Serbian Nationalism

The aim of this paper would be to analyze the rise to power of the Yugoslavian politician Slobodan Milosevic, with and emphasis on the applied nationalistic and populistic politics and their effect on his career. Often seen as a notorious politician, the one responsible for the destruction of Yugoslavia, Milosevic used his charisma and emotional appeal and succeeded to rise to power in the 1980’s. The time frame analyzed in this paper is the period from the early 80’s up to Milosevic’s death in 2006 with an emphasis on the period 1980-1990 and including the Gazimestan speech given on 28th of June, 1989. The suggested time-frame is of importance since that time period can be seen as crucial from the aspect of developing nationalistic politics by Milosevic.

ABSTRACT: The paper explores relations of both Serbian nationalist and antinationalist intellectuals towards Karl Kraus’ work. Analysis of the “Last days of mankind“ shows that Kraus wrote satires against ruling circles of the Habsburg Monarchy, demanded its reorganization, and even its destruction. He mostly ridiculed the top circles of the Habsburg Monarchy and German Reich, and unmasked their war plans against Serbia. He ridiculed warmongering Wiennese press, intellectuals, who betrayed their vocation by supporting German nationalism
and Habsburg imperialism. Whereas some of the most distinctive Croatian Yugoslav-oriented intellectuals in the aftermath of WWI highly respected Karl Kraus, Serbian intellectuals have almost utterly neglected this talented nonconformist, who sympathised with Serbian and Yugoslav tendences despite their unpopularity in his own surroundings. Furthermore, interest for Kraus is much more visible in today’s Croatia than in Serbia. The paper’s goal is to offer an explanation of lack of interest for Kraus among Serbian intellectuals. In the twilight
of socialism, majority of them showed nationalist parochialism, and a part of them expressed even unbridled warlike attitude, which contributed to thorough neglect of Kraus’ voluminous, intellectually demanded and uncompromising pacifistic work. At the same time, anti-nationalist and pacifistic intellectuals were prepared to pay
attention only for such aspects of the Kraus work, while they have neglected other aspects such as his criticism of pan-German imperialist tendences recognizable throughout the short 20th century.
KEY WORDS: Kraus, Serbs, Habsburg Monarchy, imperialism, nationalism, pacifism.

In this article we will describes the basic features of " Ideology of Nationalism " in a unity. Then, we will make comparision in the identification by addressing the Hroch's " three stages of nationalism " which were rapidly spreading ideology of nationalism and nation state process towards the end of the 18th century emerging with the 1789 French Revolution and quickly spread in the 19th century. We will also try to explain how this Hroch's three stage analysis developed on " Greece, Serbia and Bulgaria. " However; the terms of " Nationalism or Nation " is a vision of a society belives that enables the development of mankind which combining their language, history or cultural ties could create a superstructer of a nation or nations whose name is defined as the accumulation of social community life and ideals of progress. It is a concept that holds the country's tangible and intangible aspects of interests above all of everything. Though, rather than promoting each other, how they use nationalism against the nations which they call the others and we will try to demonstrate progress which was happened with the support of Western Powers in these three Balkan States.

The continuous rise of the Serbian state in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is often described as a typical example of the Piedmont-style of national unification. The conventional historiography emphasises the role popular nationalism has played in this process, making little if any distinctions between the forms of Serbian nationalisms within and outside of the Serbian state. This article challenges such interpretations and argues that the formation and expansion of Serbia had less to do with society-wide national aspirations and much more with the internal elite politics within the Serbian state. Moreover, the paper makes a case that, rather than being a driving force of national unification, the expansionist nationalism was a by-product of the state development. This argument is articulated further through the comparison of the different nationalist trajectories in Serbia and among the ethnic Serbian populations in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Nažalost, ideološke postavke (anti)srpskih liberala o “genocidu” u Srebrenici, i njihov odnos prema srpskim žrtvama, preuzimaju i pojedinci i grupe koje se deklarišu kao marksističke, komunističke i antiliberalne. Iako govore o “beskompromisnom zalaganju da se žrtve nacionalističkih ratova i etničkog čišćenja nikad ne zaborave”, njihova “beskompomisnost” odnosi se samo na Srebrenicu i bošnjačke žrtve - srpske kod njih ne postoje, niti se pominju. Jer Srbi su za ovakve “marksiste”, kao i za liberale, praktično uvek manje ljudi i manje žrtve od svih ostalih, pa o njihovim ljudskim pravima i stradanjima nije nužno govoriti.

Oni koji, nesvesni stvarnih ciljeva i učinaka srebreničke medijske histerije, u ime nekakvog "marksizma(-lenjinizma)" naivno veruju u mitološku priču o srebreničkom “genocidu”, ili srebreničkom “najmasovnijem masakru” pridaju isključivu pažnju (potpuno ignorišući masakre Srba u Podrinju), mnogo pre su marsovci nego marksovci, i lenjisti (žrtve lenjog uma) nego lenjinisti. Marks i Lenjin nikada ne bi potpisali optuživanje jedne države, pa i njenog naroda, sa neograničenom rokom trajanja. Makar taj "zločinački" narod i država bili Srbi, odnosno Srbija. To nema nikakve veze sa internacionalizmom i borbom protiv nacionalizma. Ovi principi ili jednako važe za sve, ili su puko oruđe kojim se prikrivaju i sprovode nečiji imperijalistički ili nacionalistički interesi.

Sramotno je u kolikoj meri oni koji se deklarišu kao “antiimperijalisti” i “antinacionalisti” podležu i robuju zapadnjačko-imperijalističkoj i nacionalističkoj propagandi iz susedstva. Ovakvi kvazimarksisti se beskompromisno i dosledno diferenciraju od srpskog nacionalizma, vodeći protiv njega ljute borbe i okršaje, ali su sasvim miroljubivi i nehajni prema provlačenju stavova iz repertoara bošnjačkog ili albanskog nacionalizma, odnosno zapadnog imperijalizma. Može se zaključiti: zagrebi prosečnog negacionistu zločina nad Srbima i naći ćeš proimperijalistiu, ili bošnjačkog/albanskog nacionalistu, makar se samoidentifikovao i kao levičar. To je svedočenje o istorijskom porazu našeg pokreta i dominaciji imperijalizma na Balkanu.

20.yüzyılın sonlarında Balkanlarda meydana gelen Bosna ve Kosova savaşları dünya kamuoyunun ilgisini ve bölgeye yönelik çalışmaların sayısını artırmıştır. Çalışmalarda özellikle Boşnak ve Arnavutlara yönelik soykırıma varan politikalara neden olan Sırpların milli kimlikleri, sosyal/siyasal yapıları, tarihsel gelişimleri anlamlandırılmaya çalışılmıştır. Sırpları merkeze alan çalışmaların sonucunda milliyetçiliğin yaşanan süreci açıklamada en iyi değişken olduğu ortaya çıktı.  19.yy’dan bu yana orataya çıkan, gelişen, dönüşen ve 90’lı yıllarda zirveye ulaşan Sırp milliyetçiliği; Balkanların siyasi, ekonomik, kültürel gelişim ve çıkmazlarında kilit rol oynadığını ortaya koymak mümkündür. Peki neydi bu Sırp milliyetçiliği?

Sırp milliyetçiliğinin tarihsel süreci incelendiğinde ortak köken, din,/mezhep dil, toprak, gelenek, mitlerin merkezi konumu hemen dikkat çeker. Milliyetçiliğin düşünsel arka planını Nemanja Hanedanı, Sırp Ortodoks Kilisesi, stokovjan lehçesi, Kosova ve Aziz Sava benzeri mitler, Bosna ve Kosova topraklarının kutsallığı, Sırp isyanları gibi olguların, kişilerin, toprakların ve mitlerin şekilendirdiği görülmektedir. Bu çerçeve Sırp bağımsızlık ve yayılmacı siyasetin 19.yy’dan bu yana etkileyen ana paradigma olmuştur. Diğer bir ifadeyle Sırp milliyetçiliği etnik, dinsel ve romantik milliyetçiliklerin formlarını barındırdırdığını krallık, sosyalist, demokratik siyasi yönetimlerde de birçok farklı elbise ile kendini yeniden ürettiğini iddia etmek mümkündür

This article examines the structure of the correlation between Hungarian and Central and Eastern European radical right-wing ideology and the field of religion. It briefly presents the relations of radical right wing groups and Christian churches, and tries to reveal the background and role of the explicit religious elements of the ideologies.

It is extremely difficult for a state to survive without international recognition; even so, some de facto states have been established and continue to exist. Others do not, and have been wiped off the face of the earth again. This article looks at one failed de facto state, the breakaway Serb Republic of Krajina (RSK) that existed for five years (1991–1995), before it was overrun by Croatian armed forces in Operation Storm. What did RSK do wrong that the surviving de facto states do right? Research has shown that in order to survive de facto states must have a patron that will protect them and supply them with financial and other resources; in addition, they must engage in state-building (the establishment of functioning state institutions) and in nationbuilding (fostering patriotism and a common national identity). RSK failed on all three scores. The Krajina leaders did initially enjoy the backing of the Milos˘evic´ regime, but fell out with it and lost that support. Rather than build strong state institutions they pilfered the state and allowed the society to slide into anarchy. Finally, they never made any attempt to create a sense of separate RSK identity linked to the state. RSK was presented only as the westernmost outpost of Serbdom, and as a temporary structure pending the unification of all Serbs in one state. This is not the stuff successful de facto states are made of.

Nažalost, ideološke postavke (anti)srpskih liberala o “genocidu” u Srebrenici, i njihov odnos prema srpskim žrtvama, preuzimaju i pojedinci i grupe koje se deklarišu kao marksističke, komunističke i antiliberalne. Iako govore o “beskompromisnom zalaganju da se žrtve nacionalističkih ratova i etničkog čišćenja nikad ne zaborave”, njihova “beskompomisnost” odnosi se samo na Srebrenicu i bošnjačke žrtve - srpske kod njih ne postoje, niti se pominju. Jer Srbi su za ovakve “marksiste”, kao i za liberale, praktično uvek manje ljudi i manje žrtve od svih ostalih, pa o njihovim ljudskim pravima i stradanjima nije nužno govoriti.

Oni koji, nesvesni stvarnih ciljeva i učinaka srebreničke medijske histerije, u ime nekakvog "marksizma(-lenjinizma)" naivno veruju u mitološku priču o srebreničkom “genocidu”, ili srebreničkom “najmasovnijem masakru” pridaju isključivu pažnju (potpuno ignorišući masakre Srba u Podrinju), mnogo pre su marsovci nego marksovci, i lenjisti (žrtve lenjog uma) nego lenjinisti. Marks i Lenjin nikada ne bi potpisali optuživanje jedne države, pa i njenog naroda, sa neograničenom rokom trajanja. Makar taj "zločinački" narod i država bili Srbi, odnosno Srbija. To nema nikakve veze sa internacionalizmom i borbom protiv nacionalizma. Ovi principi ili jednako važe za sve, ili su puko oruđe kojim se prikrivaju i sprovode nečiji imperijalistički ili nacionalistički interesi.

Sramotno je u kolikoj meri oni koji se deklarišu kao “antiimperijalisti” i “antinacionalisti” podležu i robuju zapadnjačko-imperijalističkoj i nacionalističkoj propagandi iz susedstva. Ovakvi kvazimarksisti se beskompromisno i dosledno diferenciraju od srpskog nacionalizma, vodeći protiv njega ljute borbe i okršaje, ali su sasvim miroljubivi i nehajni prema provlačenju stavova iz repertoara bošnjačkog ili albanskog nacionalizma, odnosno zapadnog imperijalizma. Može se zaključiti: zagrebi prosečnog negacionistu zločina nad Srbima i naći ćeš proimperijalistiu, ili bošnjačkog/albanskog nacionalistu, makar se samoidentifikovao i kao levičar. To je svedočenje o istorijskom porazu našeg pokreta i dominaciji imperijalizma na Balkanu.

Starting with an assessment of the relations between the discourses of
tradition, nation and modernization in the interwar monthly review for children Jugoslovenče, this paper reveals a link between the ideologies of ethnic nationalism followed by anti-modernist medieval imagery in the rubric named Prominent Yugoslavs and the representation of the Yugoslav women only as sisters or mothers. The discursive
invention of „Yugoslav Middle Ages“ in the rubric, with the Kosovo Myth as its core, is interpreted as a marker of the breakthrough of an ethnic nationalism into a more modern supranational code, which the building of Yugoslav nation, at least nominally, was supposed to be. Since “race” is the meeting point of the discursive encounter of anti-modernism and ethnic nationalism, they both rest on an obsession with women’s
reproductive role, which, as the paper argues, informs the portrayal of women in the role of pre-modern figures such as mothers and housewives exclusively.
Key words: journal Jugoslovenče, antimodernism, modern periodical studies, ethnic nationalism, Yugoslavism, gender and nation

Artykuł poświęcony jest językowej konstrukcji ideologii Načertanija Ilii Garašanina. Tekst został w póź - niejszym czasie uznany za manifest serbskiego nacjonalizmu i z tego powodu należałoby bliżej przeanalizować jego symbolikę. Pierwsza część artykułu bada tło historyczne Načertanija, tj. kwestię przemian społeczno-kulturowych w XVIII wieku, symboliczną i ideologiczną produkcję tzw. etnarchii, rozwój filologicznych i politycznych idei Vuka Karadžicia, wpływ polityki Hôtelu Lambert. Druga część identyfikuje trzy warstwy ideologiczne (pluralistyczna wzajemność słowiańska, wspólnota słowiańsko-prawosławna, etnocentryzm) w dokumencie Garašanina i wskazuje, jakie wyrażenia językowe są ich nośnikami.

This study aimed to examine the nationalist processes through which Serbia gained its independence in 1878, and the effects of these processes on the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Serbian nationalist movement, centered around the idea that Serbs had lost their independence and freedom since the First Kosovo War, is an ethnic nationalism. The Serbian nationalist movement, which does not hesitate to mobilize the masses to conquer the lands of Greater Serbia, dragged the people into war, and brought Yugoslavia’s end. In this study, the historical evolution of the conflict situation called Balkanization in light of the conceptual framework of ethnic and territorial nationalisms was discussed. The post-Yugoslavian situation was analyzed in the context of these concepts with special emphasis on Serbian nationalism. As a result, the need to seek a way out of Balkanization, without ignoring the existence of ethnic cores was underlined.