Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / History  % width 70

Serbian contribution to Poland's independance after WWI


Crow 137 | 7,709  
20 Oct 2009 /  #1
Rebellion of local, native Bosnian Serbs against Austro-Hungarian rule, among else led dirrectly to Poland`s independance. Some historians says that Polish independance established after WWI represent consequence of chain reaction of events that as (they admit) started by Balkan Serbs. Others goes deeper and simple blame Serbs for start of WWI on the contrary of those who says that actualy Austro-Hungaria started WWI attacking Serbia. More realistic historians are aware that world powers started WWI in order to solve their mutual misunderstandings. And, that`s truth.

But, this thread deals with Serbian and Polish role in events that led to Austro-Hungarian dissaster and both- Serbian and Polish independance.

Facts are that both- Poles and Serbs desired their independance. They had plans and they coordinated. Their coordination moved Russia to act on the behalf of Serbia. All started with efforts of Polish Prince Czartoryski's and so called Serbian Constitutionalists. Their action even contributed to formation of first Yugoslavia. But, its another story...

So,... Bosnian Serbs said ENOUGH to Austro-Hungarian occupation, Habsburgs wanted to eradicate them, Serbia supported Bosnian Serbs, Austro-Hungaria attacked Serbia and Russia reacted on the behalf of Serbia. Poland got chance and grabbed it...

What i want to ask this auditorium- are you aware of this?

Polish Independence Day (part 2)

Święto Niepodległości (Independence Day) - Celebrates the restoration of Poland's independence in 1918 after 123 years of partitions by Austro-Hungary, Prussia & Russia.

With a significant amount of summarising. WWI saw all the three powers that had been occupying Poland gradually defeated at the same time as a rise in Polish independence movements (primary figure being Jozef Pilsudski) and support from overseas for an independent Polish state, primarily Woodrow Wilson in the USA. The combination of these events gave rise to Poland's Second Republic.

The Austro-Hungarian Empire went into the war quite seriously under-prepared and without anything like a good enough fighting force for what was to unfold. They essentially fell out big-time with Serbia after a Serb militant group murdered the heir to their throne, Franz Ferdinand, in July 1914.

[b]Ilija Garasanin's "Nacertanije"


A REASSESSEMENT

Institute for Balkan Studies
Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Belgrade, Dusan T. Batakovic

Prince Czartoryski's intention was to make conditions for the establishment of independent Poland by using the Eastern question. Assuming that Russia and Austria intended to divide the Balkans between themselves in the near future, as they had done with Poland (only now without Prussia which had no direct interests in the East), Czartoryski and his associates made a project of a vast Southern Slav state that should be created around Serbia, and lean on France and Great Britain in its foreign policy.

MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
20 Oct 2009 /  #2
What i want to ask this auditorium- are you aware of this?

Yes.

Edit: with the difference that it was indirectly Serbia was indeed sickening the neighbourhood for Slav independence, however, her primary concern was to create a Southern Slav state, Yugoslavia. She didn't cause all the stirrings with an independent Poland in mind. Polish re-emergence on the map was a consequence of the ensuing WW1 which in turn was a consequence of Serbia's stirring and A-H's desire to teach her a lesson. The declaration of war was in the 19th century a common practice to push your wishes upon the other. And A-H only did so because Germany (unaware of the consequences) said she would back up her in her desire to take care of Serbia. This didn't mean war as Wilhelm 2 declared after reading the Serbian answer to the Austrian ultimatum: "with this all reason for war has been eradicated."

>^..^<

M-G (though it's a little more complicated than the highschool paper you quote, it's basically what happened)

Crow

Another example of the fact that it wasn't intended anything else than a way of putting pressure on Serbia: Colonel Dimitrievic, the leader of the Black Hand, was in a spa in Austria on the day the Austrians declared war on Serbia. He was granted free passage back to Belgrade that day. If the Austrians did mean it as an actual declaration of war, they would've never allowed that and would have kept him hostage. But unfortunately the Great Powers had been running the armament-race too hard in the previous decades, so when the war machineries started rolling, there was no stopping it, even when they tried, they couldn't stop it anymore. It had become too heavy and even though the Czar and the Kaiser didn't actually wanted war, they were not able to stop it anymore once the wheels were set in motion.

>^..^<

M-G (where is Crow)
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
21 Oct 2009 /  #3
She didn't cause all the stirrings with an independent Poland in mind.

well, not exclusively Poland

it was indirectly Serbia was indeed sickening the neighbourhood for Slav independence

partly true. Only partly. This comment is proof that you aren`t familiar with historical facts but anyway entering in disscusions. Or you maybe just provoke

A-H was neighbourhood to Serbia but, also A-H annexed Bosnia-Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Dubrovnik and Croatia. Yes, before that nor Dalmatia, nor Dubrovnik, nor Slavonia were integral part of Croatia. That`s how started process of croatization of the Catholic and Orthodox Serbs of all those regions and all that under German supervision.

Then, local native Serbs reacted and resisted to A-H. A-H increased oppresion to the climax that provoced Serbian anwer in Sarajevo when archduke was assasinated.

You see, Austro-Hungaria was neighbourhood to Serbia but also A-H dirrectly annexed Serbian lands, territories populated with Serbs- Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dubrovnik, Dalmatia. BDW, those territores were previously liberated from Ottoman Turkish rule on the first place by Serbian and Russian efforts. Even Poles had their role in it and many died on the behalf of Serbs. But anyway, A-H took it for itself simple by annexion supported by other European and world powers.

So, Serbia as only free Serbian land on Balkan was obliged to support other Serbs, both- those under A-H rule and those still under Turkish rule. Not to mention that A-H showed intentions to anex even Serbia. They wanted to establish border with Turks and to split Serbian lands among themselves. That was mistake. Serbs took whole issue seriously and screwd both- Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires.

Let it be said here that Serbian Entente allay partners- Britain and France had misunderstandings with A-H and Turks but here in the region, on Balkan, they wanted status quo. They wanted to see how Austrians and Turks rule over native Slavs. That`s what they wanted. It was Serbians solely who dealt cathastrophic charge into Austrian and Turkish joke. On the first place, Poles helped, Polish inteligentsia and fighters (in Bosnia) and, of course Russians arrived.

All in all, A-H oppresed native Serbs on territories that previously annexed and also provoked Serbia. Serbs reacted, what was their natural right.

her primary concern was to create a Southern Slav state, Yugoslavia.

primary Serbian goal was to save itself from A-H and Turkish rule and treat. Then, Serbian goal becomes to support resistance movements of Serbs in A-H and Turkish Empires. Hand in hand with it Serbia supported resistance movements in other Slavic countries (Cezska, Slovakia,...).

On the end, Serbia pledge to liberate all Balkan Slavs and losing 1/3 of its entire population in WWI managed that. Serbian army reached almost Wienna while pursued Austrians who were in panic. Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Dalmatia, Dubrovnik, Kosovo, Malesia (northern Albania), Macedonia were liberated dirrectly by Serbian military involvement. In battle of Kumanovo, Serbs crashed last attampt of Ottoman Empire to survive as Europen power. Serbia even innitiated rebellion against Turks in Greece and Bulgaria and supported their resistance movements.

On the end, Yugoslavia was created as Serbs and Poles planned.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
21 Oct 2009 /  #4
This comment is proof that you aren`t familiar with historical facts

Just so you know, I graduated on Serb history, so I'd like to think I know something about the topic :)

I'm off to bed now, I will reply to you tomorrow.

>^..^<

M-G (good night)
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
21 Oct 2009 /  #5
In 19 century, in a time when Poles were oppresed by Russia and Austro-Hungaria, Poles desperetly needed Serbian support, no matter that they were aware of tragic Serbian situation.

Serbia was treaten by Ottoman Turkish and Austro-Hungarian Empires. In a same time Serbian partners- USA, Britain and France tratened Serbia too after they declared Serbian new constitution too liberal. Paragraph of Serbian constutution- ``even slave if come on land of Serbs is slave no more`` represent first diplomatic Serbian incident with so called west. Serious pressure was issued on Serbia to remove that `liberal` paragraph from its constitution. Also, very early USA, Britain and France took part in partition of Balkan on their zones of influence. It was also time of strong Russian pressure on Serbia that Serbia needs to obey to Russian dictate.

Situation was more then complicated. From one side, Russia was honest and serious Serbian partner on Balkan in war against Turks and, on the other side, Russia oppresed Slavic West- what was in contradiction with Serbian pollitical doctrine. Russia also defended Serbia from Austro-Hungarian and German diplomatic pressure. Serbia desperetly needed British, Franch, Russian and USA support to boost its develpment after liberation from Turkish occupation (part of territoeis was still under Turkish rule). After all, Serbia needed European powers on its side but it wasn`t easy to get support. Serbs as Serbs had their particular ideas about freedom of Slavs and that was biggest taboo in Europe.

In such a environment, Poles aririved and urged Serbian elite to support their rightfull intentions to achieve independance. On the fundaments of `Sarmatian connection` Poles and Serbs made a deal... and, things were moved...

The leading figure among the Constitutionalists was Ilija Garašanin, the first modern statesman of Serbia, author of a famous memorandum on foreign policy, called Naèertantije (Draft). In cooperation with Paris-based Polish émigrés led by Prince Adam Czartoryski, who were looking for an ally in the Balkan to continue their struggle against the Habsburgs and Russians, Ilija Garašanin in 1844 elaborated a detailed plan that would make Serbia the centre of a movement for unifying Serbs and other South Slavs into a large state under the Karadjordjević realm. Belgrade became the centre of a Pan-Slavic agitation, attracting patriots from Bosnia and Croatia.

[b]The first counsellor of Garašanin was Matija Ban from Dubrovnik (Ragusa) a poet and a playwright, professor of French at Belgrade High School. As a leading intellectual of the Constitutionalist rule, Matija Ban, a Roman Catholic Serb from Dubrovnik, who gave his name to a large district of today's Belgrade (Banovo brdo), was trying to instil a classical spirit in modern Serbian literature that would soon be forgotten in the face of the Romantic poetry of younger generations.

Source: DUŠAN T. BATAKOVIĆ, BELGRADE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
A HISTORICAL SURVEY

batakovic.com/belgrade19thcent.html
TheOther 5 | 3,831  
21 Oct 2009 /  #6
Crow

So what you're saying is that the Serbs and Poles secretely worked together to ignite WW1? Some sort of conspiracy?
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
22 Oct 2009 /  #7
no, i never said that. WWI would happen anyway, with Poles and Serbs or without them. But France, Britain and USA actualy didn`t care much of Polish-Serbian situation and destruction of A-H because of freedom for Slavs wasn`t their agenda. So, Poles and Serbs needed to take care of itself. They pledged to push things in positive dirrection for Slavic cause in general- in central Europe, south-eastern Europe and on Balkan.

In this thread one can learn:

1. that Poles and Serbs coordinated in order to achieve their freedom and independance, from Austro-Hungaria that was oppressor/occupator to both- Poles and to many other Slavs.

2. that Poles and Serbs coordinated in order to neutralize Russian pressure and dictate and in Polish case- oppression/occupation

3. that Poles and Serbs in their coordination were above Catholic-Orthodox antagonisms. They presented themselves as freedom loving people, as good Christians and good Slavs. Their solidarity was based on mutual interests and their mutual trust was based on historical confidence in each others. Their subordination was Pan-Slavic and Sarmatian thing.

4. that Russia sacraficed itself on the behalf of Serbs but actualy also on the behalf of all other Slavs that were oppresed by hostile non-Slavs.
King Sobieski 2 | 716  
22 Oct 2009 /  #8
crow, a quote from my serbian mate:

"Tell him to focus on the future and not the past and to stop pestering people."
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
22 Oct 2009 /  #9
this thread is about Poland`s Politics and History. What you suggest- canceletion of this section of forum?

Why don`t you start some futuristic thread then? Why you actualy post in this section?
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
22 Oct 2009 /  #10
Tell him to focus on the future

King S, that's what I have been telling him so many times. He does not listen :(

>^..^<

M-G (let's spank Crow until he does!)
King Sobieski 2 | 716  
23 Oct 2009 /  #11
this thread is about Poland`s Politics and History. What you suggest- canceletion of this section of forum?

Why don`t you start some futuristic thread then? Why you actualy post in this section?

my very parochial serb mate who you remind me of has said that, not me.

King S, that's what I have been telling him so many times. He does not listen :(

i think crow has the "bang your head against the wall mentality, one day the brick wall will give way and all will agree with him" theory going on.
southern 75 | 7,096  
23 Oct 2009 /  #12
Serbs burned Austrohungary.Austrohungary was based on mutual fear,fear of the Czechs for Sudeten,fear of the Austrians for Germans,fear of the Croats for Serbs,fear of Ukrainians for Poles,fear of Slovaks for Czechs and fear of Hungarians for Russians.So all these fearful nations formed Austrohungary a loose entity of slavic nations under germanic control where everyone was suspicious but tolerant for the other.

Austrohungarian experiment was successful till panslavists decided to destroy it and pangermanists saw there a new opportunity.

What puzzles me is the naivity of Hambsburgs who thought they could annex Serbia the classical way.I imagine their faces after the death of the Archiduke.
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
23 Oct 2009 /  #13
Serbs burned Austrohungary.

it was their right. Till the end of time, fight for freedom would be respected as noble deed

Austrohungary was based on mutual fear,fear of the Czechs for Sudeten,fear of the Austrians for Germans,fear of the Croats for Serbs,fear of Ukrainians for Poles,fear of Slovaks for Czechs and fear of Hungarians for Russians. So all these fearful nations formed Austrohungary a loose entity of slavic nations under germanic control where everyone was suspicious but tolerant for the other.

all in all, Austo-Hungaria was full of internal antagonisms. i would say `divide and conquer` policy was key toll of ruling Germanics

Austrohungarian experiment was successful till panslavists decided to destroy it and pangermanists saw there a new opportunity.

Austro-Hungarian experiment was tolerated by Slavic world because of Turkish treat. A-H was seen as leser evil

Germanics as Germanics grabbed the opportunity and imposed policy of germanization of Slavic majority. Slavs as Slavs, responded with resistance. Combined effects of these two reasons in combination with absolute incompetence of Habsburgs effectively canceled Austro-Hungaria.

What puzzles me is the naivity of Hambsburgs who thought they could annex Serbia the classical way.

if anyone in Serbian (and Slavic in general) history underestimated Serbs/Slavs those were Habsburgs. Thank God for that. Same way as Germanics were efficient and fast to impose Germanization on Slavs when they had opportunity, Slavs were efficient and fast to get rid of their oppresores when they sought first chance.

I imagine their faces after the death of the Archiduke.

yes. That was real histeria when they spot how Serbs removing bloody pedestal of Habsburg`s rule

see this >>>

Slide to War in Europe, 1911 to 1914
fsmitha.com/h2/ch04.htm

The hawks in Austria-Hungary had an ally in Germany's supreme army commander, von Moltke, who wrote his Austrian counterpart that a war between "Germandom" (which included German Austrians) and "Slavdom" (the Russians and Serbs) was inevitable. Von Moltke believed that "eternal peace" was a "pipe dream" and that if war were inevitable it would be best to launch it at a most opportune time.

For days people in Vienna paraded, carrying flags and portraits of Franz Joseph and singing patriotic songs. People chanted "God protect our king, our land!" And people chanted "death to Serbs" and "Serb dogs must die!" The archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Piffl, gave voice to what many saw as a holy crusade. He proclaimed that it was the voice of God that spoke through the roar of Austria-Hungary's guns. He called on his flock to go forward in happiness and in confidence to attack the enemies of God.

but, Pope din`t support Austro-Hungarian hawks in their war preparations for conquest on Serbia >>>

Pope Pius X took a different approach. The ambassador from Austria asked him to bless the Habsburg armies, and the Pope refused saying he blessed peace.

MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
23 Oct 2009 /  #14
Slide to War in Europe, 1911 to 1914

Crow, why are you such an ignorant man? This link leads to a page that says EXACTLY the same thing I said in my very long post about the causes of WW1. Then it was said that I didn't have a clue by "experts", one of which was YOU. Now you come with an overview that says exactly the same as I did back then and you claim this to be true suddenly? Don't be such an ignorant fool, ok?

>^..^<

M-G (I was right back then as I am now)
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
23 Oct 2009 /  #15
Don't be such an ignorant fool, ok?

ok
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
23 Oct 2009 /  #16
Crow

So you're gonna stop posting then? Good :) This is not the time anymore to post nationalistic stuff. Time to move on to the future and no more nonsense of Slavic Brotherhood et al.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
23 Oct 2009 /  #17
So you're gonna stop posting then? Good :)

your wish is command to me

This is not the time anymore to post nationalistic stuff. Time to move on to the future and no more nonsense of Slavic Brotherhood et al.

?

but listen,... forget
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
23 Oct 2009 /  #18
Crow

History has proven that there is no such thing as Slavic Brotherhood. Nice thought, nice idea, but marxism is a good idea in basic as well, but ppl are ppl, so it will never work.

>^..^<

M-G (will haunt Crow until he gives me a definitive answer to my previous question)
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
23 Oct 2009 /  #19
will haunt Crow until

i hope you are a woman. Honestly

definitive answer to my previous question

since when i am obliged to answering. since i am Serb?

History has proven that there is no such thing as Slavic Brotherhood

well, we are not on the level of tribes. Slavic integrations, Slavic unity, Slavic Confederation, Slavic alliance,... are more appropriate terms to me

Nice thought, nice idea, but marxism is a good idea in basic as well, but ppl are ppl, so it will never work.

BLEB
southern 75 | 7,096  
23 Oct 2009 /  #20
Pope Pius X took a different approach. The ambassador from Austria asked him to bless the Habsburg armies, and the Pope refused saying he blessed peace.

Pope was catholic.With so many Poles under the rule of Austrohungary he should remain diplomatic although Austrians probably pointed out they fought against orthodox Serbs and Russians.

The point is slavic soldiers of Austrohungary did not fight and surrendered to Russians and this was one of the main causes of Habsburg collapse.Czechs always looked with one eye towards the Germanics and with the other towards their slavic brothers.
OP Crow 137 | 7,709  
23 Oct 2009 /  #21
southern

here is one interesting info for you man

Do you know that first Serbian Chetniks in history were formed under supervision of Poles? Yes, Chetniks were organized by the rules and codes of Polish guerila warfare. Rules of the warfare in Polish were translated on Serbian language by Mateja Ban (influental Catholic Serb from Dubrovnik- BDW, Ban Mateja was already mentined in this thread, see post #6). It was in 19 century.

Source:
ISTORIJA ČETNIČKOG POKRETA
[History of the Chetnik movement]
vudu.dzaba.com/rich_text_7.html
southern 75 | 7,096  
23 Oct 2009 /  #22
Chetniks

Yes,when the Chetniks,the Cossaks and the followers of the Dragon order found each other,a big party always took place.
Piorun - | 658  
24 Oct 2009 /  #23
History has proven that there is no such thing as Slavic Brotherhood. Nice thought, nice idea, but marxism is a good idea in basic as well, but ppl are ppl, so it will never work.

That’s what you think. Recent history definitely (but it was mainly due to the German and Russian influence, at least in case of Poland and it was not in their interest to promote unity amongst the Slavs and it still is not) you have to keep in mind that history that was thought to you was written in the 19th century by the German historians and their theories of German superiority who were of the impression that they brought the civilization to the Slavic nations of Europe when in fact we even refused to take Christianity from them.

To test this theory asks yourself this question. What do you know of the Slavic history? When all you have been thought of European Middle Ages in school is concentrated on Franks and their successors. Half of Europe is omitted in your version of history of your own continent. All you have managed to learn is how the good old West is the defender of post classical heritage against the barbarian Slavs hell bent on destroying it. Even the most recent history that you have been thought was heavily influenced by the recent political division of Europe and Cold War mentality. All you seem to know is that propaganda only existed in the Eastern Bloc nations and you don’t see it in your own. Besides bringing the Marxist ideology as Slavic invention into this is foolish on your part, not only that it’s a totally Western idea not of Slavic origin at all and against the principals of the form of government Slavic people always had, with the exception of Russians (there always is one), but it was another founding father of that ideology Engels who theorized that the general war which will eventually break out will scatter the Slavic alliance, and annihilate all these small Slavic nations.

It looks to me like even the political theorists of that time “who were supposedly for the people and promoting unity” were of opposing view to yours regarding Slavic Unity, or perhaps scared of the idea of potential Slavic alliance, and rightly so, Crow is right it’s a force that has a great potential and which should be explored more. Marx and Engels were anti-Slavic chauvinists. In fact Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were both Germans and the work they have produced “The Communist Manifesto” has nothing to do with the Slavs in general, the association does not exist at all. Perhaps you meant Stalinst-Leninist idea? The Soviet invention, which is the New and Improved version of what you have read. In case you wonder, this one does not work either.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
24 Oct 2009 /  #24
In fact Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were both Germans and the work they have produced “The Communist Manifesto” has nothing to do with the Slavs in general, the association does not exist at all. Perhaps you meant Stalinst-Leninist idea?

You overlooked two small words in there: "as well". This means that I meant Marxism as in "like". So: Slavic Brotherhood is a nice idea, but it doesn't work and it will never work. Why? Because there are ppl involved. And where there are ppl involved, dreams die and the practice shows that dream always gets perverted somehow. This happens with the idea of Marxism as well. I just meant it as a comparison. A good idea that went bad as soon as ppl put it into practice or got involved in it. I didn't mean it in reference to Slavs at all, just a comparing example. And the fact that Marx and Engels were German is irrelevant in this respect.

Edit: to put it in plain words: where ppl are involved, there will always be ppl who put ideas, thoughts and dreams into their own profit.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Mr Grunwald 19 | 1,542  
24 Oct 2009 /  #25
Slavic Brotherhood is a nice idea, but it doesn't work and it will never work. Why? Because there are ppl involved. And where there are ppl involved, dreams die and the practice shows that dream always gets perverted somehow

in 1981-1989 some people dreamed about freedom. Answer me that one ;=)
southern 75 | 7,096  
24 Oct 2009 /  #26
Slavic brotherhood worked in many critical cases.Other times it did not work because people were influenced by other ideas.
Piorun - | 658  
24 Oct 2009 /  #27
Slavic Brotherhood is a nice idea, but it doesn't work and it will never work. Why?

I used to be of the same opinion, I’m not so sure anymore. Although there are disagreements amongst us Slavs and what might look like a chaos in general to the eyes of the westerners, there are many factors outside of our control that seem to push many smaller Slavic states in that general direction. Never judge the mood of the people by the politicians they are represented by. They generally live in their own dream states disconnected from the reality by being high on the internal struggles of the individual parties they represent or the office they currently have. Yes currently we have the split, not only in the Balkan states but also our neighbors could not pass the test of Unity. This is not necessarily a bad thing, sometimes you have to get burned to realize you need help and to see you can’t go at it alone. The way I see it, the coalition therefore the Unity of Slavic states eventually will be formed within the structures of EU itself out of the necessity to protect our own interests and existence. Although the Slavs themselves currently prefer to go their own ways, ironically the West itself will prove to be the Unifying factor in bringing us closer together.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
24 Oct 2009 /  #28
in 1981-1989 some people dreamed about freedom

Well, that was because they had a common enemy: the Soviets. And they wanted to be free from the oppression the visit of the Soviets meant to them. And if a ppl are oppressed, any idea what represents (at least in their minds) freedom, seems like the best idea.

Compare this to ancient Japan: the islands' population consisted of many tribes who were in a nearly constant state of war with eachother. However, in case they were invaded by some foreign enemy, they all bonded together to expell the enemy. The common enemy and how to fight him is more important and gives a breeding ground for dreams of (Slavic) unity as a means to oppose that common enemy. However, when that enemy disappears, the need for this means has gone and usually it disappears pretty soon after that.

Although the Slavs themselves currently prefer to go their own ways, ironically the West itself will prove to be the Unifying factor in bringing us closer together.

When the Germans tried to impose a sort of "pan-Germanic" ideology upon the Danes and the Dutch, they met with fierce resistance and such a "brotherhood" would never work as, though they may be Germanic ppl, they are first and foremost Danes or Dutch and want in general to take care of their own business. I think with the Slavic states this is pretty much the same. I think a person living in Poland is first and foremost a Pole and then secondly a Slav. My hunch would be that the average Pole doesn't care that much for what is happening in Bulgaria, for example, if in Poland there is no bread for some reason, if you catch my drift.

>^..^<

M-G (will discuss further later on, does have some shopping to do and this is at this moment a little more important to him than any brotherhood:) )
Piorun - | 658  
24 Oct 2009 /  #29
When the Germans tried to impose a sort of "pan-Germanic" ideology upon the Danes and the Dutch, they met with fierce resistance and such a "brotherhood" would never work as, though they may be Germanic ppl,

Same happened with the Soviet version of pan-Slavic world. Besides Unity comes in many forms, it does not necessarily mean one humongous Slavic Super state. I don’t see any barriers against forming some sort of coalition within EU that would represent the Slavic interests, those of the smaller states within EU and be a counterbalance to the bigger states that might not always have the interests of the smaller states at heart. That’s the way I see future Slavic Brotherhood, eventually the policies of the EU will bring this on.

My hunch would be that the average Pole doesn't care that much for what is happening in Bulgaria, for example, if in Poland there is no bread for some reason, if you catch my drift.

Your hunch is wrong; all you have to do is to look at the recent history. When there was uprising in Hungary, people were very much interested in and in solidarity with those events and people of Hungary, you see it’s the Policy of others that very much dictates the course of your own action. If you feel a victim of certain policies you naturally will sympathies and support the other victim. Simple human nature.
southern 75 | 7,096  
24 Oct 2009 /  #30
some sort of coalition within EU that would represent the Slavic interests,

You think Germans will allow you to build any form of coalition?Dream on.The only coalition in EU working legally is the german-french axis.

Archives - 2005-2009 / History / Serbian contribution to Poland's independance after WWIArchived