Tsar Samoil and the Archbishopric of Ohrid in Macedonia

[DimitarP]

First of all communist bulgaria from 1989 and democratic bulgaria 2011 are quite different.

First of all bulgaria is not as centralized now as it used to be in communist times (i think this is obvious).

The ex-communists in the parliament are always trying to keep the status quo as this keeps the laws and regulations in the country more obscure and imperfect, which allows for mafia-like structures, who sponsor their politic campains, thriving and making millions.

However Kostov's government 1997-2001 made some massive reforms and started negotiations for joining NATO and the EU. Now the whole process of joining EU required more massive reforms and laws to be implemented. Effectively the european laws guarantee the rigts of the idividual (in theory). However the corrupt judisial system was and still is a problem. Bulgaria has paid millions to people who have sued the country in Strasbourg. The european commission puts enormous pressure on bulgaria to reform further and this is the necessary path to join the Schengen zone.

Bulgaria kicking anyone out is completely impossible at the moment. The gypsies are a problem as long as they stay uneducated and keep commiting numerous crimes. In fact this is going to be addressed very soon. There probably will be EU programs for regional development where money will be given for dealing with the poverty and poor infrastructure in ghetos where gypsies in bulgaria live. Their rights are guaranteed by the law but they aren't given the same chance as the rest of the bulgarians when it comes to finding ordinary jobs.

So bulgaria has embraced the european path again after 50 years of communism. The communism is something that noone actually chose, it was forsed upon bulgarian and eastn europe by russia. the 50 years of communism are a black page in the history books. Super centralized power that manipulated, exploited and discriminated against its own people. Everything was done to suit ideological doctrines of the regime, while people who would disagree were sent to prisons and Belene (the bulgarian analog of Sibir/Gulag in russia)

[Onur]

Originally Posted by DimitarP

First of all communist bulgaria from 1989 and democratic bulgaria 2011 are quite different.

Bulgaria kicking anyone out is completely impossible at the moment. The gypsies are a problem as long as they stay uneducated and keep commiting numerous crimes. In fact this is going to be addressed very soon. There probably will be EU programs for regional development where money will be given for dealing with the poverty and poor infrastructure in ghetos where gypsies in bulgaria live.

Yes it is different but not "THAT" different. You cant become democratic and prosperous state in a day just because you are not a communist anymore. It`s a long process which requires experience and collective social memory as a result of it. Look at Greece, they thought they became rich in a day when they entered EU and Euro zone since credit rating firms increased their rating to AA+ in a day. Now they are facing hard truth after the big guns turned off the taps. As far as i heard, Bulgaria is still trying to replace it`s bureaucracy by kicking out 100s of ex-communist bureaucrats these days. I saw Bulgaria last year and there was communist style buildings everywhere in Sofia. It was plain ugly. Small towns and cities in eastern Bulgaria, where Turks lives was much better and cozier than Sofia because of beautiful nature. Well, the beautiful nature was the only thing i liked about Bulgaria. So, I think Bulgaria still needs more time and lots of money to recover.


Why impossible? 2 different party, Ataka and Vmro openly recommends for the expulsion of Turks and gypsies again. Bulgarians cant have babies for some reason!! and their population keeps dropping for a long time while Turks has normal population increase rate and gypsies reproduce like cats&dogs. If this continues, gypsies will overrun you in the future, so what you gonna do about it?

By the way, you shouldn't trust EU funds since they are in crisis for more than a year and i don't think German taxpayers would like to give money to Bulgaria just to resolve your gypsy problem. I think they would prefer what Sarkozy did few months ago, instead of spending money for gypsies. Also forget about educating or trying to integrate them in to your society cuz they cant do that. They have exactly same lifestyle for centuries and they don't wanna change it. They live in their own world, not in ours.

[Risto the Great]

Onur, you often refer to Turkic tribes as being Turkish which I think is incorrect and falling into similar traps that Greeks do. If the Bulgars were Turkic, how does that make them Turkish?

[DimitarP]

Originally Posted by Risto the Great

Onur, you often refer to Turkic tribes as being Turkish which I think is incorrect and falling into similar traps that Greeks do. If the Bulgars were Turkic, how does that make them Turkish?

That's spot on, turkic tribes does not mean turkish tribes. there is a big variety of turkic tribes. The bolgars were believed to be a turkic tribe that roamed across asia long before they reached the balkans or the volga river. Nowadays some believe that they also had borrowed a lot from the iranian tribes that they came in contact with at some stage.

In fact modern bulgarian linguist have found words with similar root in modern bulgarian and in the iranian languages Pushtu and Farsi-Dari.
http://lukferi2.webs.com/linguistic.htm..

[DimitarP]

Originally Posted by Onur

All these are for medieval Bulgars tough and as you said, currently there is no relation whatsoever between early Bulgars and current Bulgarians. I am talking about the philosophy and ideas of current Bulgarians, not about your DNA since it doesn't matter how much early Bulgar, Tatar blood you have. So, Bulgarians kinda hijacked the name Bulgars and using it atm.

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...0&postcount=25

Well.. some bulgarian historians put the number of the bulgars who came with Asparukh (name of iranian origin) to the Danube river to up to 300 000. However they can only find some evidence for about 50 000 at best... Now this is info from my grandma who used to be ethnographer back in bulgaria and that was one of the research topics that her friend was involved with. They actually went to Romania to investigate places of bulgar settlements... Now 50 000 is a big fig figure if all these people were fighters with weapons, but good many of them must have been women, anyway.. if we are talking about assimilation of 50 000 bolgars though, I don't think that 50 000 stands as such a big number. Even the most bulgaristic historians say that there were at least 250 000 slavs south of Danube at the time (thats a conservative estimate). More over soon after the establishment of Asparukh's bulgar kingdom (less than 200 years) the slavic alphabet was adopted..

[DimitarP]

"...So, Bulgarians kinda hijacked the name Bulgars and using it atm."

I don't think that ist's a case of highjacking.

The kingdom of the bulgars was called accordingly because the bulgars were the top officials, the millitary commanders and the early organization of the state was similar to that of Old Great Bulgaria. (Old Great Bulgaria is a name given by the Byzantium to the state at the north coast of the black sea lead by the bulgar/bolgar khan Kubrat). So the state run by the danube bulgras was called bulgaria. However, the population of this kingdom was quite a mixture of ethinic groups. The name of bulgaria and the bulgarians has survived through the centuries though.

The bulgarians were a recognized ethnic group in the Turkish empire, who spoke bulgarian language throughout the whole 5 centuries of turkish domination. Now that indicates that this isn't a made up or highjacked name. It refered to some particular group of people, who were identified as bulgars or bulgarians as opposed to vlahs, serbs, thracians or for example makedons. The bulgarian awakening in the turkish empire started with "Istoria slaviano-balgarska" - a historical document meant for those who called them selves bulgarians. Then those people fought in the april uprising for freedom.

How those people who were a mixture of ethnicities, i asume with predominant slav representation, became one bulgarian people I do not know. The fact is they took up the cirilic alphabet and east orthodox christianity as a religion, which may have been a unifying factor... I really don't know, perhaps TM has some docos that would bust the myth of bulgarian ethnicity in the turkish empire... however no other ethnicity fought for independance in Moesia, it was predominantly bulgarians with bulgarian names and language who fought, wasn't it? And when they got so to speak "liberated" by the russians the new kingdom was called Bulgaria.

[DimitarP]

Link to an article about Australian dude who lives bulgaria, what he thinks about bulgaria and the bulgarians, it's sad in a way. The good thing is: things are being adressed: http://www.capital.bg/politika_i_iko...desh_seriozen/

Sorry the article is in bulgarian, i'm no demonstrating anything, but may be some macedonians could understand it. I can understands some macedonian but not everything.. if anyone is interested can give it a try. I found it interesting.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Originally Posted by Soldier of Macedon

Dimitar, hopefully you won't allow the prevalent anti-Macedonian view of official Bulgarian policy to get in the way of your pursuit for knowledge. I agree with you regarding the lack of significance that the actual Bulgars have in today's Bulgarians, and would also argue that the Bulgarian label perpetuated more from precedence rather than ethno-linguistic connotation. Do you agree or disagree? Do you think that today's Bulgarians should be called something else, Thracians perhaps? Do you recognise a distinct Macedonian people?

Dimitar, do you not wish to address the above?

[Ottoman]

Originally Posted by Risto the Great

Onur, you often refer to Turkic tribes as being Turkish which I think is incorrect and falling into similar traps that Greeks do. If the Bulgars were Turkic, how does that make them Turkish?

You can compare the term Turkic with Slavic, the term Turkish is indeed not correct because that term is used to describe people from Turkey.

[DimitarP]

"I agree with you regarding the lack of significance that the actual Bulgars have in today's Bulgarians, and would also argue that the Bulgarian label perpetuated more from precedence rather than ethno-linguistic connotation. Do you agree or disagree? Do you think that today's Bulgarians should be called something else, Thracians perhaps? Do you recognise a distinct Macedonian people?"

Ok so there's three questions in there... Here's my three answers:

1. At this moment I disagree with you on the first question, because as I said there has been a recognized bulgarian ethnic group in the turkish empire, which spoke bulgarian (sort of a slavic language). Their name and language hasn't survived for such a long time because of a random precedence, it was a recognized ethnicity and language and has been around for a long, long time. This group has not only survived under that name but also organised it self and rebelled and sought independance. We don't know about any thracian minorities in the ottoman empire who had tried to liberate them selves (or do we? let me know if there are materials that talk about uprising of ethnic thracians or thracian awakening at that time).

2.This gives an answer to your second question. Those who fought for independance called them selves bulgarians, whatever meaning this word "bulgarian" has had at the time. They were also known and described as bulgarians. So their state would logically be called Bulgaria (unless a thracian minority claimed that a different name would be more appropriate but i don't think that anyone has come up with such suggestion at the time (again if there is evidence that i have missed let me know).

3. The main thing for me is that the macedonians feel dfferent from everybody else, therefore they are a separate people, therefore I recognise them as such.