From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia,alt.news.macedonia,soc.culture.misc
Subject: Re: Info on Macedonia
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:34:05 GMT
Organization: Keele University, England

From article <1993Jan22.014007.6171@news.weeg.uiowa.edu>, by lolonis@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Panagiotis Lolonis):
> cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear) writes:
> 
>>its right to that name or of the GraecoMacedonians to call themselves
>>Macedonians. However there is also the Republic of Macedonia which has
>>an equal right to this name and part of Bulgaria with similar rights.
> 
> The rights of one group of people should not harm the rights of another
> group of people.  In this case the rights of Greeks who live in Macedonia,
> Greece, are violated by the request of Skopjeans to gain recognition
> under the name "Macedonians".

This is a circular argument resting on the assumption that only
GraecoMacedonians have the right to the name Macedonian. But this is
what needs to be proved and the burden of proof rests firmly on the
group who wish to appropriate this name for their exclusive use. As yet
I have seen no good arguments used in this regard. I fail to see how
sharing a name violates any one's rights. Are the rights of the
Luxembourgeois of Belgium violated because there is a country of
Luxembourg? If so how?


>  If Skopjeans have trully good intentions
> for Greece, they should respect the rights of Macedonians in Greece who
> wish not to share their identity with their northern neighboors under
> the current circumstances.

I don't think the Republic of Macedonia wants to share the
Graecomacedonian identity just assert its own different, but equally
Macedonian identity. What you say amounts to saying 'the only way we'll
accept that you have good intentions towards is that totally give in to
all our demands'.

 
> If Skopjeans think that Greece's position is unjust, then they should 
> prove why they deserve to be called "Macedonians" (using historical,
> cultural, political etc. arguments)

Well since the Macedonians of the Republic of Macedonian have lived in a
geographical region called Macedonia for some 1,400 years they seem to
have a pretty good claim.  After all this is about the same length of
time as the Anglo-Saxons have been in Britain and no one questions our
right to be called British.  Actually this is a rather dangerous
argument for Greek propagandists as it makes the rash assumption that
the ancient Macedonians were Greeks.  The problem is this isn't at all
clear.  Plenty of ancient Greeks would have disagreed very strongly and
that includes not only enemies of Macedonian imperialism such as
Demosthenes and Aratus but also friends of it such as Isocrates.  It's
interesting to note that Arrian (a Greek author btw), usually regarded
as the most reliable of our historians of Alexander the Great makes a
constant distinction between Macedonians and Greeks in his history. The
Macedonians also spoke a language which was entirely unintelligble to
the Greeks and which modern philological research suggests was more
related to Thracian or Illyrian than Greek. Apart from pointing out that
history is a two-edged sword for Greek propaganda I'd like to add what
other problem in the world is there where events nearly 3 milennia are
thought relevant to solving that problem? Who would, for example discuss
anglo-french relations in terms of the 100 years war or Anglo-Italian
relations with reference to the Roman occupation of Britain? Let's look
at the present, or if we are going to look at the past let's look at
*all* of it, not ideologically selected highlights.


>> No one group has exclusive rights here, there isn't one sort of Macedonian
>>there are many.
> 
> When we are talking about identity, including national or ethnic identity,
> we are talking about uniqueness (at least that is my understanding of the
> term "identity").  Therefore, I cannot see why it justifiable to use the
> same term to describe geographical, ethnic, and political entities that are
> different.

Well the geography at leasts overlaps.  As for ethnic states, Macedonia
is a *geographical* region spread through three countries where many
different ethnic groups live. Britain I suppose is a smaller version of
the same thing, we all seem to manage to be Britons though some of us
(the best naturally:-) are English Britons, others Scottish Britons etc.
Most people don't feel remotely threatened by this, why should Macedonia
be any different. The horrible alternative seems to be the ethnic
cleansing solution of the Serbs and I trust all sides of this argument
wouldn't want to see that happen.


Andy

p.s.  the very best Britons of course are the Lancastrians, who since
they are not very loquacious, wear flat caps, have red as their county
colour and eat black pudding are obviously descendants of the ancient
Spartans.  How's that for a creative use of ancient History? Here's to
the Red Rose.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.yugoslavia