Todor Aleksandrov

[vicsinad]

Thanks for sharing this, I would have thought that 3/4 supported the MPO, especially in the period before WWII.

Also, in addition, I reviewed all of MPO's official membership data. In the mid-1930s, its paying membership was at its highest ever at about 2,000 members. From the late 1920s through the late-1950s, its membership remained between 1,800 and 2,000 people. However, by the establishment of the MOC as an independent church in 1967, its membership was down to 1,500 people. After that date until the early 1990s, it listed exactly 1,500 every year as its membership, which tells me they really weren't keeping an accurate tally anymore. Especially compared to the 1950s, when they would give precise numbers:


1950: 1,922 members
1951: 1,980 members
1952: 1,986 members
1953: 1,980 members
1954: 1,962 members
1956: 1,943 members
1959: 1,894 members

There membership in the 1920s and 1930s was not any higher because of three reasons: 1) many Macedonians were not on board with the MPO from the get-go (think pastor David Nakoff and his followers); 2) MPO suffered major divisions once the Mihailov-Protogerov feud escalated with Protogerov's death; MPO almost ceased to exist, but the Protogerovists essentially left en-masse; 3) the creation of the Macedonian People's League attracted most of those Macedonians who a) were from the old IMRO guard (those that fought in Ilinden); b) had supported Macedonian ethnicity and language; and c) were left-leaning.

I wrote the following in my MPO book. It'll help put some context to the MPO divisions in the late 1920s and early 1930s.

These developments profoundly impacted MPO’s members, especially its leadership. Zografoff, the Tribune editor, feverishly stood against Mihajlovists and their violent methods. Assen Avramoff, who was born in Sofia but whose family hailed from the Drama region in Aegean Macedonia, arrived in the U.S. on September 25, 1929.54 A graduate of Sofia’s Law School, he was elected as secretary to the MPO Central Committee in order to replace Jordan Chkatroff, who had left for the Balkans 1929 to act as “prime minister” of Mihajlov’s IMRO, as well as loyal adviser to Ivan Mihajlov.55 Avramoff was staunchly pro-Mihajlov. He was described as a good friend and confidant of Mihajlov.56 Nizamoff had noted that, since Avramoff’s arrival, Zografoff and Avramoff “were not on speaking terms.”57

Even though Zografoff was against Mihajlov’s methods, he believed that the MPO should not choose sides in the internal struggles overseas.58 Furthermore, unlike several of his MPO associates, he maintained that just because Macedonians’ language was classified as ‘Bulgarian’, it did not mean Macedonia and Macedonians should not be independent or considered as their own people. In 1929, he wrote:

The Serbians have closed all of the non-Serbian churches, schools and libraries; have expelled, imprisoned, tortured or killed bishops, preachers, teachers in Macedonia; have placed in prison and tortured Macedonian and Croatian students; have arrested, imprisoned, tortured, expelled or killed many Macedonian, Montenegrin and Croatian patriots, business men, educators, for the simple reason of their unwillingness to change their nationality. …

Mr. Vukovich “calls Macedonia a myth.” Macedonia existed even before Serbia. Macedonia has fought Turkey and is fighting the new oppressors, Servia and Greece, to become free and independent. In this struggle for freedom lives have been lost on all sides. The peace of the world has been threatened. Is that a myth? Now there is a revolution in Macedonia against Servia and Greece. Is that a myth?

Mr. Vukovich states since there is no Macedonian language, Macedonia should not be independent. If that argument holds good Switzerland, Austria [and] even the United States should not be independent. The language does not govern the making of a country. When the population of a given territory of a considerable size wants to be free and independent, as the original American colonies wanted to be free and independent, this population has right to establish an independent country. This is the principle of the American Declaration of independence.59

Zografoff’s views and writings were much more blatantly pro-Macedonian – and much less Bulgarian-friendly – than those of most other early MPO leaders, as we will see in Chapter Two. In opposition to Zografoff, Avramoff and other MPO leaders wanted to align with Mihajlov.60 These members considered Mihajlov to be Macedonia’s number one “warrior”.61 These differences accumulated and climaxed at MPO’s 1930 convention. Nizamoff described the mood of that convention:

The Youngstown convention was stormy. Tempers ran high. I had been elected chairman and there were moments when I, too, lost my temper. The divisions and battles of the IMRO across the ocean had affected all of us. During the first and second days the sessions continued until early midnight. But the time came when all of us had to think for the preservation of our organization. Finally, with some help from me, Avramoff, presenting his case with the mastery and logic of a jurist, succeeded in swaying most of the delegates to his viewpoint and the neutrality voted the year before was rescinded. The MPO in the United States agreed to support the side which had punished-General Protogeroff "to save the Macedonian movement from a takeover by incompetent and corrupt left-wingers".62

[vicsinad]

The may manifesto is a clear example of this, however like i mentioned Chaulev, Vlahov etc we're the group who forced Todor Aleksandrov and Protogerov to withdraw their signatures.

I think there were other reasons then Chaulev/Vlahov publishing his signature that forced Aleksandrov to withdraw or deny that he signed it. However, if this is what you mean, it shows again that Aleksandrov was worried more about his political position in relation to the Macedonian movement and the Bulgarian government than he was about advocating for a unified Macedonian agenda.

Sadly many of our freedom fighters on the 19th century and 20th century can be argued to have negative sides, Misirkov, Aleksandrov, Apostol Petkov etc. It was just the enviroment of their time just as there is Macedonians who are either pro Russia or Pro U.S today.

I'm not doubting that. Though, I think if we look at the whole of Aleksandrov's actions and words, in the context of the Macedonian Cause and other contexts, there's really no place for him as a hero or someone who truly helped our cause. There's only so much that we can excuse as "well, that was the times" or "he was a product of his environment."

[VMRO]

Aleksandrov personally sent these men. I do agree that the early MPO years had many more pro-Macedonians involved -- they were naturally attracted to an large-scale Macedonian movement. But many of those quickly discovered what Chkatroff, Poppetrov and others were up to. The pro-Bulgarian elements instigated the creation of the MPO and they came on behalf of Aleksandrov. Especially Chkatroff, who was in constant correspondence with Aleksandrov.

I don't deny that his actions were questionable especially with his flip flopping with Bulgarian ministers and even encouraging the Bulgarian propaganda but other actions particularly in the final years before his murder conflict his earlier actions.

The may manifesto is a clear example of this, however like i mentioned Chaulev, Vlahov etc we're the group who forced Todor Aleksandrov and Protogerov to withdraw their signatures.


Sadly many of our freedom fighters on the 19th century and 20th century can be argued to have negative sides, Misirkov, Aleksandrov, Apostol Petkov etc. It was just the enviroment of their time just as there is Macedonians who are either pro Russia or Pro U.S today.

[VMRO]

Aleksandrov personally sent these men. I do agree that the early MPO years had many more pro-Macedonians involved -- they were naturally attracted to an large-scale Macedonian movement. But many of those quickly discovered what Chkatroff, Poppetrov and others were up to. The pro-Bulgarian elements instigated the creation of the MPO and they came on behalf of Aleksandrov. Especially Chkatroff, who was in constant correspondence with Aleksandrov.

I'll put up the excerpts from the book by Stavre Dzikov later this month, he touches upon this period around the formation of MPO. Murky times.

[vicsinad]

I agree with the above, i agree that the person Aleksandrov sent (or it could've been Mihajlov due to the zagovor against Aleksandrov at the time) had those intentions to influence the Macedonians in America. There has been research done by Stavre Dzikov who claims the contrary however that MPO was pro Macedonian whilst Aleksandrov was alive and only became influenced to revert from Macedonian to Pan-Bulgarianism after Mihajlov sent his own people after Aleksandrov's death. (When i have more time i will translate and post up on here)

Aleksandrov personally sent these men. I do agree that the early MPO years had many more pro-Macedonians involved -- they were naturally attracted to an large-scale Macedonian movement. But many of those quickly discovered what Chkatroff, Poppetrov and others were up to. The pro-Bulgarian elements instigated the creation of the MPO and they came on behalf of Aleksandrov. Especially Chkatroff, who was in constant correspondence with Aleksandrov.

[vicsinad]

Thanks for sharing this, I would have thought that 3/4 supported the MPO, especially in the period before WWII.

At the 1922 organizational meeting of the MPO Chapter "Fatherland" in Detroit, there were 250 people in attendance. Only 50 of those people signed up to be members of the MPO chapter. Says a lot, in my opinion!

[Niko777]

That about 3/4 of Macedonians in the US during the 1920s wanted nothing to do with MPO

Thanks for sharing this, I would have thought that 3/4 supported the MPO, especially in the period before WWII.

[Carlin]

Letter from Aleksandrov to Tsar Ferdinand I about the difficulties in food and populations' livelihoods, the poor attitude of the Germans towards the Bulgarian army and suggestions for the elimination of the weaknesses. February 25, 1917:

"We think that it is necessary to react against the small whims and attacks committed by the Germans and Turks in order not to expand and take dangerous proportions, and to make everything possible for the conclusion of the great people's cause - unification of the Bulgarian tribe under the scepter of Your Majesty."

[VMRO]

Where's this from?

It's from:

The Macedonian Question 1893–1908 From Western Sources by Nadine Lange–akhund

[VMRO]

I actually think he started out with pure intentions and, as with many youth, had ambitious ideological stances. As he became more entrenched in the politics, he began to play the different sides (Bulgarian government, Macedonian communists, etc.) not solely for the benefit of Macedonia and the Macedonians, but to cement his power and position, a vicious loop that many leaders find themselves in. His actions demonstrate, on several occasions, that in his later years he was more worried about losing control over the Macedonian movement and people than he was about any ideological convictions. He was outmatched in this regard by his protégé Mihajlov's thirst for power.

Aleksandrov moved closer to an independent Macedonia free from Bulgaria's grip as time went on, but I doubt he genuinely embraced the concept of a separate Macedonian nationality by the time of his death. At the same time, the Macedonian awakening was still ramping up -- had Aleksandrov lived through WW2, we would have been able to discern his true feelings on the matter.

I agree with the above, i agree that the person Aleksandrov sent (or it could've been Mihajlov due to the zagovor against Aleksandrov at the time) had those intentions to influence the Macedonians in America. There has been research done by Stavre Dzikov who claims the contrary however that MPO was pro Macedonian whilst Aleksandrov was alive and only became influenced to revert from Macedonian to Pan-Bulgarianism after Mihajlov sent his own people after Aleksandrov's death. (When i have more time i will translate and post up on here)

If we paint Aleksandrov with a black brush, we would then have to paint many others who at other moments in time could be classified as controversial due to certain

I believe there was a chance he would've grasped the concept of a separate Macedonian identity as he was also supportive of the may manifesto which in my opinion if it succeeded would've united the Macedonian factions in a common goal free from Bulgarianism.

However the May manifesto broke down due to the left and i cannot hold Aleksandrov accountable for that as both sides did silly things at times.

[vicsinad]

Yeah there is conflicting information on Aleksandrov no doubt. He seems to have moved more and more away from Bulgaria as time went on though. Perhaps he realised our future was not with them? Keen to hear your thoughts on this Vic

I actually think he started out with pure intentions and, as with many youth, had ambitious ideological stances. As he became more entrenched in the politics, he began to play the different sides (Bulgarian government, Macedonian communists, etc.) not solely for the benefit of Macedonia and the Macedonians, but to cement his power and position, a vicious loop that many leaders find themselves in. His actions demonstrate, on several occasions, that in his later years he was more worried about losing control over the Macedonian movement and people than he was about any ideological convictions. He was outmatched in this regard by his protégé Mihajlov's thirst for power.

Aleksandrov moved closer to an independent Macedonia free from Bulgaria's grip as time went on, but I doubt he genuinely embraced the concept of a separate Macedonian nationality by the time of his death. At the same time, the Macedonian awakening was still ramping up -- had Aleksandrov lived through WW2, we would have been able to discern his true feelings on the matter.

[Liberator of Makedonija]

Yes, of course. But some people adapted in ways that ended up being more harmful (or more helpful) to the Macedonian Cause. For example, take Aleksandrov sending Srebren Poppetrov to organize the "Macedonian-Bulgarians" in the U.S. Poppetrov was one of Aleksandrov's most trusted loyalists, and he wrote back the following (in 1924):



Along with Chkatroff, Poppetrov helped form the MPO at Aleksandrov's directive. They did so as a means, in reality, to form a pro-Bulgarian Macedonian organization. That about 3/4 of Macedonians in the US during the 1920s wanted nothing to do with MPO should send a pretty clear message about how convincing Aleksandrov's (and then Mihajlov's) brand of "Macedonianism" was to most Macedonians in the U.S. Even many of those who had once been staunch Sarafov supporters wanted nothing to do with Aleksandrov's minions in the U.S. I have no doubt that this is because most Macedonians suspected, as evidenced by Poppetrov's letter above, that Aleksandrov was really working for the Bulgarian kingdom and not a pure Macedonian independence movement. This act of sending two of his loyalists to "organize the Bulgarians of Macedonia in America" did more harm than good to the Macedonian interests in the diaspora. We have Aleksandrov to thank for the lasting legacy of MPO and their fight against a thing called a Macedonian identity, language and church.

Aleksandrov had many Vardar Macedonians under Serbia under his sway because he fought against the Serbian occupation, but I still view his brand of Macedonianism as fairly closely aligned with that of Greater Bulgaria's interests in an "independent Macedonian movement", at least for most of his life.

I think he is a complicated, mixed bag -- many positive actions for Macedonians and many negative actions. Sure, all Macedonian revolutionaries were controversial, as are all Balkan figures, but there is no comparison between Aleksandrov and Delcev, Gruev and Sandanski.

Yeah there is conflicting information on Aleksandrov no doubt. He seems to have moved more and more away from Bulgaria as time went on though. Perhaps he realised our future was not with them? Keen to hear your thoughts on this Vic

[Momce Makedonce]

Thanks for the respones, I am genuinely still on the fence with Aleksandrov. I came across this latest video from Mario's History Talks talking about Todor Aleksandrov which was quite interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1fOLYh0jxM

[vicsinad]

People need to realise that many Macedonians during that time had to adapt to their new surroundings and environment (Misirkov is a fine example)

Yes, of course. But some people adapted in ways that ended up being more harmful (or more helpful) to the Macedonian Cause. For example, take Aleksandrov sending Srebren Poppetrov to organize the "Macedonian-Bulgarians" in the U.S. Poppetrov was one of Aleksandrov's most trusted loyalists, and he wrote back the following (in 1924):

The Bulgarians in America are in large majority from Macedonia. Before the wars, these Macedonian-Bulgarians went, earned money, and returned to their native country. After the wars, not only do they not return to their loved ones, but they almost always call for their families to come here.

The universe does not lose the fact that some of them are not called Orthodox, but instead Protestants or Catholics, and that some have lost a national Bulgarian feeling and are called Serbs, Greeks, Russians or whatever … If our nation is organized faithfully and nationally, it will only be saved for the future reintegration of our homeland of Macedonia and for the kingdom, but by then it will be a force that will be taken into account in solving our big questions.

Along with Chkatroff, Poppetrov helped form the MPO at Aleksandrov's directive. They did so as a means, in reality, to form a pro-Bulgarian Macedonian organization. That about 3/4 of Macedonians in the US during the 1920s wanted nothing to do with MPO should send a pretty clear message about how convincing Aleksandrov's (and then Mihajlov's) brand of "Macedonianism" was to most Macedonians in the U.S. Even many of those who had once been staunch Sarafov supporters wanted nothing to do with Aleksandrov's minions in the U.S. I have no doubt that this is because most Macedonians suspected, as evidenced by Poppetrov's letter above, that Aleksandrov was really working for the Bulgarian kingdom and not a pure Macedonian independence movement. This act of sending two of his loyalists to "organize the Bulgarians of Macedonia in America" did more harm than good to the Macedonian interests in the diaspora. We have Aleksandrov to thank for the lasting legacy of MPO and their fight against a thing called a Macedonian identity, language and church.

Aleksandrov had many Vardar Macedonians under Serbia under his sway because he fought against the Serbian occupation, but I still view his brand of Macedonianism as fairly closely aligned with that of Greater Bulgaria's interests in an "independent Macedonian movement", at least for most of his life.

I think he is a complicated, mixed bag -- many positive actions for Macedonians and many negative actions. Sure, all Macedonian revolutionaries were controversial, as are all Balkan figures, but there is no comparison between Aleksandrov and Delcev, Gruev and Sandanski.

[Liberator of Makedonija]

Above talks about the early factions post Ilinden.

Where's this from?