Mike Ilitch/Ilievski

[Vangelovski]

That sounds like you're making physical distinctions in regards to the criteria for self-identification.

Self-identification doesn't exist in any physical sense, in DNA or on the basis of language, self-identification only exists in the realm of the mind...

I did not intend to make a 'physical' distinction - Japanese just popped into my head. We can say German, French, Italian, Russian or whatever instead. It was merely an example of someone who is considered to be of a certain ethnonationality to 'switch' to another and the likelihood of them being accepted as such.

[Phoenix]

For the record, I don't consider self-identification as definitive either, for the simple fact that if a Japanese man declared himself to be Macedonian, noone would take him seriously.

That sounds like you're making physical distinctions in regards to the criteria for self-identification.

Self-identification doesn't exist in any physical sense, in DNA or on the basis of language, self-identification only exists in the realm of the mind...

[Vangelovski]

The only 'necessities' I consider in this regard are for cultural characteristics to have been developed by Macedonians based on Macedonian habits or practices, and not necessarily used by all Macedonians or originating in Macedonia proper either. Complete uniformity in terms of traditions and customs in any country or for any people is impossible to establish, and would only be likely in a discriminative and monocratic-type of society.

I think this is a circular argument. If we say Macedonians are people who practice Macedonian culture and then ask what is Macedonian culture, only to answer by stating its developed by Macedonians (based on 'Macedonian habits or practices', which can be queried again) then we come back to what is a Macedonian again.

Further, how can culture be a primary 'marker' of Macedonian identity if Macedonian culture is not practised by all Macedonians? By your own admission, not all Macedonians practice Macedonian culture and uniformity is impossible to establish in this regard. How then do we define Macedonians who do not practice Macedonian culture (whatever that is, for both contemporary and past Macedonians)? According to these 'markers', they are not Macedonian, and yet we instinctively know this is incorrect.

In my opinion, one must allow for historical evolution and other factors, otherwise such a premise would render all modern ethnicities as artificial and the result of political constructs, and while politics have certainly played their part, they are not the defining factor in most ethnic identities today - certainly not the Macedonian one.

I'm not so sure that ideology is not a defining factor of identity. Many people that we consider Macedonians were quite happy little Yugoslavs 20 years ago and others have become Greeks, whose ancestors (Macedonians) are long forgotten.

For the record, I don't consider self-identification as definitive either, for the simple fact that if a Japanese man declared himself to be Macedonian, noone would take him seriously.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Not disagreeing with too much but to say India is a good example ... well I can't draw a bow that long. Other than being under the same national flag, these various peoples could just as easily be in any other country. The border means very little in relation to their ethnic identity. Their national identity is well identified, but anything else is extremely blurry. More blurry than it is for Macedonians.

Indians themselves are well aware of the differences between each of their respective sub-groups or ethnicities. But I should have been more specific, what I had in mind did not include Dravidian (southern) India, but Aryan (northern) India - specifically Hindi-speaking states (not including other languages derived from Sanskrit such as Punjabi, Gujarati, etc). Although these people share the same language and religion, their culture is so rich that each region would have particular characteristics that are unique from others, however, they are all still regarded as forming part of Indian culture.

SoM, I’m looking at this from a clinical perspective, as it is an issue I need to deal with in one of my current academic endeavours.

I know mate, and I hope our discussions will open your mind to alternative views other than those you currently hold.

Regardless, the point I was trying to make is that neither culture nor language determine identity. If they did, the both of us would be closer to Englishmen than Macedonians........

Most Macedonians here know Macedonian because that is what has been passed on to them by their parents as a native and hereditary language; it therefore constitutes a cultural characteristic that contributes to the definition of a Macedonian ethnicity. The English language, on the other hand, which is not native, hereditary or pertinent to Macedonian ethnicity, is only learned because of its status as a medium in general society, government, schools and other official organs, and not because it is being passed on from their parents (although I admit, we are getting to the point where parents are using both Macedonian and English with their children, and in some cases mostly or solely English, which is a concern).

.......how can we point to culture (in any ethnonational group) as a ‘marker’ of identity, when not all members of the ethnonational group adhere to cultural traits that may be deemed as ‘necessary’ for belonging?

The only 'necessities' I consider in this regard are for cultural characteristics to have been developed by Macedonians based on Macedonian habits or practices, and not necessarily used by all Macedonians or originating in Macedonia proper either. Complete uniformity in terms of traditions and customs in any country or for any people is impossible to establish, and would only be likely in a discriminative and monocratic-type of society.

.......I know many Macedonians in Australia that do not speak Macedonian, do not practice any Macedonian traditions or customs, do not attend Macedonian events and for the most part do not even mix with other Macedonians, and are generally not interested in anything Macedonian.

I know few that fit into that category. If they still identify as Macedonians, then they do so based on their ancestry alone (which is one of the other primary indicators that I mentioned). Otherwise, there is nothing else that defines them as Macedonians. I don't accept the Greek 'formula' in which anybody who says they are 'Greek' can be Greek - the Macedonian identity isn't that ambiguous and fickle.

I was referring to the argument that just because the political elite among the ancient Macedonians spoke Greek and practised Greek culture, that in itself did not mean they were Greek. In that case, many on the forum, including yourself, have conclusively argued that language and culture do not define identity.

The Greek language and culture were foreign and not native to Macedonians, therefore not required to define the Macedonian identity. Nor is the French language and culture required to define a Tunisian, for example.

....research as conclusively demonstrated that a majority of Austrians do not consider themselves Germans (even historically) but identify as a separate ethnonational group.

Perhaps (at least after WWII), but the difference between the Austrians and Germans has more to do with politics than history and ethno-linguistics. While one would probably be tempted to draw a parallel with the Macedonians and Bulgarians, there are more fundamental differences that need to be considered, not least the aspect of ancestry (collectively, Macedonians do not and have not identified with a foreign Turkic Bulgar element as their ancestry).

My premise still remains that defining an ethnonational group is impossible.

In my opinion, one must allow for historical evolution and other factors, otherwise such a premise would render all modern ethnicities as artificial and the result of political constructs, and while politics have certainly played their part, they are not the defining factor in most ethnic identities today - certainly not the Macedonian one.

[Louis Riel]

Fuck the Red Wings!

[osiris]

thanks for the correction b j. Macedonians love to expect others to be patriotic and generous
In my experience o have found rich Macedonians to be the least patriotic. The illich family have made their fortune in their lifetime it is np wonder they are democrats given they are both the children of factory workers from Detroit one of the democratic heartlands

[fyrOM]

Does anyone know if he as any single offspring for Bij?????????????

Good one Bij...hahaha...but you are going to have to learn to cook pizza.

[Bij]

Why is everyone trying to rip Ilitch? Is this tall poppy syndrome????

Seems to me like no one has any personal gripes against this man. Has this guy done anything to anyone personally?

Sorry I don't know much about him other than what I've read online.

Does anyone know if he as any single offspring for Bij?????????????

[fyrOM]

Nope. The Ilitch family are democrats.

Is that the same Democrats that love and support the Greeks?

[Niko777]

What political campaigns did he contribute to? Bush perhaps?

Nope. The Ilitch family are democrats.

[Bij]

Here are some stats according to my fathers oral historical knowledge of our area. My fathers village dragosh over 100 families. There were 4 ski and 3 n suffixes the rest were ov or ev. My mothers lazhets 150 plus families only one from ski and they were from buf. Surrounding villages opsorina 50 plus families all ended in v. Bitusha 70 houses only one ended in ski and even here in Australia despite the imposition of Greek names the ski ending was used for that family. In sveta petka one ski. Gradeshnitsa no skis
Velusjhina no ski. Kanina there were no ski only the martyred partisan kloe povov becameKOLE Kaninski His Serbian era name was Todorovic tha name he finished his law degree in Belgrade today on his grave and statute he is Todorovski a name derived from his Serbian one not the one he was known by in his village even during Serbian times
In klabuchischa there were two families with ski. Have a look at the memorial to the illindendead from the selo of tsapari. They are all except one n ov or ev. Today in tsapari nearly all have ski except three n and ten or so with v. I think the famous oz cricket player lenny Pascoe who's name was paskovitch I think that John gastev the oz footballer is also from tsapari so there may be others abroad who I don't know about and cannot comment.

lenny pascoe was born leonard stephen durtanovich. he was harassed by other cricketers for being a wog and changed his surname according to his dedo's name - Pasko

Back to Ilitch. From Wikipedia:

Philanthropy

One of Ilitch's first philanthropic efforts was the Little Caesars Love Kitchen, established in 1985. The traveling restaurant was formed to feed the hungry and assist with food provisions during national disasters – most recently helping the flood victims and volunteers in North Dakota. The program has been recognized by former Presidents Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, and has served more than 2 million individuals in the United States and Canada.

In 2006, inspired by a veteran returning to civilian life after losing both of his legs in war, Ilitch founded the Little Caesars Veterans Program to provide honorably discharged veterans with a business opportunity when they transition from service or seek a career change. Ilitch received the Secretary’s Award from the U.S. Department of Veterans affairs for this program in 2007; it is the highest honor given to a civilian by the department. Today there are 50 Little Caesars Veteran franchisees who have applied more than $1.5 million in benefits.

The Little Caesars Amateur Hockey Program, established by Ilitch in 1968, has provided opportunities for tens of thousands of youngsters over the years. Not only has it paved the way for a number of extremely talented players to make it to the NHL, it has helped develop character on and off the ice for those who have participated in the program.

Additionally, Ilitch Charities for Children was founded in 2000 as a non-profit foundation dedicated to improving the lives of children in the areas of health, education and recreation. In 2008, the charity was renamed Ilitch Charities and its focus was broadened. The new charity invests in the community’s future by supporting innovative, collaborative and measurable programs that promote economic development and spur job growth, as a means to address social issues such as poverty, unemployment, homelessness, and hunger.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, reports required by the Federal Elections Commission from 2002-2005 indicate Ilitch Holdings, Inc. members and business partners have contributed more than $500,000 to political campaigns and PACs.[11]

What political campaigns did he contribute to? Bush perhaps?

[fyrOM]

It is what a lot of diasporas do if they want to advance their home country...it often leads to returns less than what could achieved elsewhere...but Macos are too smart for that.

[osiris]

Som n vangelovski this is an interesting topic and deserves its own thread. The I think thereof I am argument may be enough to prove ones existence but I think a National identity is more than just a desire because at one point that identity needed its own peculiarities to distinguish it from others and hence make it a separate unique identify . If feeling Greek is nothing more than a feeling then it nothing more than a facile and meaningless feeling and not the expression of a unique National identity . RtG i believe Greeks need to be louder prouder because they need to convince not just others but themselves of their greekness.

[Vangelovski]

SoM, I’m looking at this from a clinical perspective, as it is an issue I need to deal with in one of my current academic endeavours. What may be obvious to us, as Macedonians, will not be immediately obvious to a genuinely interested outsider. My premise at the beginning was that to define a Macedonian (or any other ethnonational group) is an impossible pursuit. However, this was not to suggest that ethnonational groups or Macedonians do not exist – they do and they are a fundamental part of the social and political order – or that one cannot identify as belonging to an ethnonational group without being able to define it. I do not have a definition of a Macedonian, but I am open to suggestions.

Regardless, the point I was trying to make is that neither culture nor language determine identity. If they did, the both of us would be closer to Englishmen than Macedonians, as I am guessing both of our English language skills are better than our Macedonian language skills and we both practice Anglo-Australian culture in much more depth and to a wider extent (whether we realise this or not) than we do Macedonian. This, however, does not prevent us from identifying as Macedonians.

I never claimed that regional cultural differences were ‘abnormal’ or that it would exclude one group or another from being Macedonian (though I don’t think the Indian example is a good one as they constitute at least 12 or so distinct ethnonational groups federated into one state). Rather, my point was that there are differences, and in some cases quite marked differences, so how can we point to culture (in any ethnonational group) as a ‘marker’ of identity, when not all members of the ethnonational group adhere to cultural traits that may be deemed as ‘necessary’ for belonging?

Exploring this a little deeper, which are the cultural traits that we would pin-point as necessary for belonging for our ancestors? Which are the cultural traits that we could say they shared, regardless of which region they lived in, to demonstrate a common identity? And what are we to say about those that did not share these cultural traits and yet identified as Macedonians?

Assimilated Macedonians are another example. By assimilated I mean those that have been both linguistically and culturally assimilated, but may still consider themselves Macedonian. For example, I know many Macedonians in Australia that do not speak Macedonian, do not practice any Macedonian traditions or customs, do not attend Macedonian events and for the most part do not even mix with other Macedonians, and are generally not interested in anything Macedonian. I even know of some that have one Anglo-Australian parent and one Macedonian parent, and yet they still consider themselves Macedonians.

I know nothing about Paleo-Balkan and Balto-Slavic languages. I was referring to the argument that just because the political elite among the ancient Macedonians spoke Greek and practised Greek culture, that in itself did not mean they were Greek. In that case, many on the forum, including yourself, have conclusively argued that language and culture do not define identity. I don’t think that we can argue that (which I agree with) and then argue that speaking other languages and practising other cultural traits do define identity.

We could take non-Macedonian examples to make the point as well. Germans and Austrians both speak German and share cultural traits. However, research as conclusively demonstrated that a majority of Austrians do not consider themselves Germans (even historically) but identify as a separate ethnonational group. Here it is even more obvious that neither culture nor language can be a definitive ‘marker’ of identity.

My premise still remains that defining an ethnonational group is impossible. And I still hold to the view that neither culture nor language demonstrate an individuals identity and that an individual can still identify with a particular ethnonational group and not adhere to cultural or linguistic criteria.

[Risto the Great]

I don't see a problem there, intra-cultural diversity is to be expected in a historically and culturally rich land like Macedonia. India is another good example.

Not disagreeing with too much but to say India is a good example ... well I can't draw a bow that long. Other than being under the same national flag, these various peoples could just as easily be in any other country. The border means very little in relation to their ethnic identity. Their national identity is well identified, but anything else is extremely blurry. More blurry than it is for Macedonians.

I hate to say it, but the Greeks are on to something. If you feel Greek, you are Greek. If you feel Macedonian, you should be Macedonian. Especially if you base your feelings on your ancestral lineage. You would be right on the money.

Many Greeks might have to forget about their ancestors but they generally are more Greek to a disinterested party than a Macedonian is Macedonian to the same party. Why is this the case?