Talk:Croatian nationalism

message: I have been seeking the web to find a map which would suit this site. In 2001 I came accross a map published by a Croatian extremist group. Trying to find it now, it seems I cannot remember its name, OR it has been closed down - the content was rather unpleasant I have to be honest... but what I liked was the map of a "proposed" Croatian state originally drawn during the early 40's in the Nezavisna Republika Hrvatska. It placed within Croatia - Istria, including the north peninsula (Koper and Portoroz etc) which went to Slovenia, plus Western Slovenia AND the regions now in Italy (Gorizia and Trieste) etc. It encompassed much of Southern Hungary and went into Romania too plus it took all of Vojvodina as well - if this rings any bell to anyone. There was a caption under Vojvodina quoting that the Serb majoritry had only moved there in the 17th century and that the Croatian minority was present beforehand. Apart from that, I dare not argue with anyone that there was a "Serbianization" of Orthodox followers in the West Balkan and it may have even happened in Vojvodina. It is not to say that I agree or disagree with any of these extreme policies but the map is one that I'd love to see again and it would go well on this page. I hope someone can find it and I am sorry I know no more. Celtmist 9 March 2006
:MY OPINION!
I think this definition of Croatian Nationalism is wrong, there were different types of nationalism. Anything in this acticle refers to the most far right wing view there is, it's disappointing that's for sure,they do not mention anything else about positive nationalism which is based upon and internationalistic view point. Any Croatian minority where there used to be a majority has never had any sort of uprising or crazy view that it should be switched back to Croatia. Yes Vojvodina used to be Croatian for example, so you would expect a small percentage of people to go on about this, but do you honestly think a Croatian nationalist would put these sorts of views before peace? I think they go on about this to make sure they are respected and have equal rights...
It is like an Italian saying "wouldnt it be great if Rome was once as powerful as it was" do people turn around and start shouting "oh no its an Italian nationalist, he must be some sort of terrorist!" And imagine for example and Italian national living in Austria and he is injured or harmed for whatever reason and the embassy wants to know whats going on...this is normal, but if a Croatian in Vojvodina goes to church or wears a soccer jersey "oh no its the evil Croatian nationalists!! Hey look at the nazi's everyone! look what they did" GET OVER IT!
You want a map Celtmist? i put a Croatian flag on the planet earth once in photoshop..ohh no i have just let lose our biggest Croatian nationalistic secret, we are claiming the world is our and will take it over, all 4 million of us that is...
MA. User:58.107.135.104
::And when exactly "Vojvodina used to be Croatian" according to you? Check any population census in history and you will see that number of Serbs in Vojvodina was always larger than a number of Croats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Vojvodina#Results_of_different_censa_in_Vojvodina_between_1880_and_2002 And not to mention that even those Croats that live in Vojvodina are not Croats at all, but Croatized Bunjevci and Šokci most of whom did not had Croatian national consciousness before the 20th century. PANONIAN (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: - The source is biased and reflects Croatocentric POV that Illyrian movement was all about Croatian nationalism which is nonsense. Most of the Illyrianists were not even Croats, and they were pan-Slavists. Their goal was to culturally and linguistically unify all South Slavs and not only Croats. By jezik "language" they meant narod "people", and combined dialects and used etymological orthography to abstract away dialectal differences. It was only after Vienna agreement that Illyrians realized that their goals were too ambitious, and that the only realistic unification is between Croats and Serbs which share Ijekavian Štokavian dialect. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 21:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but I think you would be better off countering Motyl with a better source that says that. Motyl is just a tertiary source which was vastly overused by User:R-41 on all nationalism articles (this article alone cites a single page in Motyl 24 times). It is good for painting a broad picture of the topic but its factography is sometimes dodgy. Feel free to add something from a better secondary source. Timbouctou (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Fiddling with directly referenced sentences is never a good idea. I remember actually reading that Motyl source on gbooks, and it seemed to match what is written here. And in any event, this line of reasoning omits the subtle point in that the topic of this article is Croatian nationalism. Modern-day Croatian nationalist view is certainly that the Croatian national revival was the most important thing that came out of the Illyrian movement, so this might just be an issue of rephrasing to make it clear that it's not necessarily describing a universal truth, rather, that it's focusing on this particular aspect of the topic. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "Croatian language" used by Illyrianists has little to do with modern Croatian that is being linked. Matica hrvatska founded in 1842 was called Matica ilirska. Their cultural programme was not nationalism but unification of Slavs. Statements taken from Motyl are wrong and misleading. Just because the article itself is by definition a certain POV, it doesn't mean that everything in it has to inherently reflect that POV. Why did you remove statements referenced by the article hrvatski narodni preporod in Hrvatska enciklopedija ? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 08:33, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, I missed that part (because you left no edit summary). Go ahead and re-instate it. It seems that the still-unreferenced part is the claim that they promoted the use of "Illyrian" instead of "Croatian". For all practical intents and purposes, the language whose use they were promoting was certainly Croatian in a sense that it wasn't Hungarian or German - that is the actual juxtaposition given context. And then we run into one of those wretched subtleties - in the Croatian nationalist view, "Croatian language" doesn't just mean modern standard Croatian. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Illyrianist usage of "Croatian" (horvatski, hervatski) usually meant either Kajkavian or their peculiar kind of dialectal amalgamation. It's not about terms but their meanings. Linking to Croatian language is misleading - at that point Neoštokavian that modern Croatian is based on was far from being accepted as the literary language. I'll translate some passages about Illyrian language conceptions which are sorely missing on the article Illyrian movement. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 22:43, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motyl