alsaaas

Many such cases!

no of course not, but the breakup of Yugoslavia is a special case...

Although you could argue that the SFRY in (especially late) 80s was hardly socialist anymore, since they had to implement exceedingly more wide-reaching reforms dictated by the IMF. Thus giving rise to material conditions which could be exploited by fascists as soon as the strong suppression of fascism stopped (which started much sooner relative to other ex-socialist countries, thanks to said reforms).

Or even that it had stopped being socialist with the beginning of deeper implementations of "self-managment socialism" (to judge that is out of the scope of this comment), giving more time for those sentiments to foster.

Ofc the sudden rise of fascist and (ultra-)nationalist forces wasn't only bc of material reasons, even if they fed the spread of it. Culture, questions of ethnicity and nationalism played a huge role for both historical and structural reasons.

Yugoslavia was a multi-ethnic state with deep interwoven ties between it's peoples. A part (or result or reason for, again out of scope) of that was either a confused dispersion, or deep regional integration of said ethnicities, depending on how you put it.

Here is a map based on the 1981 census

To cut things short, ethnic tension was one of the main problems the '74 constitution tried to solve. It didn't succeeded, but was able to prolong it's "explosion" for quite a while.

With the gradual weakining of the central government – aggrevated by Tito's death – nationalism was allowed to spread or even cultivated inside of the individual republics...

Edit: another thing (aside from western intervention ofc) that enabled the dream of unity and brotherhood between the southern slavs to turn into a nightmare:

It's the military doctrine of "Total Defence"

The JNA adopted the concept of total defence (as did a number of other small European and neutral countries). Yugoslavia based its defence doctrine upon the total war concept of "Total People's Defence" (sh. Opštenarodna odbrana / Općenarodna obrana) which drew upon Yugoslavia's successful partisan history during the Yugoslav People's Liberation War during the Second World War. "TND prepared the entire population to contest the occupation of the country and finally to liberate it. The Territorial Defence Forces would mobilize the population for this purpose. The combat readiness of the TDF meant that the steps of organization and training could be bypassed after the start of hostilities. The TDF would supplement the YPA, giving it greater defensive depth and an armed local population ready to support combat actions." The entire Yugoslav population was to be engaged in armed resistance, armaments production, and civil defence under this concept. It was believed by the Yugoslav planners to be the best method by which a smaller nation could properly defend itself against a much stronger invader, specifically, NATO or the Warsaw Pact.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_People%27s_Army#Doctrine

also:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_defence
• https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_Defense_(Yugoslavia)

yet another reason was the liberlization of religious policies which led to more freedom for the catholic church and of muslim organizations, which fostered nationalistic opposition in both Croatia and Bosnia

(those are the instances I know of, might be that religious orgs of other beliefs did the same and/or additionaly in the other republic)

Edit1: writing this comment made me wanna rewatch the following video: History of Yugoslavia through music ♪♫.
It always manages to make me tear up, especially "Samo da rata ne bude" at 12:30 which practically devestates me. every. fucking. time. after that still but less so

Here is the full version with eng translation: "Samo da rata ne bude" - Yugoslav Anti-War Song [Just let there be no war]

Edit2: in it of itself "Total Defence" is a sound doctrine and the SFRY executed it quite well with their own characteristics. It's not inherently bad, I do not mean to critize it, just inform about some ground laying aspects of the following wars; their unfortunate and partially coincidental combination just lead to horrible outcomes

well, in ex-Yugoslavia you afaik still got plenty of 8mm mouser for all the neo-ustashe and /-chetniks

(it was also more of a joke remark lol)

basically all of (south) eastern europe + all (now ex-)soviet republics until the 1990s

the bullet part: civil war in ussr (the whites were proto-fascist af) and ww2 in the rest of (south) eastern europe

+ fascists were perpetually heavily persecuted by the agencies of state socialism

now the movement part: socialism builds around solving the issues of the working classes first and foremost by changing the material basis of society. It provides solutions which take the problem by it's root (e.g. not reforming capitalism – which is the root cause of poverty, homelessness, hunger etc. – but eliminating it)

facism (partially) uses a perversion of leftist rhetoric to fool and garner support from working people.

after said state socialisms found their ends, the following bourgeois "democracies" failed to address the needs of working people, allowing for fascist rhetoric to capture the minds of many. and ofc the rigorous persecution stopped too

the former territory of the GDR provides one of the best examples of the combination of the two

western and southern europe (mainly France and Italy; with the exception of Spain, which had a continued fascist presence long after WW2) had momentary violence against fascists, which was not upheld after ww2 (or after the revolution in Portugal's case), but still had flourishing socialist movements (talking about real socialism, not the french "socialist" party), mainly strong communist parties. after their disintegration in the 90s, fascists had a much easier time and we are seeing the effects today just as well in the rest of europe as in Germany

"fighting" fascists on the marketplace of ideas

being reasonable

choose one

it takes something huge to break through that kind of thinking [...]

nah, a 9mm will do just fine

lmaooo, "maybe try fighting harder on the marketing place of ideas?! 👉👈🥺"

Fascism can only be stopped by a bullet in the head and a strong socialist movement exposing their lies, especially regarding their perverted partially leftist rhetoric

Korrektur/Ergänzung: die PDS war ein reformierter Teil der SED der sich – wie der Name schon sagt – für demokratischen Sozialismus eingesetzt hat.

Und das war der Teil, der die Wendeversuchungen des ZK von Egon Krenz nicht weit genug fand. Sie haben eben dieses ZK zum Rücktritt bewegt und anschließend Leute wie Egon Krenz aus der Partei geworfen.

Waren quasi Reformer der Reformer lol

Sie ging aus der Sozialistischen Einheitspartei Deutschlands (SED) hervor, die sich im Dezember 1989 zunächst in Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands – Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (SED-PDS) umbenannt hatte. Am 4. Februar 1990, nachdem ein personeller und inhaltlicher Wandel vollzogen worden war, änderte sie ihren Namen in Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus (PDS) und im Juli 2005 in Die Linkspartei.PDS (Die Linke.PDS). Am 16. Juni 2007 ging sie schließlich im Zuge der Fusion mit der WASG in der Partei Die Linke auf.

aus https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partei_des_Demokratischen_Sozialismus

Am 3. Dezember 1989 trat das Politbüro des ZK der SED (einschließlich Egon Krenz) nach massiven Protesten auch aus der Basis der Partei geschlossen zurück. Krenz gab nach siebenwöchiger Amtszeit am 6. Dezember den Vorsitz des Staatsrates an den LDPD-Politiker Manfred Gerlach ab. Im Januar 1990 legte er sein Volkskammermandat nieder und wurde aus der inzwischen umbenannten SED-PDS unter Gregor Gysi ausgeschlossen. Mit dieser Aussage endet sein Buch aus dem gleichen Jahr.:246

aus https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egon_Krenz

Gott, kurz Jumpscare gehabt und dann das SRF/CH gesehen

gleitendes Schreiben

Meinst du als Google Tastatur oder Heli~~o~~board und import der Bibliothek

average Treatlerite