View Single Post
Old 06-26-2019, 08:32 AM   #11
Rogi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,278
Rogi is on a distinguished road
Default

This makes absolute sense, when de-Macedonization is the agenda.

If you were to try and create a new identity, one that is not based on ethnic concepts or nation-state concepts, but rather a cosmopolitan one, you would take away the name and the deeper ancient roots (Macedonian name, ancient claims, institutional names renamed from Macedonian to 'national', giving up Cyrilus & Methodius, Tsar Samuel, etc via Prespa Agreement and Bulgarian Agreement), then you'd take away the roots that inspire national pride and identity such as more recent history and heroes (Goce Delcev, Ilinden, etc via Bulgarian agreement) and then you'd demote the importance and position of the dominant ethnic identity by prioritising others (language law, national celebrations of other holidays, etc) to create more and more confusion.

The last step might be to introduce another batch of people into the mix (like the refugees waiting to be settled) to help shift the ethnic balance further away from the dominant identity.

Give that one generation of co-existence and inter-marriage and you've just about wiped out the Macedonian identity and created a new, cosmopolitan identity that is based on citizenship, not nationality. The Greeks have already proven much of the formula with their de-nationalisation and assimilation of the Macedonians inthe Aegean part of Macedonia.

From a foreigners perspective, who doesn't care about the fact that it is essentially cultural genocide, they'd see it as a model for stabilising the region. Roll that out more widely and you can have a federation, because with no cultural competition or protection, nobody cares about the borders or who governs.

Easy enough to do when you have a passified nation who wont revolt.

Last edited by Rogi; 06-26-2019 at 08:43 AM.
Rogi is offline   Reply With Quote