How is this the only socialist state that right wingers don't hate?
Repulse
>>543530980>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Yugoslaviayugoslavia doesn't exist anymoreright wingers don't hate them probably because they don't care about a defunct stateAre you claiming that right wingers didn't care about Yugoslavia even back in the day?
>>543531193something like hundred head of states attended the funeral of Tito, including anti-communist ones.
They got good boy points for sort of breaking with the Soviet Union and even ideological opponents begrudgingly respect Tito
>>543530980they kept Stalinism under Tito, which kept communism in the country and forcefully modernised all the different ethnic groups and religions under one banner. it's usually Trotskyism (exporting communist revolution) and Maoism (third-worldism) that right-wingers usually don't like. the Soviet Union tried to compromise all the different sects
>>543531993No, we had Titoism, not Stalinism. Stalin and Tito had a split precisely because of an ideological drift. Stalin tried to poison Tito several times, and Yugoslavia was not on the Soviet side during the cold war. It is rumoured that Tito poisoned Stalin."Stop sending people to kill me. We've already caught five of them, one of them with a bomb and another with a rifle... If you don't stop sending killers, I'll send one to Moscow, and I won't have to send a second."
>>543530980Pretty sure the government of Yugoslavia wasn't "socialist" so much as "Marshall Tito is in charge and you better fucking do whatever he says p.s. fuck you."
It was a shitty hellholea complete failure and we're still dealing with the problems I swear the next time I hear an old fuck going on about>we had it so good back with tito, he would fix everything if he were still aroundI'm suckerpunching him on the spot
>>543532078Stalinism literally means rule by Stalin only, he was like the god of communism and knew best. naturally anyone who split from him and knew better officially abandoned Stalinism, like Tito. he invented Titoism, which is Stalinism but with Tito. the essence is the same. keep communism inside the country and modernise industralised to be self-sustainable by force, which is how Yugoslavia was able to stay an independent neutral nation unlike say Ukraine or Belarus.the Soviet Union kept Trotskyism to an extent where they kept funding communist movements abroad, Yugoslavia didn't do this. the Soviet Union stopped this during the world wars and then it was the west's ally, however it could be argued the world wars themselves were exporting the communist revolution. ideologically defence was the priority during Stalinism. after the wars they started exporting it again, this is what tends to annoy right-wingers. Maoism was an added factor, China took the lead for that and still does. the Soviet Union tried to play it too which gained it no friends amongst the western right-wing, although it came off as much less convincing from Russians like their wars in Africa in support of black brothers. we still see this with them saying Slavs aren't white, we get what they mean but come on, get real. in China it goes without saying. Yugoslavia didn't participate in any of this at all.
>>543532244The only two countries that left Yugoslavia with more territory than they joined: Croatia and SloveniaTransfer of Serbian industry to Croatia and Slovenia under Tito: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relocation_of_Serbian_industry_during_the_Informbiro_periodThe only country to get legally balkanized out of it: Serbia (Tito's saying the only strong Yugoslavia is a weak Serbia)The reason for Yugoslav wars: Tito changing the constitution in 1970s to allow Croatia and Slovenia to leave with more territory than they joined, while legally condemning Serbian territories to foreign rule, leaving 50% of Serbs outside of Serbian bordersWhy didn't Croatia get balkanized the same way, i.e. Dalmatia, Istria and Slavonia? Why did Croatia get to incorporate Istria after WW2 and cleanse Italians?Why wasn't Bosnia balkanized even while Serbs were the majority until 1961? Why only Serbia?Whose victories was Yugoslavia founded on? Serbia's WW1 where it lost 30% of all males and 55% of its overall population to free Bosnia from Austrian rule, and slovenian and Serb victory in WW2Who was on the losing side in all these conflicts, yet remained unpunished? CroatiaThank you for your attention to this matter.
>>543530980Because its "socialism" lasted for aprox 5 years it took to rob Serbs blind, since that point its entire history was a slow progress toward free market capitalism
>>543530980Because it doesn't exist.
>>543532353Titoism had differences from Stalinism, it had market socialism and worker self-management. Nothing was top-down in practice, unlike in Stalinism.Stalinism does not mean "just Stalin", it was an ideology, just like Titoism, and they had differences.
>>54353248955% of all males and 30% of overall population*
>>543531837Tito was the only man Stalin respected
>>543532734Good thing they're both dead now.
>>543532078>rumoured that Tito poisoned StalinBased if true, I hope it is true, although I doubt it. Stalin had many enemies especially inside ussr.
>>543532655nevertheless both are left-wing in that they claim to progress society, but kept them in their countries. right-wingers don't want to progress, modernise and industrialise, they tend to see society at its limit and they want to go back and live on a farm. anyone who doesn't bother them is on their good side. of course, many right-wingers do live in modernity or work in industry and some may even want to progress society into something new in some way, such as driving new cars instead of riding horses, but then they are hypocrites and that's where the "judeo-christian" religious angle blame game usually comes in. what they say they want is usually the opposite. Hitlerism is another left-wing movement that deals with this aspect.
