The Macedonian Conflict

Rating:
Summary: read the arguments, face the facts, consider the sources
Review: A book on this topic will always trigger strong emotional responses from readers, both friendly and hostile. The responses of the Greek readers below are to be expected. It is sad to see people who seem to be intelligent and educated resort to the most ridiculous nationalist claims and propaganda available, the uses of which beg the question: is this almost-total reliance on emotion (rage, hatred, etc.) a substitute for arguments based on facts and objectivity?

For example, in defending their "ownership" of the word Macedonia, Greeks claim that the Macedonian nation does not really exist, and was invented by Yugoslav communists, a claim that is originally Bulgarian and that they themselves no longer view as serious. If this is true, how is it that there are people who claim to be of Macedonian ethnicity in Greece and Bulgaria, two countries that have never been controlled by Yugoslav communists? By resorting to the use of this claim, Greeks expose their entire argument as ridiculous.

I don't want to get into the "who is Macedonian" argument as the book does that effectively. I do want to point out that virtually all reports on minorities in Greece criticize the Greek government for denying the Macedonian minority its basic human rights (right of self-expression, use of own language, etc.).

About the name- even if all Greek arguments were true, the right to choose one's own name is a right enjoyed by all of the nations and peoples in the world. Should Mexico object to the name USA because the world America refers to a commonly shared continent? Finally, the letter "M" in the phrase FYROM stands for Macedonia (FYROM means Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia). If this name is acceptable to Greece, then they don't really have a problem with the word "Macedonia" in the name Republic of Macedonia, but with the word "Republic". So a solution would be to change the name of the country to just Macedonia. Agree?


Rating:
Summary: A little out of date, but an unbiased analysis.
Review: Although much has happened in the past 10 years since this book was written, Mr. Danforth provides great insight on the nationalistic ideologies of the 3 sides within the conflict (Greeks, Macedonians & neutral). His approach is 100% UN-BIASED which in many cases is rare for this debate. He quotes Greek, Macedonian & independant sources on the Macedonian question, & provides insight on the less-beleivable claims from ALL sides. I also enjoyed how Mr. Danforth remained true to his trade & tried to keep away from the ancient history aspect of Macedonia & analyzed the real issue behind this conflict - the last 150 - 200 years.

For all, whether Macedonian, Greek or simply curious (but especially Macedonians & Greeks), please go into reading this book with an open mind. Although the book will leave you with an opinion favouring the Macedonian position, it can't be denied as a fair & unbiased analysis.

Rating:
Summary: EXCELLENT BOOK ABOUT THE MACEDONIANS
Review: In respect to the previous critics on the book, disregarding it simply as Danforth's "bias", a few facts must be pointed which they have ignored:

1)There is no Skopjan nation. This is an uncivilized racial slur that the Greeks use to label the Macedonians, one of gross distortion of reality.

2)The ethnic term Macedonian has been used by the ethnic Macedonians for the past 2,500 years, and belongs solely to them. Ancient Greek, Roman, Jewish historians, Byzantine, Slav, Arab, Vatican, Ottoman, Western European, Russian sources mention the existence of Macedonia and the Macedonians as distinct nation in every of the past 25 centuries - including before the partitioning of the country in 1913 by Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia. Greeks and Bulgarians who came to live in Macedonia since, can not be Macedonians in ethnic respect, but only in geographical sense, as their nationality is Greek and Bulgarian.

3)The fact that some Macedonians called themselves "Bulgarians" in the 19th century is not at all a proof that they were ethnic Bulgarians. The Balkans had been under brutal Turkish occupation for the past 500 years, and in such environment, NONE of the Balkan nations had a clear national consciousness. Thus the 19th century Greeks called themselves ROMANOI (not Greeks), and many prominent Bulgarian scholars, identified themselves as SERBS, and even as GREEKS. As Greece and Bulgaria freed themselves they begun actively building up a Greek and Bulgarian consciousness, and so did the majority of the Macedonian intellegencia which clearly called itself as Macedonian in the 19th and early 20th century. This is a fact that must be remembered. Those who have interest in suppressing the Macedonians do not mention this fact and rather rely on isolated cases.

4)The so-called "Macedonian Question" is not at all complex. Three countries (Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia) fighting over who would grab most of Macedonia and in the process destroy the Macedonian nation. In 1913, the three partitioned Macedonia, but in 1991, the Serbian occupied part (later Yugoslav), won independence, and both Greeks and Bulgarians are afraid of losing their parts to a united Macedonia, one that belongs to the Macedonian nation, the same nation they stole it from.

Those who deny Danforth, deny the reality, and that is the existence of the Macedonian nation. THEY are the ones who are biased. Not surprisingly these deniers are the Greeks and the Bulgarians, which still today, since 1913, occupy parts of Macedonia, and which have tried everything to destroy their large Macedonian minorities. Greece's oppression is well documented by Danforth and this is what bothers most the Greek deniers of the Macedonian nation. The Bulgarian deniers hate the fact that there are records of Macedonians consciousness, and stubbornly stick to few isolated cases, ignoring that Delcev, the leader of the Macedonians at the end of 19th century wrote:

"Those who fight for inclusion of Macedonia in Bulgaria, Greece, or Serbia, can consider themselves as good Bulgarians, Greeks, or Serbs, but never as good Macedonians."

Danforth's book is EXCELLENT. He has uncovered the existence of the ethnic Macedonian nation and exposed to light the politics of assimilation of the Greeks and Bulgarians. He himself has spoken to the Macedonians in Greece and witnessed their suffering at the hands of the Greeks, who forbid them to speak their own Macedonian language, and give their children Macedonian personal names. Yes, in Greece it is illegal to have a Macedonian personal name! The Greeks forbid both first and last Macedonian names, and all Macedonian family names, along with the names of Macedonian cities, villages, rivers, and mountains, had been renamed with Greek names since the Greek occupation of 1913.

Rating:
Summary: greeks will be greeks, but Macedonians are Macedonian
Review: Macedonians since the beginning of time have not been greek. They actually had a different spoken language, and yes some of them spoke greek since greek was the political and world language used, something of what english is today. The reason why Greece is being so scared and defensive is because we macedonians do have land claims in northern greece and because they don't want to lose that land since it is basically the bread basket for Greece and that they don't want to grant any of the macedonian minority living there any rights. It's funny how the greeks claim on a greek cultural website sponsored by the greek government on how the Romans were greek as well. That by far is the funniest thing I've ever heard.



Rating:
Summary: An exclellent case study of communist/nationalist propaganda
Review: Mr. Danforth suggests a solution to the problem by urging both Slavs and Greeks to accept the term "Macedonian" as a national description for the first, and a geographical description for the latter. This "solution" is plainly stupid. As you know, Western Thrace is part of Greece and Eastern Thrace is part of Turkey. Both Greeks and Turks frequently use the term "Thracian", and it is perfectly fine with each other, because "Thracian" only has a geographical meaning, not a national one. The term "Macedonia" COULD HAVE BEEN commonly used by both Slavs and Greeks, only if the Slavs agreed to it being used to describe geography alone. But what we see here, is that the Slavic population of the geographical Macedonia has "abducted" the name and the history of ancient and medieval Macedonia, and customized them to fit their need of becoming a nation separate from the Bulgarian one. This is unacceptable by us Greeks, it is a violation of our collective soul. I also find it extremely annoying that according to Mr. Danforth, only Halkidiki and the island of Thasos appear to have been inhabited by Greeks in the past. This is a horrendous lie that proves how much he has been influenced by Slavic propaganda. This book will gratify Slavic nationalism and do nothing to reveal the truth.

Rating:
Summary: An exclellent case study of communist/nationalist propaganda
Review: Recent events in the Balkans have shown that due to the ethnological, geopolitical and historical complexity of the region, serious in depth analysis is of paramount importance in understanding the truth. Apart from the thousands that have died as a result of the break up of Yugoslavia in the 1990's, another victim has been the truth, as is the case in most wars, especially in the 20th century.
The truth is based on undisputed facts (dates, events etc), and in relation to opinion, the truth always lies somewhere in the middle. The author along with the two previous "reviewers," offer a valuable primary source of the beliefs of those who wish to distort History in order to further their own goals and political agendas at the expense of the historical truth; in this case it is an attempt at convincing the world of the existence of a fictitious Macedonian nationality i.e. a continuation of Yugoslav communist policies from 1945 to the present aiming to create a "socialist" state in the heart of the Balkans at the expense mostly of NATO member Greece. It is, therefore, a prime example of what should be avoided when in search of the truth. Most of the information included in the book has been either purposely taken out of context or is irrelevant and unsupported material from unknown origins.
In addition, the previous "reviewer" states: "There is no Skopjan nation. This is an uncivilized racial slur that the Greeks use to label the Macedonians, one of gross distortion of reality". There is no bigger crime one can commit against history and human-kind in general, especially the younger generations, than distorting history itself. The undisputed fact is that the "Greeks" or "Hellenes", as is more correct, are made up of a mosaic of different peoples with common characteristics. The Macedonians, just like the Spartans, Athenians, Corinthians, and the citizens of Argos, Thebes, Phokis, Eretria and dozens of other regions, spoke and wrote the Greek language, had Greek names, believed in the Greek gods, used Greek architecture and most of all considered THEMSELVES to be Greek, thus setting themselves apart from all others whom they viewed as "Barbarians". The unification of Greece took place under the hegemony of Macedonia and lead to the downfall of the Persian Empire and the establishment of the mighty Empire of Alexander the Great, through which the Greeks avenged themselves for the Persian Wars and spread Hellenism across the "Known World" and into the far reaches of uncharted lands in Asia.
He also states: "He (the author) has uncovered the existence of the ethnic Macedonian nation and exposed to light the politics of assimilation of the Greeks and Bulgarians."
One can clearly see that the choice of wording "uncovered the existence of the ethnic Macedonian nation" sheds more light as to the true purpose of this "review" than they would have liked; meaning that the "Macedonian" nation had either disappeared from the face of the planet or had carefully and very efficiently been hidden until this book came out. In any case, it lacks both seriousness and credibility.
Furthermore, he states: "Yes, in Greece it is illegal to have a Macedonian personal name!" Both the "reader" from NY as well as Mr Danforth should have done their "homework" better. The names Alexander and Phillip are not only widely used today in Greece, but just like Socrates, Homer or Leonidas, they don't get any more Greek.
A rather childish and yet dangerous assertation coming as a result of Yugoslav communist propaganda and indoctrination aiming at conditioning the majority Bulgarian-Slavic population of South Serbia into believing they belong to a fictitious "Macedonian" nationality. What's next? Did the Vikings build the Parthenon, was Homer a Turk or was Alexander the Great a Slav?
Let's be serious. In a democracy all voices should be heard instead of being immediately disregarded on the basis of their origin. One cannot and should not silence another just because they disagree with them! Nevertheless, the truth should be protected at all cost and not be left to be sacrificed in pursuit of political agendas.
This book provides a fictitious insight in the study of Macedonia. It is a "must" for anybody interested either in fiction or the study of the use of communist/nationalist propaganda in History.

Rating:
Summary: Truth about Macedonia
Review: Well, as I'm not a scholar, I can't argue about the "scientificness" of the book. It touched me deeply - Macedonian history in my country was written by communists which give it a special touch, and Greeks, definetely, destroyed every sign of Macedonian culture, to rebuild according to their wishes. Of course, this book doesn't mention the UK and US help to the King during the Greek Civil War (US army even used napalm bombs over Macedonian villages), but it mentions the exile - 28,000 kids in 1948 only, and a lot more after that... I just can't wait for the next book which will be devoted to the Macedonian - Greek struggle in Australia...