absolutely hate serbs
CollegeFootballGood@reddit
Lmaoo
thatgirleliana@reddit
I've always found this mind boggling. I have a cousin who is like this but in reverse and it's hilarious. Well, it would be hilarious if it wasn't do ironically idiotic.
sjedinjenoStanje@reddit
It's only Serbs of the same gender that are the problem...
Chranium@reddit
Serb women are hard to resist
AnjavChilahim@reddit
And he lived in Belgrade, writing ćirilica(Serbian letter's) and even speaking pure ekavica/Serbian.
Frederico_de_Soya@reddit
Never wrote cyclic and had problems speaking ekavacia, even some croats said to me that his ijekavica at moments had strange accents.
Magistar_Idrisi@reddit
He definitely wrote in Cyrillic from time to time, and he had a weird accent when speaking standard Serbo-Croatian of any variety because he was a peasant kid from Zagorje.
skvids@reddit
his accent led the CIA to try and spread a conspiracy theory tito was a russian plant lmao
ChefStar@reddit
Well trained spy.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
That's not ekavica, he was a Zagor region person, the language there sounds more Slovenian than anything else. I had an ex who's mother's from there, I barely understood anything she said.
But no way it's ekavica.
Seen Vids of Tito speaking jekavica too.
It doesn't matter, but he was pure breed croat.
The ustaše and četnik folks hate him.
It doesn't matter Serb or croat, Yugoslavia is more complicated than that.
Some are nostalgic and some couldn't wait to become religious missionaries and ultranationalist in the open. All these folks have been silent or made silent , now they're everywhere.
The Yugo nostalgics and moderates anywhere will like him but wouldn't want a reprisa, the right wing strongly dislikes him.
Think of this, though, he got Yugoslavia out of Nazi occupation and didn't fall under Russia.
The nationalist in the 90s.....fucked up everything. For what?
NoHawk668@reddit
His mother was Slovenian.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I think he was writing in both?
Also, arent people in Zagorje (where hes from) speaking kinda version of ekavica, or at least very "soft" jekavica?
Sanguine_Caesar@reddit
Yes, Kajkavski (the main variety in the region) traditionally uses Ekavian pronunciation.
Human_Treat@reddit
The guy could barely speak serbo-croatian , and he was a croat born in croatia.
ChefStar@reddit
Everything was for the show Mate.
Traditional-Match-55@reddit
He was extremely anti-Serbian. They say he was croatian ... but he sounds so weird, he has a polnish accent. After the ottomans and germans he was the worst thing that happened in Serbian history. (Maybe the germans were "better" than him - have to think about this.) But Serbia couldn't do anything against him and the yugoslav brainwash, he received financial support from the west. They also supported him during the war. He was their puppet. He was one of many reasons why 2 million Serbs died during WWII. He killed many Serbs even after the war. No normal Serb with at least a minimum of education could ever be pro-tito. Thinking about him makes my stomach turn.
Styljac@reddit
Not a Serb but if anything Tito was the opposite of a fascist and did a great job in turning very poor regions and areas into way better places. He managed to unite people who were in constant conflict, with different languages, dialects, religions and their own identity.
According to anyone who lived under Tito within my family and local community, things were better in many ways.
Although Yugoslavia had many flaws, Tito kept a relatively neutral position between the republics so one wouldn't be favoured over the other. Tito was one of the people and one of very few people that managed to improve living conditions in post-war Yugoslavia.
It's still very complicated but two things are for sure. He was definitely not a fascist, and he definitely didn't hate Serbs or Serbia. No one is perfect and opinions may vary but Tito did a very good job as a leader.
KafkasCat7@reddit
Most Serbs I've met don't actually like him.
On the other the majority of Croats i know really respect and have a positive view of him (absurd since Croatia leans right nowadays and it's not very fond of communism), Slovenians and Bosnians also have a positive opinion of him in my experience
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I think this is just a coincidence. Both Serbs and Croats are generally divided on this issue and you have people who see Tito as the god, and the people who see him as the devil.
KafkasCat7@reddit
Ik. Based on the internet, most Croats aren't very fond of him.
But when i was growing up in Athens i had a classmate who was half Greek and half Croatian. The dude is a conservative right winger, but he always talked in favorably of Tito. His mother said that she had a wonderful life growing up in Yugoslavia.
I guess it depends. I know that people are pretty divisive on this things. Especially in the balkans. Division is what characterizes us...
HeyVeddy@reddit
I don't mean this in a rude way, because i hate identities nationalism etc because a half croat is so far from a full blooded croat. Half Croats would be exposed to the world more, have more interesting convos about how political systems work based on their lived experiences with others (such as capitalist Greece) which could make them more favorable to a socialist Yugoslavia.
Croats are in fact quite anti Yugoslavia and I would say the most anti yugoslav. It kind of goes beyond left right, because many view it as a threat to their national independence which they all seem to value.
In contract Serbians are openly pro or favorable or at the least, not ashamed or embarrassed to even discuss Yugoslavia. They don't have a fear of how someone views their opinions on Yugoslavia, i.e. it's not an awkward topic to them, and that is already to illustrative of how much more accepted it is by Serbians. In Croatia to many it's literally hell and the devil. Also not sure if you've been in Serbia, but there is a lot of yugonostalgia there, from art, Museums, Restaurants etc. Same as Bosnia
I agree Slovenians seem to be a bit more sympathetic too
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
It doesent go across the spectrum. The more left leaning you are, the more pro-yugoslavian you are generally speaking. I think you are overselling both the anti-yugoslavian sentiment in Croatia, and pro-yugoslavian one in Serbia.
Topic of Yugoslavia can be very controversial and unformfotable in Serbia, and some nationalists definitely see any connection to Yugoslavia as a threat to serbian national identity. Fans of the most populat football club Red Star for example have the famous chant "Red Star Serbia, never Yugoslavia".
Meanwhile, you can get get a concert in Zagreb and Split full of people singing Yugoslavian songs. It is not that black and white.
CriticalHistoryGreek@reddit
Which is ironic, since the red star is a socialist symbol including in Yugoslavia.
What are the connections of Grobari to Yugoslavia, if any?
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
It is. It is a painfuly ironic, but they dont care.
I dont think they evet talk about Yugoslavia explictly. But they are too nationalists, they sing chetnik songs, and generally dont like Croats, Bosniaks and Albanians.
CriticalHistoryGreek@reddit
Sad to hear that.
HeyVeddy@reddit
Belgrade has red star and partizan, two Yugoslav socialist Teams. If that was Croatia they'd change those names.
I see zero yugonostalgia in Croatia. I see it living and breathing in Serbia and Bosnia. Anecdotes aside, there are physical remnants of yugonoatalgia in Bosnia and Serbia that simply don't exist in Croatia.
As for the people, I haven't met a single croat that is pro Yugoslavia other than in r/Yugoslavia. In Serbia and Bosnia it's quite easy to come across pro yugoslavs
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
So what? Its just a name, their fans are openly chetniks and hate Yugoslavia.
There are physical remnants of Yugoslavia in Croatia too. Streets named after Tito, partisan monuments, in music and popular culture.
Thats weird. I met plenty Croats who are pro-Yugoslavi both on internet and in real life. Andy many Serbs who are against it.
HeyVeddy@reddit
"so what?" Is my point, it shouldn't be banned but would. I'm not sure if you're from the Balkans or not but in Dalmatia it's virtually impossible to find anything remotely sympathetic to Yugoslavia. Zagreb is a little more neutral but the amount of hate that exists is unparalleled.
As a Yugoslav myself, I hate that it's that way but it is that way. I wish Croatia was more pro yugoslav
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
My "so what?" means that you are noticing symoblism, but ignoring actual anti-yugoslavian sentiment of Partizan and Red Star fans myself. Dalmatia? There are many Dalmatians who are pro yugoslavian. Descendens of many partisans who died there during war. There is famous journalist Boris Dežulovic for example. There are partisan monuments. Some of them destroyed, but some well kept and cared for. I made some photos of them, I can try to find them a post them here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC7_c4nhfVw This is Zagreb couple years ago.
Are you Yugoslav from Croatia, is the main question? Im Yugoslav too, and I would like for every former republic to be more Yugoslavian, not just Croatia.
HeyVeddy@reddit
There is a joke about asking dalmatians what they grandfather did because they were the most pro yugoslav 70 years ago and now the most nationalist.
My 30+ years experience in Croatia Bosnia and Serbia I cannot and will never say to anyone that Croatia is more pro yugoslav than any other state, let alone Bosnia and Serbia. I'd you'd like to, to ahead, but it goes completely against my life experience
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Some of them are the most nationalist. But Dalmatia was always divided. In 1990 elections for example, the left did better in Split than in Zagreb. I think Dalmatian nationalism gets overhyped by liberals from Zagreb, who have predjudice about those "primitive southerners".
Im not saying that it is more yugoslavian. But it is not black and white. It is controversial topic as in any other republic. Bosnia is the most pro-yugoslavian, no question there. Serbia? I would say less than its reputation.
HeyVeddy@reddit
That's your opinion but I can't reference polls in 1990 and use them 34 years later. We have statics measuring yugonostalgia already showing Croatia's position as the least yugonostalgic. Stats + my experience is enough for me
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
But Im the one using statistical examples, you are just using your experience.
You are not using any stats tho. Just your experience. Where are you from?
HeyVeddy@reddit
Here's a gallop poll for example. Plenty of this exists with more modern statics than 1990
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I know that this one is popular on the internet. But I think its just one poll, conducted on limited population, with kinda misleading question.
HeyVeddy@reddit
I don't mean this in a rude way, because i hate identities nationalism etc because a half croat is so far from a full blooded croat. Half Croats would be exposed to the world more, have more interesting convos about how political systems work based on their lived experiences with others (such as capitalist Greece) which could make them more favorable to a socialist Yugoslavia.
Croats are in fact quite anti Yugoslavia and I would say the most anti yugoslav. It kind of goes beyond left right, because many view it as a threat to their national independence which they all seem to value.
In contract Serbians are openly pro or favorable or at the least, not ashamed or embarrassed to even discuss Yugoslavia. They don't have a fear of how someone views their opinions on Yugoslavia, i.e. it's not an awkward topic to them, and that is already to illustrative of how much more accepted it is by Serbians. In Croatia to many it's literally hell and the devil. Also not sure if you've been in Serbia, but there is a lot of yugonostalgia there, from art, Museums, Restaurants etc. Same as Bosnia
I agree Slovenians seem to be a bit more sympathetic too
KafkasCat7@reddit
Interesting to know, thank you.
I also had the feeling that most Croatians didn't like Yugoslavia based on most of comments on the internet and in comparison with what other ex-Yugo people usually say.
I just shared my personal experiences.
People from Skopje also seem to have a positive opinion about Yugoslavia. I guess they got even poorer after the dissolution...
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I think inernet comments are tricky. Croatian nationalists are very loud group there and they have desperate desire to be heard.
KafkasCat7@reddit
Croatian Neonazis came here in Greece last year and killed a fan of the team that i support. I despise the Ustase descendants.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
I despise Ustase as well.
You should however know, that these particular neonazis were also supported by Greek fans from Panathinaikos (who are not nazis themselfs from what I heard).
So this one was more about football hooliganism than politics.
KafkasCat7@reddit
I know. Panathinaikos Gate 13 fans were with them when the incident happened outside of our stadium.
Historically AEK has been the team of the Greek refugees and their Ultras are anti-fascist-leftists
Panathinaikos on the other hand was the team of the bourgeoisie in Athens and they also had Neonazi Ultras in the past.
Most of today's Greek football supporters though aren't divided by class or politics but this is how it all started. Whereas in Cyprus, football clubs are to this day extremely political and your ideology usually matches the team that you support.
CriticalHistoryGreek@reddit
I've seen poems written by Panathinaikos fans in honour of the BBB.
Filipthehandsome@reddit
I have an impression that Croats hate him much more than Serbs do.
skadarski@reddit
Well I am Albanian and it's mitigated. Basically he is loved by Balkan boomers everywhere but Kosovo and Albania.
It is no secret that he wanted to annex Albania into Yugoslavia. It only failed to happen because he broke with Stalin early enough.
About Kosovo, while he managed to develop it somewhat, it still remained the poorest part of Yugoslavia. He also encouraged Albanian immigration to Turkey more or less overtly. This was during the Ranković era. And 50% of political prisoners in Yugoslavia were Albanians. So yeah Tito wasn't that good to Albanians, but at least he wasn't Enver Hoxha. But yeah I don't Kosovo boomers hate him, it's mainly neutral. They like the relative travel freedom during his rule.
branimir2208@reddit
I mean Kosovo's politicans share part of that responsability (they cared more in promoting albanian nationalism than in bringing jobs).
I mean you would get Kosovo.
skadarski@reddit
Hoxha would get Kosovo in an independent Albanian state but refused because he feared Tito's reaction (who proposed Kosovo to him).
branimir2208@reddit
He couldn't Yugoslavia would be against it. Only way that Albania would get Kosovo is inside Yugoslavia where our politicans could explain to our populace that nothing has change since Albania is 7th republic. Kosovo was a bait for Hoxha to get into Yugoslavia.
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Everybody who says "they hate him" or "they love him" is a liar. He is probably the most controversial figure in the modern history. He has a lot of admirers and a lot of haters too. I would say this is the case for every former yugoslavian nation.
Affectionate-Arm-405@reddit
So... Doesn't that make it true and not liars?
Terrible_Resource367@reddit
Shit, my bad :D I meant to say "they only hate him" or "they only love him". But even then, its not really true. Many people have mixed feelings. I would say that the most accurate thing is to say that he is highly controversial.
trippy_toads@reddit
Not serbian, but I think there is a general view on him troughout whole balkan. From what I can tell, the majority of balkan boomer generation liked him and praised him. There are some people who werent happy with how he lead yugoslavia. Young people mostly don't care or don't have any opinion on him, since we were never born and never experienced that period of life under him. My parents for example like him very much and kinda "miss" the old days, when we were under Tito. They say life was simpler and they had been provided with anything they needed by the state.
My opinion on him is that he did great things. I love what he did during the war, I love the fact that he was the only one who could unite the balkan as one, and there was some form of peace during his reign. Nowadays we are missing true leaders, just like Tito was. Having said that he did some questionable things aswell ofcourse, which I don't particuraly like and agree with. But I have utmost respect for him as a leader.
mamlazmamlazic@reddit
It's a tough one to pharse but some of the reasons people hate Tito.
-Nationalisation - serbian Elite was simply kneecaped in so many ways. Not just confiscation of wealth but forcing tenants on them in the same apartment and choosing worst ones specifically for that position and similar acts.
- Constant suppression of Serbian nationality. At the very least he was afraid of the power of most numerous nationality in the union that traditionally had Macedonians and Montenegrins to hold their back as a destabilising force. Kosovo and Vojvodina were given wider powers and leaders were selected specifically to rein in power of Serbian nationality etc
- Assassinations or political assassinations of Serbian political figures that god little too popular regardless of their loyalty. Ranković and Krcun are most popular examples of that.
kruska345@reddit
In my impression, older ones seem fond of him while younger ones seem to dislike him a lot
YugoCommie89@reddit
I love what Tito did to free ourselves from the Nazi menace. I loved what he did to fascists at Barbara.
He did a lot of shit wrong too with his IMF loans, but personally I think he's still a far better leader then we've ever had realistically.
Smrt Fašizmu, Sloboda Narodu.
AggravatingIssue7020@reddit
As crazy as it sounds, him being a dictator, it's probably true. All the split states governments have quickly filled up with total pieces of shit.
YugoCommie89@reddit
I see a dictatorship of the proletariat as a good thing. His only fault was not detecteding natuonalists and chauvanists and purging them from the party. That said, I've read elsewhere that Tito effectively lost power around about the mid 60's and that his views on how the country should function was not the dominant view of the communist party. He was apparently quite bitter about it and likely it was the cause of party functionaries becoming traitors to the proletariat.
t_rex_pasha@reddit
In HD
Fickle-Message-6143@reddit
Tito from 1941. - 1945. good, after that questionable.
Bad things:
Sweeping ethnic hatred under carpet worked only as long as he was alive. Getting so much IMF loans thinking that capitalism will fall like wtf dude. Not having succesor. Making 2 APs in Serbia while not in any other republic, Serbs will not forgive him for that. Goli otok thing, his gulag basicaly.
Good things:
Saying Stalin goodbye. Titoism not socialism. industrialization and major infrastructure projects. Wasn't afraid of superpowers and etc.
I am neutral regarding him. My parents seem to liked Yugoslavia, did they like him don't know.
Main-Economics1955@reddit
Look at the Serbs . Use have done the same shit genocide as everyone else always playing the victim .
Apprehensive_Rub4924@reddit
A strong Yugoslavia requires a weak Serbia ~ Tito. There‘s your answer. Lets just say that he definitely didnt like Serbs for his own reasons, to say the least. And Serbs who have at least 1% brain capacity dont like him either, including me. I genuinely hate Tito and those Ex-Commie Serbs (mostly older people) that glorify him. But on an average level, Serbs have a more negative view of him although Serbia sometimes gets portrayed as ‚Pro‘-Tito/YU for whatever reason which is simply not true.
Dry_Hyena_7029@reddit
Biggest evil we had to endure.
TomatoVEVO@reddit
Idk I wasn't born yet
Genetherapydenier@reddit
Fuck him, nobody likes him apart of modern leftists and boomers here
Puzzleheaded_Sir903@reddit
I was born after Tito died so I have neutral feelings about him.
My grandmother disliked Tito because she claimed Tito could have liberated Jasenovac much sooner and saved many lives, but he chose not to.
Srki90@reddit
Because Serbs were the largest and most powerful group in the federation, naturally he weakened Serbia to strengthen the federation.
I don’t think he had anything against Serbs personally but for the sake of unity you can’t have the largest group control the military, economy and government.
AlexMile@reddit
Imagine a guy in restaurant who orders a lot of good food and drinks for large bunch of friends on the table, to excitement and joy of everyone, ate and dank more than others but vanish some time before party is over leaving rest of the gang to pay the bill, with larger bill for those who stayed longer at the table. Well, that guy is Tito and Serb stayed longest.
Plane-Bug-8889@reddit
My Macedonian family likes him same with the Bosnian family. lol. I find it odd that Serbs of all people would hate him.
Maecenium@reddit
Hello Bratko!
The answer is very simple. Communists executed (at least) 60.000 Serbs, after the war.
If you know his home town or village - check this list
http://www.komisija1944.mpravde.gov.rs/
Or, go to any Serbian club abroad and ask random old ex-Royalists. Each one of them will tell you some serious horrors.
After the war, they had internal fight between pro-Soviet and pro-Yugoslavian communists
Voja_zi@reddit
You rarely meet anyone who sees him in a good light.
Texoraptor@reddit
Not a Balkaner, I've met a few. He's a polarizing political figure. From my very limited POV seems to follow family heritage lines. ("My great grandfather fought for Tito, I like him" or "My great-grandfather and his brother were Chetniks" screw him) For some he's a symbol of unity, for others a symbol of oppression of conservatism. Each has their own opinion. I think he's way more popular in Bosnia though.