Ventilator

[Risto the Great]

I'd rather much educate the people, however you obviously prefer a 'forceful' strategy. That is where I believe the line being drawn is disrespectful and frankly, a bit of a joke.

How would you educate the people? What if they know more than you know? What will you do if you find out that most Macedonians are nothing more than "sheep" in the same vein that Goce Delcev identified and that a revolution of the mind would be necessary for these people even though they have no desire to revolt?

What is the forceful strategy that you presuppose about the MTO?

[EgejskaMakedonia]

How would you educate the people? What if they know more than you know? What will you do if you find out that most Macedonians are nothing more than "sheep" in the same vein that Goce Delcev identified and that a revolution of the mind would be necessary for these people even though they have no desire to revolt?

They may know more than me, I don't doubt this. However their memory needs to be jogged and they need to develop a sense of urgency in regards to the crisis currently unfolding in Macedonia.

If they are fully informed on the implications of the ventilator and IA, then they need to be inspired and encouraged to take action. To wake the 'sheep' up, leadership is required. Without the proper leadership, they will remain as a passive group of people. Competent leadership that clearly convey their views and values will seek to align the common ideology shared by Macedonians, acting as a step in the long process.

A forceful strategy will likely only produce animosity and a lack of trust between people. A participative approach must be taken, or the people wont feel a part of the action as their decisions are being made for them or forced upon them, as opposed to their own conscience doing the asking.

What is the forceful strategy that you presuppose about the MTO?

I'm sure he would know the answer to this, since it was his own suggestion. I don't refer to the MTO with the notion of a 'forceful strategy,' only select individuals.

EM,
But as I said in the begining - my aim is not to educate in relation to the ventilator (I don't think its necessary), my aim is to force people to make a choice and abandon their delusions.

[Soldier of Macedon]

None that immediately spring to mind.

Not even one. I doubt they are all ignorant of the damage the ventilator has caused and continues to cause. So do you think the 'softer' approach will work with them? How do you think they will receive your advice, given that they are most probably already aware of the implications? Do you think they will listen attentively while you explain, or will they dismiss you as 'good kid' who is naive or a 'super patriot' from the diaspora who talks from his armchair in some distant country? Sometimes, for this kind of mentality, the only option is to back them into a corner so they can make a choice - if they truly care about the issue, that is. We can't assume that the same approach will work with everybody.

Just because he waved the ventilator during his performances, it by no means establishes him as a traitor.

EM, do you think in all of his life (may he rest in peace), Tose never once discussed the issue relating to the ventilator? Let's assume that he never did, and that you had an opportunity to speak with him and explain the situation, but he continued to accept the ventilator and wasn't prepared to change his mind. He may not be a traitor, but he accepts a treacherous symbol imposed on the Macedonians, and isn't prepared to demonstrate his integrity by making a stand on this simple yet fundamental issue. How should he be perceived? Will we make excuses for him? Macedonia needs people with courage, people who are prepared to make individual sacrifices in order for the collective to progress.

I find it a lot easier to agree with yourself and RtG due to the simple fact that unlike others who resort to attacks, you back up your statements.

I understand that, but different characters and approaches appeal to different people, what is most important is for the message to be the same and consistent. Vangelovski isn't the only person that one can consult on these matters, nor am I, nor is Risto. But just like we afford all others the right to speak their minds freely, so too should this courtesy be extended to people like Vangelovski. The personality 'clashes' have always been there, and will always be there, it's human nature. That doesn't mean we can't unite behind the same cause.

The ventilator issue has caused discrepancies between people who share the same ideology, and a mentality of 'agree, or else your a traitor' is definitely prevalent in the posts of some members of the MTO.

If you've been told a 1000 times, and yet refuse to adhere to the principles of the Macedonian Cause, what are you? If we allow people to continue carrying on as apparent 'patriots' who beat their chest but wave the ventilator, they can indirectly become a dangerous element which will make it impossible for many other Macedonians to start appreciating their real flag and history.

[Risto the Great]

A forceful strategy will likely only produce animosity and a lack of trust between people. A participative approach must be taken, or the people wont feel a part of the action as their decisions are being made for them or forced upon them, as opposed to their own conscience doing the asking.

A participatory approach would suggest we need to be reasonable about issues that we do not agree with. You know, we would have to say "I understand why you continue to use the ventilator ... "sure, I will stand next to it or wrap it around me". If I am not so agreeable, I might be a problem. This brand of niceness has allowed a cancer to run through all of Macedonia. It was a mistake and the consequences are obvious for all to see. It almost includes a resentment for the Macedonian identity. Many Macedonians see themselves with European eyes and feel they do not measure up. They have compromised their identity and the ethnic Albanians have filled the identity void.

I have gleaned from some of your posts that you are in fact very young. It thrills me to read posts from such a young articulate gentleman. I suspect you may travel down one of two paths if you choose to be more active in Macedonian matters:

1. Use an inclusive approach that means your ideology will be swayed to embrace as many people as possible and ultimately fall apart because it is a meaningless grouping that serves no purpose. Under Myopic Dreams.

OR

2. Try to find like minded people that feel there is no room for negotiation on solid core principles. Become extremely jaded with the present status quo. Demand tough decisions from people and look for the glint in the eye of Macedonians that can be useful to the Cause.

Option 2. is a tough one and causes animosity. It also has a life cycle because many patriots burn out from the thankless abuse they put themselves through. Time is running out for Macedonia in my opinion, there is no option but Option 2.

[EgejskaMakedonia]

Not even one. I doubt they are all ignorant of the damage the ventilator has caused and continues to cause. So do you think the 'softer' approach will work with them? How do you think they will receive your advice, given that they are most probably already aware of the implications? Do you think they will listen attentively while you explain, or will they dismiss you as 'good kid' who is naive or a 'super patriot' from the diaspora who talks from his armchair in some distant country? Sometimes, for this kind of mentality, the only option is to back them into a corner so they can make a choice - if they truly care about the issue, that is. We can't assume that the same approach will work with everybody.

EM, do you think in all of his life (may he rest in peace), Tose never once discussed the issue relating to the ventilator? Let's assume that he never did, and that you had an opportunity to speak with him and explain the situation, but he continued to accept the ventilator and wasn't prepared to change his mind. He may not be a traitor, but he accepts a treacherous symbol imposed on the Macedonians, and isn't prepared to demonstrate his integrity by making a stand on this simple yet fundamental issue. How should he be perceived? Will we make excuses for him? Macedonia needs people with courage, people who are prepared to make individual sacrifices in order for the collective to progress.

I understand that, but different characters and approaches appeal to different people, what is most important is for the message to be the same and consistent. Vangelovski isn't the only person that one can consult on these matters, nor am I, nor is Risto. But just like we afford all others the right to speak their minds freely, so too should this courtesy be extended to people like Vangelovski. The personality 'clashes' have always been there, and will always be there, it's human nature. That doesn't mean we can't unite behind the same cause.

If you've been told a 1000 times, and yet refuse to adhere to the principles of the Macedonian Cause, what are you? If we allow people to continue carrying on as apparent 'patriots' who beat their chest but wave the ventilator, they can indirectly become a dangerous element which will make it impossible for many other Macedonians to start appreciating their real flag and history.

I accept the fact that the approach that essentially forces them to make a choice will likely produce better results short-term, but only for some individuals. Those who are already informed are either dismissive of the current circumstances or require a basic re-learning process. If this is brought about by posing them with a black and white question, then so be it.

This forceful strategy will only work with a small minority of the younger generation Macedonians. Unless their parents have educated them thoroughly in regards to the IA and even other issues for that matter, where do we expect them to learn such important information? A teacher or mentor who nurtures and encourages the learning of their pupils is far more likely to be listened to than someone who criticises any differing contribution made by the students. Obviously a balance needs to be found, that is not too lenient, nor harsh. I understand the need to 'act now,' but if the 'informed' parents simply do not care about the sovereignty issues facing Macedonia, how can we expect them to convey the proper Macedonian values and beliefs to their children?

I'd rather have 100 people who are ideologically sound and have developed a full and concrete understanding of the ventilator than 1000 who may have been pressured into opposing it, without understanding exactly why. If these people are fully informed, 'adult Macedonians' as Vangelovski calls them, then so be it, 'cornering them' may pressure them into assuming their responsibility to acknowledge what is 'right' and 'wrong.' Younger Macedonians however, present a very different and complex scenario.

A participatory approach would suggest we need to be reasonable about issues that we do not agree with. You know, we would have to say "I understand why you continue to use the ventilator ... "sure, I will stand next to it or wrap it around me". If I am not so agreeable, I might be a problem. This brand of niceness has allowed a cancer to run through all of Macedonia. It was a mistake and the consequences are obvious for all to see. It almost includes a resentment for the Macedonian identity. Many Macedonians see themselves with European eyes and feel they do not measure up. They have compromised their identity and the ethnic Albanians have filled the identity void.

I have gleaned from some of your posts that you are in fact very young. It thrills me to read posts from such a young articulate gentleman. I suspect you may travel down one of two paths if you choose to be more active in Macedonian matters:

1. Use an inclusive approach that means your ideology will be swayed to embrace as many people as possible and ultimately fall apart because it is a meaningless grouping that serves no purpose. Under Myopic Dreams.

OR

2. Try to find like minded people that feel there is no room for negotiation on solid core principles. Become extremely jaded with the present status quo. Demand tough decisions from people and look for the glint in the eye of Macedonians that can be useful to the Cause.

Option 2. is a tough one and causes animosity. It also has a life cycle because many patriots burn out from the thankless abuse they put themselves through. Time is running out for Macedonia in my opinion, there is no option but Option 2.

Not necessarily, but perhaps the word 'consultative' is more fitting to my approach. In this sense the concerns and views of the people are taken on board, yet at the end of the day our own viewpoints will be unaffected. This ultimately gives them a sense that they are being listened to, their views are being valued. You may completely disagree with what they may have to say, yet they are far more likely to then listen to your opinions if they have been treated with equal respect. It isn't a brand of niceness, it is simply treating people as equals and refraining from the perception of being 'superior' and others 'inferior' purely based on their views. If they are actively working against the Macedonia cause, then yes, they do not deserve to be treated with respect, as they have undermined their own people for their own personal gain.

Ultimately I see the most appropriate method as a blend between the two options. Option 1 would be more useful in some circumstances and option 2 in others. It's a matter of applying the most appropriate method to the situation at hand. Time is definitely running out, but we can not bet all our chips on the short-term, some needs to also be invested in the long-term. I understand that the next few years are crucial in protecting Macedonia's sovereignty, but we can not discount the long-term future entirely, especially with educating the youth of Macedonia to defend the values and history of their nation.

[blackcactus]

Not necessarily, but perhaps the word 'consultative' is more fitting to my approach. In this sense the concerns and views of the people are taken on board, yet at the end of the day our own viewpoints will be unaffected. This ultimately gives them a sense that they are being listened to, their views are being valued. You may completely disagree with what they may have to say, yet they are far more likely to then listen to your opinions if they have been treated with equal respect. It isn't a brand of niceness, it is simply treating people as equals and refraining from the perception of being 'superior' and others 'inferior' purely based on their views. If they are actively working against the Macedonia cause, then yes, they do not deserve to be treated with respect, as they have undermined their own people for their own personal gain.

Ultimately I see the most appropriate method as a blend between the two options. Option 1 would be more useful in some circumstances and option 2 in others. It's a matter of applying the most appropriate method to the situation at hand. Time is definitely running out, but we can not bet all our chips on the short-term, some needs to also be invested in the long-term. I understand that the next few years are crucial in protecting Macedonia's sovereignty, but we can not discount the long-term future entirely, especially with educating the youth of Macedonia to defend the values and history of their nation.

Nicely said


I would not encourage anyone to try and narrow/harden someone so young as EgejskaMakedonia to any particular strategy, leave that up to the old men who think they have done it all and now have no patience or energy to be creative anymore

Personally I feel being proactive/open is far better than being reactive, this quote from Albert Einstein sums up the sentiment nicely “Intellectuals solve problems: Geniuses prevent them”, Albert was a wonderfully creative thinker, he never lost that ability even as he aged

Cheers

BC

[United MKD]

I've been a member in a Macedonian sports forum for a few years now where 90% of them are living in Macedonia, they are all fairly young mid 20's, nice friendly guys. Recently they were talking about protesting and trying to make a change in the leadership of the Macedonia FA after the embarassing results of the national team, obviously the FA is corrupt. It got me thinking if they were THINKING about protesting for football (which they won't and did not as far as I know, no surprise there) I thought I'd explain to them my thoughts about the Interim Accord, our name change with the 'referendum' Gruevski speaks about, the ventillator etc and see their thoughts. I only got two replies, one was about Gruevski and how he is the devil and is a money laundering criminal, he showed more hate to Gruevski and VMRO rather than talk about any issues I raised.

Second reply was this:

Referendumot e samo igracka so koja Makedonija bi odbila bilo kakva promena na imeto. edno opravduvanje na Gruevski pred svetot za politikata koja ja vodi, deka Makedoncite ne prifakaat drugo ime, deka toa ne e samo negov stav tuku na site Makedonci.

Od druga strana, ako vo slucaj na referendumot gragjanite se izjasnat za promena na imeto, togas toa si e nivna zelba i pravo i nikoj nema da ni bide kriv.

Znaci, so referendum na koj bi bila odbiena bilo kakva promena, na Evropa i na svetot ke im se stavi oficijalen stav od celiot Makedonski narod, a ne samo na vladata. ete toa e razlikata.

Go figure.

[Risto the Great]

United MKD, if Gruevski can keep talking about referendums then he knows most people think like the fellow above. Further proof that the nation is lost.

[Risto the Great]

Not necessarily, but perhaps the word 'consultative' is more fitting to my approach. In this sense the concerns and views of the people are taken on board, yet at the end of the day our own viewpoints will be unaffected.

Then you would simply be a politician (one of the best liars in this world). Utterances could include the following:

"I really want to hear your concerns because I really respect your feelings."

But you won't actually come out and say the following:

"Just know I won't change a single opinion that I have"


So how respectful and honest is that really?

[blackcactus]

"Just know I won't change a single opinion that I have"

One person that fits the description of not being a politician.. Col Muammar Gaddafi

[Risto the Great]

BC, EM was saying his viewpoints would not be effected by whatever happened in the consultative process he was espousing. I was merely following that logic through.

You were applauding the consultative process he was suggesting. It included the above approach and you have now drawn parallels with Gaddafi on this point. I am confused. Did you like Gaddafi?

[blackcactus]

Did you like Gaddafi?

No

I see your point about following the logic through, but EM I think would not be so blunt and dismissive, that's part of his point I think

But being a 'politician' and allowing others to talk openly, and letting others speak even if your position is rock solid is far better than people like Gaddafi who leave no room to be heard

It's about winning people over, not forcing them into a corner where they will try to escape or fight your ideas

Anyway as usual we all have the same aim but approach it from the different ends of the universe, maybe a multi-tiered approach is really the only way forward if we want everyone on-board

[Vangelovski]

No

I see your point about following the logic through, but EM I think would not be so blunt and dismissive, that's part of his point I think

But being a 'politician' and allowing others to talk openly, and letting others speak even if your position is rock solid is far better than people like Gaddafi who leave no room to be heard

It's about winning people over, not forcing them into a corner where they will try to escape or fight your ideas

Anyway as usual we all have the same aim but approach it from the different ends of the universe, maybe a multi-tiered approach is really the only way forward if we want everyone on-board

I've never come across anyone who agrees with me to try and "fight" my ideas. They may get upset because their ego has been hurt, but eventually, you see where they really stand.

[blackcactus]

I've never come across anyone who agrees with me to try and "fight" my ideas. They may get upset because their ego has been hurt, but eventually, you see where they really stand.

That is probably true of a person who you can spend some quality one-on-one time with, and if they are rational it may work out ok, but for the masses, I feel it must be a differnet approach, I believe your message will eventually be resisted/distorted by others if your too aggressive

[EgejskaMakedonia]

Nicely said


I would not encourage anyone to try and narrow/harden someone so young as EgejskaMakedonia to any particular strategy, leave that up to the old men who think they have done it all and now have no patience or energy to be creative anymore

Personally I feel being proactive/open is far better than being reactive, this quote from Albert Einstein sums up the sentiment nicely “Intellectuals solve problems: Geniuses prevent them”, Albert was a wonderfully creative thinker, he never lost that ability even as he aged

Cheers

BC

Thanks for the contribution blackcactus. I'm glad that you understand where I'm coming from and share a very similar, if not the same view.

Then you would simply be a politician (one of the best liars in this world). Utterances could include the following:

"I really want to hear your concerns because I really respect your feelings."

But you won't actually come out and say the following:

"Just know I won't change a single opinion that I have"


So how respectful and honest is that really?

It ultimately depends on the situation. Providing an opportunity for individuals to speak their mind and to actively listen shows that you care. This in turn may bring up points of discussion that may have previously never surfaced. The key is to hear their story and find a suitable way of informing them or persuading them into developing a view that may align with your own. Politicians may be great liars, but they are the people who ultimately run the country. Perhaps this stereotype can be put to bed through future competent and honest leadership in Macedonia.

I consider the above a lot more respectful than saying, "Believe what I say or I'll spread the word that your a traitor." This approach is basically forcing an opinion onto people, leaving no room for discussion. You bring up the notion of a 'poker face' or such in terms of the utterances you've highlighted above, yet forcing a view upon someone may have similar circumstances, only this time through the 'accused' individual. Hypothetically, if you were to pressure someone and force them to reject the ventilator in every sense, do they really learn anything? I'm sure your aware of peer pressure, and the ever growing fear of being excluded in todays society. Wouldn't it be far more effective to educate them or remind them of WHY the ventilator is detrimental to the sovereignty of Macedonia. Treating forceful actions on the people as paramount to preaching the truth to them, screams a dictatorship or lack of democracy to me.

BC, EM was saying his viewpoints would not be effected by whatever happened in the consultative process he was espousing. I was merely following that logic through.

You were applauding the consultative process he was suggesting. It included the above approach and you have now drawn parallels with Gaddafi on this point. I am confused. Did you like Gaddafi?

My viewpoints would not be effected if I disagreed with everything they said, but even in amongst their flawed views, there are lessons to be learned. By adopting a consultative approach, we may effectively learn common 'errors' in an individuals ideology that can be generalised to the masses. This would in turn provide for a more efficient and effective process in terms of what needs to be done, and how.

No

I see your point about following the logic through, but EM I think would not be so blunt and dismissive, that's part of his point I think

But being a 'politician' and allowing others to talk openly, and letting others speak even if your position is rock solid is far better than people like Gaddafi who leave no room to be heard

It's about winning people over, not forcing them into a corner where they will try to escape or fight your ideas

Anyway as usual we all have the same aim but approach it from the different ends of the universe, maybe a multi-tiered approach is really the only way forward if we want everyone on-board

This pretty much sums up my contention, in particular the last line. The underlined segment is what I've been advocating this entire time. I'm glad the likes of blackcactus and a number of others have been able to see such views in my recent posts. Like I've said time and time again, our aim is united, but our means of remedy is where the discrepancies exist. Does this mean that those who prefer one approach as opposed to another should be labelled as working 'against' the Macedonian cause? No.

I've never come across anyone who agrees with me to try and "fight" my ideas. They may get upset because their ego has been hurt, but eventually, you see where they really stand.

There's a difference between agreeing and listening. If you had 'listened' to what I've been trying to convey, then I'm sure you'd also 'agree' that we all share the same goal. You need to take those blinkers off and see the world for what it is. Stop trying to position your views as the only ladder to redemption. Like I said, it doesn't always entail agreeing with someone. Since you seem to understand my legal references, why then does the judge/jury listen to the accused, even if it is 100% certain that they committed the crime. Because that's a democracy, and everyone has the right to a voice regardless of whether you may or may not agree with them.