Talk:János Damjanich

message: :The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 09:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
*support per above. --Vince hey, yo! :-) 22:53, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey 

message: "D fought against the Serbs because they fought on the Habsburg side, without mentioning this fact the paragraph is biased against him"
Zello, this is ridiculous. Kosut started war against Serbs before they became allies of Habsburgs. In fact, Serbs in the beginning supported Hungarian revolution with hopes that this revolution would bring freedom to all nationalities that lived in the Kingdom of Hungary. However, since Kosut was just a blind nationalist, he insulted representatives of Serbs who were sent to meet him and said that "sword will decide between Hungarians and Serbs". Only after that war between Serbs and Hungarians started and only after that Serbs became allies of Habsburgs. So, please do not try to say that consequence was cause. Also, the "controversy" section has a purpose to describe what is a controversy here and the controversy is that one ethnic Serbs fought against his own people during the war. If we want to search for reasons why he fought against them, then I believe his personal reasons would be the issue here - he certainly did not fought against Serbs because "Serbs fought on the Habsburg side" but because he was Serb who became Magyar (Serbs in fact have terms for such persons like Mađaron, Poturica, etc, with meaning "the one who became Magyar", "the one who became Turk", etc, which make difference between them and real Magyars, Turks, etc) thus his real personal motives behind this were attempts to delete his (unwanted) past - "Poturica is the greater Turk than the Turks themselves" (that is an old Serbian saying which very good describe those personal motives). PANONIAN (talk) 23:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Zello, I speak about events BEFORE 13-15 May: representatives of Serbs had meeting with Kosut (on April 9) and they asked from him only to recognize Serbs as a people - they even did not asked for any territorial autonomy. But since Kosut claimed that Serbs as a people in fact do not exist - that they are in fact Hungarians, the representatives of Serbs said that if he do not recognize Serbs as a people, then they will be forced "to seek for this recognition on another place". Then Kosut became angry and said that in this case "only sword can judge between Serbs and Hungarians". Only after this Serbs saw that Hungarians will not recognize their freedom and tried to achieve their goals in other ways. That is whole story about Serbian separatism and beginning of the war - Lajos Kosut is a real father of Serbian Vojvodina. So, separatist movement was a consequence of the refusal of Hungarian government to recognize basic human rights to Serbs. Also, even the war itself was started by Hungarian army, not by Serb one and muders and looting were much more present among Hungarian army. Regarding Damjanić, your exact claim that he "considered himself the general of the Hungarian government" and that he "went to fight against the Serb uprising defending the territorial integrity of the country" prove the whole "Poturica" concept, well known in the Serb history: psyhologically, "Poturica" know very well that he is not what he consider himself for, so he have constant psyhological need to "prove himself as a member of the group that he want to belong". He live under constant fear that real members of that group will not accept him if he do not prove himself as worthy member of the group. Therefore, such individuals very often became extremists and are capable of commiting the worst crimes against the group to which they belonged before as their attemt to prove themselves a worthy members of the group to which they want to belong. PANONIAN (talk) 00:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the purpose of the whole section was exactly to present differents views about Damjanić (not about war itself) - this is just article about Damjanić, not about war itself. PANONIAN (talk) 00:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: But tell me please what exactly is controversial in the fact that he fought against Habsburgs or that Serbs were on the side of Habsburgs? - the only controversial thing here is the fact that one ethnic Serb fought against his own people (even if Serbs were on the side of devil himself that is not justification that one Serb fight against them - I said "even" because we can have a long discussion about question who was devil and who was angel, but that is not a subject here...). Also, why you consider this a "hostile POV"? We do not claim that "he WAS traitor" but that "Serbs CONSIDER HIM traitor" - that is just encyclopaedic description of this point of view and since he was ethnic Serb, it is important that we describe what other Serbs had think about him. Perhaps you can expand this section with description what Hungarians think about him? PANONIAN (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In another words, "mentioning of other side" in this case do not mean that you should writte (your) opinion why Damjanić fought against his own people (because opposite opinion in this case is not even mentioned - the oposite opinion to this would be "Poturica" motives that I already described on this talk page, but they are not mentioned in the article), but that you should writte what Hungarians think about him - and that is already mentioned as far as I can see. PANONIAN (talk) 22:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It is partially mentioned, but I can expand the sentence if you insist. Regarding Serbs, Hungarians did not fought only against Serbs, but also against Croats, Romanians, etc, so it is POV to mention only Serbs. Also, Serbs were not separatists - Serbs wanted autonomous (not independent) Vojvodina that still would be part of Habsburg Monarchy, while Hungarians were separatists who wanted to separate themselves from the Habsburg Monarchy (so much about separatism). PANONIAN (talk) 00:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No, Serbs were not separatists because KOH was not a state. Habsburg Monarchy was a state and Serbs did not wanted to separate from it - Serbs just wanted to create different territorial division in the country than it was before (based on promisses of the Habsburg emperor from 1691). Therefore, what Serbs asked was completelly legal and in accordance with Habsburg laws - proof for this is that Habsburg emperor recognized decisions of the May assembly of the Serbs. Also note that much of the territories claimed by Serbian Vojvodina were not part of the KOH, but of the Military Frontier, while other parts were only recently included into KOH (Banat of Temeswar, abolished parts of the Military Frontier, etc...). PANONIAN (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Habsburgs

message: Due to the recent controversy about monument dedicated to Jovan Damjanić in Ada, professor Lajoš Bala criticized this Wikipedia article in Serbian newspaper "Danas" (Wednesday, March 23, 2011, page 14), where he stated that Wikipedia is not reliable and that Damjanić's anti-Serb statements are not supported by the sources.
:Answer of user PANONIAN to professor Lajoš Bala: Dear professor, Wikipedia is not meant to be a source, just a place where people can find first info about various subjects, but that info is usually quoted from reliable references, which could be checked by readers of Wikipedia. These anti-Serb statements of Jovan Damjanić are clearly referenced and were originally taken from this book: Milan Tutorov, Banatska Rapsodija, Novi Sad, 2001. I will now provide exact quotation from this book in Serbian and its translation into English.
:Source: Milan Tutorov, Banatska Rapsodija, Novi Sad, 2001, pages 494-496, subtitle: "Kad Srbin svoju braću omrazi" (in English: "When Serb hate his brothers"). Quotation (in Serbian): "...a njegova je (Damjanićeva) omraza prema svojim sunarodnicima i braći bila tolika da je u jednoj prilici izjavio kako će ubijati Srbe dok i poslednjeg ne bude ubio, a onda će ubiti i sebe, jer nijedan Srbin ne treba da živi na kugli zemaljskoj" (English translation: "...and he (Damjanić) hated his compatriots and brothers so much that he once said that he will continue to kill Serbs until he kill the last one, and then he will kill himself as well, because no one Serb should live on the face of this Earth.")
:So, dear professor Bala, I hope that you will examine this source in the library (valid bibliographic reference of this book is provided) and that you will use your next newspaper interview to say your opinion about that source, not about Wikipedia article which only used a quotation from mentioned source. Thank you. PANONIAN 14:19, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Answer of user PANONIAN to professor Lajoš Bala