kromida

No. Hope that helps :)

The world cup is the only sporting event I genuinely like watching, so I will, but absolutely will not pay for it or anything like that. Personally, I will be ready with pirated streams :)

... why do you think that? That's literally any group X and group Y in the Balkans. Yes, that was an issue in Yugoslavia, but that's because it wasn't being dealt with properly, especially under socialist development. That can and will be fixed in future projects.

The root cause of it is not nationalism. It's economic troubles and loss of allies. Yugoslavia had an insane amount of debt, and they had too much liberalization of the market. Playing the middle ground between the two global powers was not a good strategy in the long run. They also actually had a cult of personality (not saying it's necessarily a bad thing in our case, it had its use), and of course it all crashed after the personality was not there anymore, unlike the USSR (referring to Lenin/Stalin), Cuba (Castro), etc. Nationalism just came out and offered it self as the main "solution". Now I'm getting into whataboutism but I really highly doubt anything like this would have happened if Yugoslavia did not completely economically collapse in the late 80s, as there would not be that level of dissatisfaction and the need for an alternative solution would also not come out, as painfully as this at least. Basically Yugoslavia probably needed a cultural revolution, but Tito was not that guy lol

I'm also from a Yugoslav country. This is a very wide question, but to summarize; I will defend Yugoslavia to the death when talking about it with liberals, but endlessly critique it when talking about it with socialists who think it was perfect or look at it through a Yugo nostalgic lense.

He wants us to win the world cup, obviously

It's not about believing or not. I'm from an ex-Yugoslav country. Why were all of the leaders pro-US and supported by them during the civil wars? You could argue that was the only alternative, but getting foreign support during a separatist war means things. If we are talking FRY and the 2000s protests, what do you think bombing civilians does and do you know the background, training and backing of the organization behind the protests (Otpor)?

Again, I'm sure a lot of them are glad they got US support and such, but pretending the US (and Europe of course) didn't meddle into internal politics during Yugoslavia and had a considerable influence for it's downfall is just not true.

Yes lol

I don't know enough about it, but even a simple google search shows that the USSR rapidly industrialized the region (as expected). Still, I just don't know enough to talk about the specifics. Regarding religion, contrary to popular belief, personal religion was not an issue in the USSR. The issue was about the religious organizations and leaders mixing with state and local politics, as they have everywhere deeply and especially in Russia. If anything, Islam was more priviliged in the USSR compared to the Orthodox church, and definitely more than anywhere else in the west at the time. I'm sure some other comrades that are more familiar with the subject can provide a much better answer than this though.

The Fidel thing never happened. If you're referring to the thing that happened during the special period, he said something more along the lines of "if you want to go, go", meaning they won't be stopped. Around 40000 people left, which is not that relevant in a country that had 10.8 million people living in it at that time. That is like 0.3%. And of course saying they "swam" makes it sound even worse, of course no one actually swam to Miami.

Oh no! Look at all of those poor burned... clothes? I don't get what you're seeing here that I'm not

Could you define "authoritarian" for me?