Why Serbian society can be so extreme

[Bucky]

Serbia took two international black eyes in the 20th century. First by its government supporting the Nazis (which is unfair, considering the majority of Serbs fought against the Nazis in a popular uprising) and second for the "ethnic cleansing" of the Mlosevic era. Understanding why extremist political views took hold of this country gets a little clearer when you look at this map.

Percentage of Population killed By World War One



In World War One, Serbia lost 27% of its population over the course of four years. That translates into 60% of its male population (Serbia was already disproportionately female due to the fatalities in wars fought against Turkey and Bulgaria from 1912-13). Following WW1, Serbs faced decimation & extermination at the hands of the Nazis and their allies among the Croats and Bulgarians, then occupation by a repressive Communist regime under Tito.

I just saw this map online and thought I'd share it because of how it contextualized some of the harsher aspects of recent Serbian history. Hopefully it also makes more admirable their more recent, more liberal policies of normalization with other European countries.

[TexasProgresive]

1. That's interesting case for them to justifiy evil acts

BTW- with a 27% mortality rate that equals decimation times 3. Decimate is to reduce by 10%. I know general usage has come to mean reduction by a large part but it is poor communications and is ruining the power of the word.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/grammarly/8-words-whose-definitions_b_6481404.html
Decimate: The word decimate is usually used to mean complete and utter destruction. But did you know that it originally meant to reduce by ten percent? In Roman times, when a cohort of soldiers was found guilty of misconduct, it wasn't practical to execute all 480 of them. Instead, they were broken into groups of ten and made to draw lots. Drawing the short straw meant a painful death at the hands of your comrades.

Better to write 27% were wiped out, or a reduction of the male population by 60%.

[Bucky]

11. Thanks for the pedantry. But if one nitpics, one has an obligation to get the facts right.

At the risk of tautology, I will only advise that if you want to offer such careful reads of what I write, you first read what I write carefully. To wit:

1. I never said Serbs were "justified" in their extremist politics. I said their devastating experiences from war "contextualizes" their extremism (and makes their more recent liberalization laudable). Putting words in someone else's mouth is not cool.

2. I didn't say World War One "decimated" their population. I gave concrete percentages, as you cited. I used the word "decimated" in the sentence discussing Serbia's experience in World War Two. And although I was quite clearly using the more common definition of utter destruction, it's worth noting that, with between 340,000 to 530,000 ethnic Serb civilians being exterminated by fascist allies in WW2 (scholarly estimates vary), I'm pretty spot-on for the etymologically pure definition that you decided to crow about. (Serbia's population in 1948 was 4.2 million, but Yugoslavia is just such a hodgepodge of ethnicities I can't pin down exactly how many of the 16 million Yugoslavs at that time were ethnic Serbs).

2a. Since we're having fun with pedantry...

340,000 / 4.2m = 8.1% (low estimate) and 530,000 / 4.2m = 12.6% (high estimate)

[Javaman]

2. I have always wondered how they view their native son who basically started WWI

by assassinating the arch duke.

[independentpiney]

3. I thought it interesting the op didn't mention Gavrilo Princep and his Serbian sponsorship nt

[Javaman]

4. yeah, princep is a sticky topic for the serbs.

when people ask if I could travel back in time, what would I do?

I would admit hitler to art school and tell prince to go back to sleep.

[EL34x4]

9. WWI would've happened with or without Gavrilo Princip.

The major powers were spoiling for a fight. If Princip hadn't come along, something else would've lit the spark.

[Javaman]

10. that's very true.

also the Hapsburgs were hanging by a thread financially, and would have eventually collapsed. it would be interesting to see what would have happened then.

but the concept around how the war started, leads many to believe that if princip hadn't started it, the eventual war itself may have very well be short lived. (due to various alliance agreements not having had to be honored)

[independentpiney]

8. The Serbian President described him as a freedom fighter and hero at the inaugural of his memorial

in Belgrade. So that could be taken as the official position. Undoubtedly there are ethnic Serbs who disagree, but I'd venture they're a quiet minority.

http://www.dw.com/en/gavrilo-princip-assassin-who-sparked-wwi-gets-statue-in-belgrade/a-18546305

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. My understanding is that the pro-Nazi Serbian government was an obvious puppet

that no-one held the population in general responsible for - any more than, say, Quisling's government in Norway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_in_Yugoslavia

It's the Croats who are held to have been more on the Nazi side as a people.

[Bucky]

7. Thanks for the clarification; I think I covered that in the OP

but perhaps was not clear enough

[MillennialDem]

6. This is a worthwhile topic but is there a specific reason it's being brought up? Did I miss

something in the news?

FWIW I've been to Belgrade a few times. The Serbs are wonderfully kind people, the American xenophobia towards them is very undeserved.

[Bucky]

12. Nothing big in the news, I just saw the map and thought I'd share it among DU history nerds

I have a couple of Serb friends (Serbo-Texan actually) and agree they seem to have a rich, generous culture.
FWIW, I've also heard numerous times from nonAmericans how everybody loves Americans but hates what our government does around the world.

The struggle continues. I'm glad the Serbs seem to be winning theirs of late.

[MillennialDem]

13. I'm near Milwaukee-Chicago. Lots of Serb-Americans and Serb expats here