Macedonia Naming Dispute: Solved?

[PointOfViewGun]

Your answer includes in the Hellenic geneaology created in 1500 BC...
By that Geneaology Achaeos, Makednos,Dorieus, Aetolos, Dardanos were BROTHERS OF Hellen. Damn by your prospective i believe that is part of an old consiracy isn't it?
You know that by do not aknowlege the hellenic origin of Alexander the great you DEFINE Prophet Muhama's words" ? Search the old Muslim great scholars and find what HE said about Alexander. Maybe Prophet Him self was part of the Greek cxonspiracy too!

But I forgot....Turks are not Arabs and NOT Faithfulll Muslims because against Prophet's curse the turned Churches into Mosques!!!

So Are the Muslim Scholars liers too according to you?

None of what you posted in that post addresses what I said. Not a single word. It's not just that, but your post is mostly incoherent. At no point did I even comment on Alexander's origins. Nor I would "DEFINE" Muhammad's words if I don't acknowledge Alexander as Greek as that would be "DEFYING" his words. Nor defying his words would carry any logical weight. Nor your attack on Turks for not being faithful Muslims or their turning of churches into mosques has any relevance here. It's really mind boggling that you managed to get so many things so wrong in the most ignorant and bigoted way in response of something so simple.

[AnthoniusII]

None of what you posted in that post addresses what I said. Not a single word. It's not just that, but your post is mostly incoherent. At no point did I even comment on Alexander's origins. Nor I would "DEFINE" Muhammad's words if I don't acknowledge Alexander as Greek as that would be "DEFYING" his words. Nor defying his words would carry any logical weight. Nor your attack on Turks for not being faithful Muslims or their turning of churches into mosques has any relevance here. It's really mind boggling that you managed to get so many things so wrong in the most ignorant and bigoted way in response of something so simple.

Truth hearts and you act like no one respond to your posts, you chose to ignore and make your ignorance a bubble of safety. You chose that you had no answers to your questions, you chose to ignore everything that hearts you.
Your desision and its respected. But ignoring other people's answers does not nessesarily makes you right. Keep calp and keep ignoring the truth.

[Kyriakos]

Also, i think it is rather juvenile to focus on spelling/cis-homophone term mistakes. I mean we already are less than ideally polite, so lets not allow even more room for attack ^_^

[PointOfViewGun]

Also, i think it is rather juvenile to focus on spelling/cis-homophone term mistakes. I mean we already are less than ideally polite, so lets not allow even more room for attack ^_^

I made 6 points in my post, only one was about misspelling. (heart and hurt are not homophone by a long shot by the way) Do tell me though. What part of his post actually addresses what I pointed out earlier about applying different standards?

[Vanoi]

My question. What is the Skopjan Ambassador in Canada (among other members of the diplomatic group of that country) doing having his photograph taken with a map that includes my hometown (Thessaloniki) in the background?
How would US citizens feel if a Mexican official were to have his photograph taken with a map including, say Los Angeles in Mexican territory?
As for the "oh, its a small country, don't worry, they can't hurt you". You don't get it. Things change. Greece didn't even exist as a country in 1821, but in 1921 it had the Ottoman Empire militarily cornered. Had it not been for Mustafa Kemal, it would be Greece in both sides of the Aegean.
And of course, there is the issue that it's damn wrong. The country named "Macedonia" has nothing to do with Macedonia actual, with the exception of a very small part of its territory, Monastiri (Bitola to them), which actually has a Greek population (and should be within Greek borders, therefore, but never mind). The area they inhabit is Dardania, Paeonia, etc. That is, if they want to connect it to the ancient era. It's ridiculous to name an area by the name of it's neighbor.

I'd laugh. It'd be really funny to be honest considering Mexico ceded the land 180 years ago. They could include Texas and the Southwest too but at the end of the day Mexico is still Mexico just like Macedonia will be Macedonia.

[ioannis76]

I'd laugh. It'd be really funny to be honest considering Mexico ceded the land 180 years ago. They could include Texas and the Southwest too but at the end of the day Mexico is still Mexico just like Macedonia will be Macedonia.

I do believe you would, because nobody in their right mind would actually claim territory from the US. It would be rather... suicidal.
I don't think it would be funny, however, if, say the US was not so powerful (ie there was a power nearby at least equally strong to the US, if not stronger) willing to support Mexico in its claim.
The country you know as "Macedonia" is anything but. As I said, apart from the area of Monastiri, which actually has Greek population that is being oppressed, none of that area is the area of the historical Macedonia. Anyone who knows history knows that it's Dardania and Paeonia, neighboring states, yes, but NOT Macedonia.
It looks like the Greeks (the people, not the government) are not about to allow a foreign country usurp their history. To be honest, I didn't really think they had it in them to defend their history, but there ya have it. .
My prediction is that this is going to strengthen the nationalist party in Greece (both GD and the smaller ones, although their leaders have been shown to be anything but nationalists, unfortunately), regardless of when the elections are going to take place.
Already, Nea Dimokratia, the "center-right" (although I laugh as I write this) was forced to state that they are not going to ratify the deal if the deal has not been ratified by the time we have elections (Nea Dimokratia is expected to win by a landslide). Mind you, the President of Nea Dimokratia, Mitsotakis, was off skiing when the first huge gathering in Thessaloniki took place (January). The huge number of people in that one, and the even greater number in the second one in Athens hit him like a ton of bricks, and he was forced to change his original stance that was "we will vote according to what the Independent Greeks (the other "center right" party that is, however co-ruling with the Syriza gang).

[Vanoi]

Turkey is the only country capable in attacking Greece and it has not done so yet and I think they are a bit too overstretched in Syria to invade Greece. Macedonia doesn't and never will have an army capable of ever attacking Greece.

[Abdülmecid I]

Abdul, I apologize to you sir. On my phone I read "admiral" but going back and looking at it on my desktop you indeed were responding to Anthonius. I take responsibility for my mistake, my reply was kind of dick. I thought we were more or less on a similar side to the discussion and was confused with that post I thought was directed at me.

No worries, mate, in terms of difficulty, reading using tiny screens is found somewhere between solving the Gordian Knot and negotiating a compromise in the Balkans.

^This is imo really a very low quality reflection, Abdul. I mean it isn't fair to even just term it "simplistic" or even "simplistic" coupled with "biased". Not seeing how you think you are actually doing something other than being almost a parody of hellenophobia at this point.

Alright. Calling my arguments as aggressive or low-quality hardly adds anything to the discussion. Explaining why my reasoning is weak, instead of throwing around random adjectives, is necessary for a fruitful debate. So far, the only tangible counter-argument you have provided is about the supposed value of nationalism for the protection of cultural heritage and it has already been disproved.

Abdul, others have already answered you, I believe. .

No, not really, I'm afraid. Especially that nice little article about how the modern Republic of Macedonia encompasses almost exactly the northern part of the ancient region, as defined by Strabo and Ptolemy, was completely ignored. The same applies for the paragraphs illustrating how every Greek government (the brutal dictatorship of the colonels included) casually referred to its northern neighbor as Macedonia, until some populist right-wingers decided, sometime in the '90s, to throw their toys out of the pram. I wonder why that article was overlooked. Could it be because it crushed their valuable narrative of the inherent Greekness of Macedonia and the Greek nation's permanent opposition? I'm eagerly waiting for your response to the article's content, ioannis.

In what concerns the Macedonian consul in Toronto, it basically consists of a diplomatic gaffe, which was strongly criticized by the Macedonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I had already addressed this attempt of yours to associate Macedonia to territorial irredentism, by appealing to guilt by association, so I can only conclude that you are intentionally spreading misleading propaganda in the thread, which is quite sad, in my opinion. Anyway, the Macedonian consul should have obviously been more prudent or maybe stopped behaving like a tribalist charlatan, but the tactic of justifying paranoia and chauvinism, based on the actions of an obscure official, without any meaningful authority, is dishonest. There are European countries where political leaders publicly laugh at the Holocaust, but we shouldn't suggest that their countries or the EU are Nazi institutions. Especially when the Macedonian Constitution unambiguously establishes that the country has absolutely no territorial claims against its neighbors.

You still do not answer my previus question...Should I expect a clear answer or you will avoid it?

I ignored it, because it failed to shoot down my arguments. Please try to read them carefully and you will realize why your parents' names are irrelevant or why your appeal to the Greek tradition is ridiculous. When you manage to show to me that ancient Greek names continued to be used without any interruption from the 1st to the 18th century AD, then I'll be happy to recognize my mistake. To be honest, I doubt that you will find many notarioi and kodjabashis called Praxiteles and Poseidippus.

[Kyriakos]

It is only to be expected that after it has been shown time and again that posts are biased (even in your latest one you couldn't avoid reposting some vacant accusation of nationalism, despite how hollow it makes it all) you cannot in earnest expect those you try to speak against to bother with much elaboration in expressing their honest view of what you say. No one is forced to write a larger post, so it works on a basis of being met with actual urge to do so by the other. I mean, one doesn't really prepare the ground for much of an exchange when they already show up flying some banner quite emblematic of what conclusion they wish to work their way backwards to, dear Abdul.

[ioannis76]

Abdul, you should know by now that I am not really interested in answering Hellenophobic and unhistoric comments. To claim that Macedonia is not Greek is utterly ridiculous. The Macedonians were (still are) Dorian Greeks. They spoke Greek their Gods were the same as the rest of the Greeks, and there are no other languages spoken in the area of Macedonia, certainly not a bad sounding Bulgarian dialect (I am sorry but the sound of that language aesthetically insults my ears). Find me one written evidence of that language from the era of Philip and Alexander (Greek names, btw). And please don't start with the "argument" that Greek was the "lingua franca" of the era. The freaking Mongols had a written language approximately at they conquered the Chinese.
If the Macedonians had a different mother tongue than the Greeks "which was not written" (ridiculous, given the level of sophistication of the Macedonians) they would have started writing it, even in Greek characters, after they conquered the Greeks (they probably would develop their own alphabet, but never mind).THERE IS NONE OF THAT, EITHER.
Other than that, Kyriakos has pretty much summed it up quite well for me.

[Admiral Piett]

Can some of the Greek members explain to me how exactly Macedonia could use a military/economic with Greece against Greece? As far as I know there aren't that many Slavic Macedonians in Greek Macedon. Turkey used the excuse of a big minority of Turks to invade and intervene in Cyprus but Northern Macedon doesn't exactly have such an angle. The hardcore nationalists there can dream all they want but the actual government in Northern Macedon seems more interested in reconciliation. Perhaps instead of "no negotiation" due to their name, why not bring up counter-offers to theirs to make the deal better for Greece? A change in their education system promoting Greek Macedonians as their heritage would go a long way no?

[HannibalExMachina]

i agree, if france and germany can celebrate a common heritage after centuries of rivalry, two nations that have only existed for a fraction of the time should be able to do the same. considering the ottomans have been the historic enemy for like, ever, maybe people on both sides need to acknowledge the irony of hating each other because they fell out over the spoils of independance.

[Alastor]

@Admiral Piett
As I have argued in the past, you don't need military or economic power to do harm. An ideology and people fanatically following it is enough. A few cells of hardened nationalists committing acts of terror would be all it takes. And random groups in some desert can get the resources for that, imagine if a state was willing to sponsor such activities. So no the ability to do harm is real. No matter how people try to pretend that is not the case. You can argue that currently it is unlikely sth like that would happen and you would probably be right. But that doesn't mean it is not doable.
Second the government in FYROM now is open to negotiations, the government that was in place 2 years ago and for over a decade wasn't exactly that conciliatory. So just because a temporary government leans that way temporarily you can hardly make that argument. As for bringing up counteroffers I think you are overestimating the willingness of the FYROM side to negotiate. Even changing the name of the state is too much for many, imagine if Greece actually demanded a change in the name of the ethnicity or language. It would never fly. People should stop throwing the weight of this solely on the Greek side. The other side is the one that initiated the confrontation by making claims and is now trying its damn best to get out of this with as much as possible. The other side is still the one winning points on the international level also and yet the one more likely to blow this deal apart.

two nations that have only existed for a fraction of the time should be able to do the same.

You just couldn't resist could you.

[HannibalExMachina]

nope. say, why should the "other side" agree to have the name of their language or ethnicity dictated by someone who gets all up in arms over a name? playing the victim isnt going to win greece any points, especially since they are the far bigger player. i could think of a few examples where the bigger player takes a victim role to punch down, its not a flattering look.

[Alastor]

nope. say, why should the "other side" agree to have the name of their language or ethnicity dictated by someone who gets all up in arms over a name? playing the victim isnt going to win greece any points, especially since they are the far bigger player. i could think of a few examples where the bigger player takes a victim role to punch down, its not a flattering look.

The fact it's a skewed, inaccurate, petty point notwithstanding? I see, have it your way. First if it was just a name I would imagine FYROM wouldn't be that protective of it. I mean come on, it's just a name, why must they have it? Right. But you are right that it is kinda hard for Greece to win any points playing the victim, when the other side is so much more adept at it. Finally you do of course realize your argument on power dynamics is skewed again. Yes Greece is a bigger fish than FYROM, but is it a big fish? Hardly. Bilateral power dynamics don't exist in a vacuum.

[Abdülmecid I]

As I have argued in the past, you don't need military or economic power to do harm. An ideology and people fanatically following it is enough. A few cells of hardened nationalists committing acts of terror would be all it takes. And random groups in some desert can get the resources for that, imagine if a state was willing to sponsor such activities. So no the ability to do harm is real. No matter how people try to pretend that is not the case. You can argue that currently it is unlikely sth like that would happen and you would probably be right. But that doesn't mean it is not doable.

Yeah, everything is potentially doable, from Lichtenstein conquering Austria to kangaroos enslaving Australians. Northern Macedonia endorsing irredentism and being theoretically capable of expanding to Salonika in the foreseeable future is your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled, but unless it is supported by at least a small number of admissible indications, don't be surprised if it's dismissed as unnecessarily paranoid by objective observers. Anyway, even if, in a miraculous manner, Northern Macedonia is allowed to annex the Greek province of Macedonia, the name of the country or the number of Philip's statues is not going to be a crucial factor.

The other side is the one that initiated the confrontation by making claims and is now trying.

Nope, that's demonstrably false. As I mentioned above, Greek intellectuals, officers and dignitaries were quite content at calling the region now belonging to the Macedonian Republic, when it was controlled by the Ottomans or the Yugoslavs, as Macedonia. That bizarre dispute began suddenly, when the Greek authorities threw a tantrum, when Skopje separated from Belgrade and tried to join the United Nations. The start of the controversy perfectly proves how artificial the issue really is (essentially initiated by far-right populists willing to manipulate the outraged mob) and the flimsiness of the excuses about a future Macedonian expansion to the south. Nobody has denied Gruevsky exploiting the tensions to increase his popularity through the Antiquization campaign, but it's time for the Greek public to also accept his partial responsibility. The negotiations are obviously advantageous to Greece, with Northern Macedonia adopting a geographically accurate name and retreating from its claims to the ancient kingdom, so I think that even the most adamant nationalists need to appreciate the fruits of the agreement.

Abdul, you should know by now that I am not really interested in answering Hellenophobic and unhistoric comments.

Apparently you didn't even bother to read the article. Your rant about the Macedonian language was completely irrelevant. I summarize it for a third time, hoping that someone will finally find the time (?) to comment on it: The article establishes how the modern Republic of Macedonia corresponds to the northern portion of the Macedonian region, as defined by Strabo and Ptolemy. It then explains that the modern region of Macedonia, a term invented by Western scholars in the 19th century, since no memory of Macedonia had survived among the various Balkan peoples, derives from the description of Ptolemy and Strabo, which means that the name of Northern Macedonia is perfectly accurate. Finally, it demonstrates how academics (including Paparrigopoulos, the man behind the Greek nationalist narrative) and various governments (such as the military regime of the colonels) almost always recognized the region as Macedonia. Even in schoolbooks and military guides, the frightening northern neighbor of the Greeks is often described as Macedonia. I am eagerly waiting for your answer to these historical facts. So far I am only getting poorly convincing attempts of evasion, by pretending that my questions are so abhorrent that they do not even merit a reply, so let's hope for something more productive and sincere.

[Alastor]

Yeah, everything is potentially doable, from Lichtenstein conquering Austria to kangaroos enslaving Australians. Northern Macedonia endorsing irredentism and being theoretically capable of expanding to Salonika in the foreseeable future is your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled, but unless it is supported by at least a small number of admissible indications, don't be surprised if it's dismissed as unnecessarily paranoid by objective observers. Anyway, even if, in a miraculous manner, Northern Macedonia is allowed to annex the Greek province of Macedonia, the name of the country or the number of Philip's statues is not going to be a crucial factor.

I would argue and I believe quite convincingly that the three are not equally doable or equally likely to happen. Sth you also certainly do realize, but then again, were you to admit it, your attempt to ridicule my sane and rather measured argument would lose its punch. So by all means have your fun.

Nope, that's demonstrably false. As I mentioned above, Greek intellectuals, officers and dignitaries were quite content at calling the region now belonging to the Macedonian Republic, when it was controlled by the Ottomans or the Yugoslavs, as Macedonia. That bizarre dispute began suddenly, when the Greek authorities threw a tantrum, when Skopje separated from Belgrade and tried to join the United Nations. The start of the controversy perfectly proves how artificial the issue really is (essentially initiated by far-right populists willing to manipulate the outraged mob) and the flimsiness of the excuses about a future Macedonian expansion to the south. Nobody has denied Gruevsky exploiting the tensions to increase his popularity through the Antiquization campaign, but it's time for the Greek public to also accept his partial responsibility. The negotiations are obviously advantageous to Greece, with Northern Macedonia adopting a geographically accurate name and retreating from its claims to the ancient kingdom, so I think that even the most adamant nationalists need to appreciate the fruits of the agreement.

Demonstrably? What a facetious argument. When did these Greek intellectuals, officers and dignitaries abandon the claim to the Macedonian identity and heritage? When did they give it to the Bulgarians of FYROM? You would probably find some civil war communists trying to pragmatically bargain with it, but that's hardly an appropriate example. And yes the issue became a big deal when said state suddenly became independent and their claims to said identity mattered. Big surprise huh? No, not really. Arguably Greece should have acted earlier, but the issue was less immediate. It could be ignored for a later date. Until it couldn't. And far right populists you say? Your knowledge of modern Greek politics appears to be rather lacking. You could make that argument for today. Not for the 90s. Unless Papandreou is a far-right populist in your book. And nobody has denied? Are you quite sure you've been reading the same thread? The onus has been consistently placed on the Greek side. And no the negotiations are not advantageous to Greece, at least not unless they are a part of other, under the table, dealings. I have to say I am rather disappointed at how one-sided the arguments of someone who claims to be even-handed on the issue actually are.

[Ludicus]

My friend...I think that Herodotus should consult you before he writes his Historiae... That is why Hellens (Greeks) are so sensitive in the name Macedonia.

I have some doubts...
Let's hear Edith Hall, (Book, The Ancient Greeks, Ten Ways They Shaped the World)
Chapter 7 "The Rivalrous Macedonians" - a very small excerpt,

" ...When Macedonians first enter history, it is in the context of a competition. In around 500 BC, Alexander I applied to compete in the Olympic Games, which meant that his claim to Greek ethnicity need to be approved by the Judges.It was agreed that his descent from inhabitants of Argos in the Peloponnese legitimized his desire to compete against other Greeks in the most famous Panhellenic venue of all.

...Philippe commissioned a monument at Olympia, which showed that that he has now saw himself as the rival not of other Greeks but of the gods.

..The Macedonians took competitiveness (the seventh of the characteristics that defined the ancient Greeks) to literally cutthroat levels. This started at home in the family...the problem inherent in the Macedonian's love for competition was that - at least from the moment that Philip became king in 359 BC they were never satisfied with what they had already conquered...this hazard is most clearly seen in the enigmatic figure of Alexander, whose extraordinary conquests and permanent absence destabilized and impoverished both his home district of Macedonia and the rest of mainland Greece.

...Alexander's mother, a northern Greek associated in ancient sources with membership in esoteric cults, was of undoubted importance in Alexander's success.

Aristotle father was physician to Philip's father... and it's inevitable that the two boys, Philip and Aristotle, knew each other well from early age... Aristotle...in his Politics he notoriously argued for the superiority of Greeks and their natural right to rule other peoples and to enslave them through warfare, a political philosophy that matched Alexander's aspirations perfectly"

-----
Edit, anyway - to be fair, let's keep in mind that Macedonia was split apart in 1912 when the Bulgarians, the Greeks and the Serbs united to push the Turks out of the Balkans, and then they split Macedonia among themselves...
----

The naming dispute dates since the dissolution of Yugoslavia, when the new, independent state of Macedonia was created in 1991. Although the name "Macedonia" was used ..by the socialist predecessor of the modern country.

Because the Macedonian national consciousness had been shown to be a powerful force that might be difficult to suppress. The position of the Communist party was pragmatic, and its position toward the "Macedonian question" resulted in the strengthening of the Party in Macedonia.The communist leader united Yugoslavia's historically/antagonistic national groups in a stable federation.
Furthermore, let's say that there is little doubt that Tito saw the possibility of expanding his sphere of action into parts of Greek territory.

-------
The nostalgia for the totalitarian ways of the past,

After Tito's Death, Yugoslav Nostalgia Abounds

Talking about nostalgia,this view is not limited to Russia In Russia, nostalgia for USSR and positive feelings about Stalin | Pew ...

[alhoon]

Posts about the founding of modern Universities, Greece, France and Germany moved here.

[The Noble Lord]

The issue is NOT solved yet, there has to referendum in FYROM and it has to be approved by the president Ivanov (who declared he will never approves of the deal)
and in Greece it has to be approved and ratified by the parliament.

to be fair, let's keep in mind that Macedonia was split apart in 1912 when the Bulgarians, the Greeks and the Serbs united to push the Turks out of the Balkans, and then they split Macedonia among themselves...

Yes, that is true, Also is true that in 1912 entire Christian population of Macedonia thought of themselves to be Serbs, Greeks, Vlachs and largest number of them to be ethnically and nationally Bulgarians...
Largest number of Vardar, Pirin and Aegean Macedonia thought of themselves to be Bulgarians in identity and ethnic belonging.

It was only during the Kingdom of Yugoslavia 1918-1941 and then during the Socialist Yugoslavia 1945-1991 that separate Macedonian identity started developing.