[Odiseizam]

@noemon with such mindset on balkan history we will never heal our wounds, and eventually someone will set the fire again and again, eg. just because this greek acting in my teen years when I was normally nationalist, it was matter of focusing, for a bit I didnt went in Epirus and set on fire a house with provocation graffiti like UCPMB is here, designation for chemerian liberalation army, what eventually is easy to be spinned and enough so the greek if not authorities then neonazis to be provoked so they would start bashing the 2 million albanians that are living in Greece now, and I know that was stupid idea that could triggered extra amount of violence, but believe me when Your ancestors are victims from Aegean Macedonia simply You are not hesitating to poure Your rage in Your teen years to the greek exceptionalism just like that, again it was close call, hm why even to exist as though anyway ...

so what to say just continue like that and You'll stay exceptional, but to whom Your Greek Delusions of clean past and sober mind, yet what wasnt case before and after ww-I, sadly that as such is ethnophiletistic and nationalistic risk on behalf of True Orthodox Unity later when we will need it ...

those aegean macedonia if they were bulgarians please tell me why they didnt sing song about Bulgaria, why they didnt praise bulgarian heroes, why they were exchanged at all and didnt went voluntary!? it was etnic cleansing noemon and You are trying to praise it as league of nations paraph, Yes it was thats why I dont blame our macedonian neighbors but the european beasts, they as balkan dogs were just executors! tell me do You know how was negotiated the partitioning of Macedonia first in Paris then in Bucharest, are You aware that the destiny of macedonians was drawn by cup of tea and ruler, try understand it was time of macedonian exodus that still is buried as politically correct historical event, what a hypocrisy of european democracy and human rights ...

[noemon]

noemon with such mindset on balkan history we will never heal our wounds

It is not my fault that these people identified as Bulgarians and were exchanged with Bulgaria 100 years ago. These are Bulgarian people mate. I do not have any wounds to heal with anyone for the 1.3 million Greeks that had the same fate as the 150k Bulgarians you feel that you are owed apologies for.

You are inventing wounds that are not even your own but even if they were, WW1 grievances with the League of Nations are things long gone now.

[Odiseizam]

@noemon they didnt identified themselves as bulgarians as now they dont as northmacedonians ... earlier were designated as such by the greek and bulgarian "exchangers", now the globalist pawns in the ex-Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia now north macedonia, and now even I cant express myself as macedonian who sees his country as Macedonia [1] at least that should be allowed on public forums, but funny its not ... so the exceptionalism propaganda war continues again and again ...

I am not inventing wounds, they are real but buried, and I am not so passionate to revoke them, but to point that buried like that eventually they will resurface in future ... probably more danger comes from the fact that like this Greece is missing the opportunity for greater evoking of Grace on its behalf as country, if we know that in Christianity burdened souls with hidden sins are not easily reachable for The Grace ... but as I can see greek nationalism dont care about such metaphysics, and its their Free Will, but in the end they shouldnt complain if that firebacks as extra influx of millions of migrants in the country ...

[noemon]

they didnt identified themselves as bulgarians as now they dont as northmacedonians ... earlier were designated as such by the greek and bulgarian "exchangers"

These people physically went to Bulgaria after WW1 and later came back again from Bulgaria during WW2 and again left for a second time for Bulgaria once Bulgaria capitulated in WW2.

If these people want to set the record straight it would be up to them to do.

It would be dishonourable to their own memories to deny them the real identity they had for themselves without their consent.

It is also totally absurd for a foreign nationality posing as the victim on the behalf of people of another nationality.

It is quite unreal that you do not recognise that people who moved in and out of Bulgaria as Bulgarians for the past 100 years were in fact Bulgarians and that I and the world is being rude to you for pointing this out to you.

I cant express myself as macedonian who sees his country as Macedonia

Taiwan cannot call itself China internationally either and she actually has a point and there is no dispute that both are the same ethnicity, you on the other have no point, we are not the same ethnicity as the Han Chinese are, to share a national name with; Tito tried to invade us during the Greek civil war after WW2 and you renamed a Serbian province 'Macedonia' to give your invasion some lipstick, you 're still stuck there on repeat as you clearly demonstrate. People move on, but you don't.

You find solace in your victimised world because that means you do not have to do anything to improve your condition.
The fact is that Macedonism is the wholesome appropriation of foreign nationals as the case with the Bulgarian people above demonstrates.

It's alt-history gone insane, at the centre is a major conspiracy under which the Greeks have been conspiring ever since the Athenians derided the Macedonians as uncouth in the BC to keep the Macedonian people intentionally hidden from the world as if they have been living in our basement for the past 2 millenia and we are refusing to let the real descendants of Alexander to spring out because that would evidently bring out the end of history. Apparently to achieve this major 2,5 thousand year old conspiracy we have been in league with the neopagan forces, freemasons, zionists, the illuminati and others to hide the real Alexander.

[Odiseizam]

@noemon how so the comparison with chinese? again denying the fact that before 1990 greeks never called themselves macedonians is ridiculous how now You pretend that You are, on top bashing us who through all the last 5 centuries under ottomans called ourself as macedonians and building own macedonian consciousness was slavic fantasy, no this recent greecization of Macedonia as greek is exactly that nationalistic phantasmagoria coz some fears that arose because the colonialist megali greek past!

saying that tito made Macedonia independent from the serbian occupation is totally absurd, You should read how macedonians organized themselves against serbian occupation earlier and bulgraian later in ww2, but also against the greek one before and after ww-I, later also in ww-II they saw opportunity for liberation of whole Macedonia but that simply was not doable because the yalta deal by which Greece stayed in british interest zone!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_North_Macedonia#World_War_II

https://makedonija.name/history/macedonia-and-second-world-war

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/IndependentMacedonia/MacedonianState.html

denying these facts as tito gave us state and identity is exactly brainwashing propaganda, what before was greek etiquette for macedonians as bulgarians, later became yugoslavs calling themselves macedonians, if this is not xenophoby then what is, greek exceptionalism still negating the basic human right to macedonians to feel and call themselves as they wish!!!

[noemon]

saying that tito made Macedonia independent from the serbian occupation is totally absurd

Tito took a Serbian province that was named 'Vardarska' and baptised it 'Macedonia', the whole province as it was, despite the fact that it had never been called that before, with the express intent to give some lipstick to his invasion of what was already Macedonia, Greece. This interference took place during the Greek Civil War after WW2. Tito failed and Macedonia remained a part of Greece.

macedonians as bulgarians, later became yugoslavs calling themselves macedonians, if this is not xenophoby then what is, greek exceptionalism still negating the basic human right to macedonians to feel and call themselves as they wish!!!

There are Greek Macedonians, Bulgarian Macedonians, Romanian Macedonians, Jewish Macedonians and Yugoslav Macedonians.

I am not denying anything from you by simply stating this factual reality, or by calling Bulgarian people who travelled in and out of Bulgaria as Bulgarians.

If reality denies you something perhaps that was never yours to begin with.

[Odiseizam]

@noemon Please how tito did that, how tito gave us something, no tito stole us the right for Independence through proyugoslavian installations among the macedonian communists ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Partisans#History

Macedonians from Vardardska Macedonia (that was under serb occupation after the 1913 partition of the region between our neighbors, btw they didnt called it Vardarska Marcedonia but Vardar Banovina) in the eve of ww-2 organized themselves ... I've suggested links with their own leadership that fought against nazi-vassal-bulgarians, they expelled them proclaim Independent Macedonia and till later decided to join the yugoslav federation, altho by cue because the first president of Macedonia the prodemocrat Metodiya Andonov Chento even didnt sent delegation on the first avnoy session in Jajce that was actually informal constituting of Yugoslavia, please tell me how then tito constituted Macedonia!?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fascist_Assembly_for_the_National_Liberation_of_Macedonia#Dispute

even after 1944 he was for Independent Macedonia and against yugoslav leadership, so how this goes in Your theory!?

Chento was for United Macedoia under protectorate of America

Soviet documents on the activity of the President of the ASNOM

The president of ASNOM and later president of his Presidium, Metodija Andonov-Cento, will soon come into conflict with the then Yugoslav authorities who will force him to leave all positions.

In November 1946, he was accused of fighting for a United Macedonia and of demanding the secession of the People's Republic of Macedonia from Yugoslavia. At the same time, the alleged attempt to flee across the border was attributed to him as a sin. He was therefore brought before a court and sentenced to 11 years in prison, where he remained until September 1955.

That the great Macedonian patriot could not reconcile Macedonia to be torn apart and that he wanted to unite it, is confirmed by some Soviet diplomatic documents presented to the public by Dr. Vlado Ivanovski ...

Two Soviet diplomats, V.P. Grigorov and I. Н. Ageev, from 13 to 23 July 1945 visited Macedonia and in Skopje on 20 July had a long conversation with the President of the Presidium of ASNOM, Metodija Andonov-Cento. The report to his embassy in Belgrade will read, among other things: "He (Chento) asked us if we had heard the radio announcement from the meeting of the three world leaders of the three major states that they had allegedly come to the conclusion of need for constituting independent Macedonia under the auspices of the United States ... The same question was asked by the secretary of ASNOM, Spirov, who came in while we talked to Andonov-Cento. he offered his opinion that is acceptable any variant of Macedonia as protectorate ussR or usA. just so it would be avoided protectorate under England.
Along he (Spirov) realizes the possibility of an independent Macedonia under the auspices of the United States, but with condition to be preserved the current organs of state power and the army ... Economic cooperation should be the basis for Macedonia's growth ... Chento basically did not oppose his colleague with anything ... however, he, Chento, expressed doubts that the current organs of state power could be preserved during the American protectorate, when America would take control of the Macedonian economy.

Less than a month later, after a conversation he had in Skopje with the two Soviet diplomats in mid-August, Metodija Andonov-Cento visited the Soviet embassy during his stay in Belgrade and spent two hours with a senior Soviet embassy official. In it, President Cento was very critical of the overall situation in Macedonia, primarily political and economic. Among other things, Cento informed the representative of the embassy about the alleged violation of the rule of law in Macedonia, about the familiarity in the management structures, about the lack of basic food products, about the exploitation of Macedonian goods and so on. He paid special attention to the reasons for leaving, i.e. as he said, "for the removal" of a larger group of political and military leaders from Macedonia and their sending to Belgrade, and listed the names of Mihajlo Apostolski, Kiro Gligorov, Vladimir Polezina, Lazar Sokolov, Petre Piruze, Venko Markovski ...

Naturally, after all these conversations he had with diplomats from the Soviet Union, which were probably known to the then Yugoslav authorities, began the chase after Metodija Andonov-Cento to be replaced and condemned. Chento was later rehabilitated by a decision of the Constitutional Court of SR Macedonia.

http://www.mn.mk/komentari/1479-Cento-bese-za-obedineta-Makedonija-pod-protektorat-na-Amerika

[noemon]

@noemon Please how tito did that, how tito gave us something, no tito stole us the right for Independence through proyugoslavian installations among the macedonian communists ...

Tito renamed the Serbian province of Vardarska to "Macedonia" to give his interference in the Greek Civil War a pretext.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonian_Partisans#History

This tells a story but mentions no event undertaken, possibly because there was none.

He (Chento) asked us if we had heard the radio announcement from the meeting of the three world leaders of the three major states that they had allegedly come to the conclusion of need for constituting independent Macedonia under the auspices of the United States ...

Reality:

(Full text of the Airgram)

Foreign Relations Vol. VIII, 868.014 / 26 Dec. 1944

"The Department has noted increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally from Bulgaria, but also from YugoslavPartisan and other sources, with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected state. This Government (of USA) considers talk of Macedonian "nation", Macedonian "Fatherland", or Macedonian "national consciousness" to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic, nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.
The approved policy of this Government is to oppose any revival of the Macedonian issue as related to Greece. The Greek section of Macedonia is largely inhabited by Greeks, and the Greek people are almost unanimously opposed to the creation of a Macedonian state. Allegations of serious Greek participation in any such agitation can be assumed to be false. This Government (of USA) would regard as responsible any Government or group of Gonernments tolerating or encouraging menacing or aggressive acts of "Macedonian forces" against Greece".

STETTINIUS U

[Odiseizam]

@noemon You are repeating Your reality again as some fact that only serves as propaganda pamphlet, why, simply after Yalta and the yugoslav federalization of the liberated part of Macedonia, usA was pushing stance that the macedonian question is closed, especially because the need for securing its aegean interests through Greece which was in their sphere of interests after Yalta, so obviously was flirting with greeks, altho in same time fearful of macedonians that were aligned with communists not just in Macedonia but also in the usA where even in '30s of the past century macedonians were aligned with commies "George Pirinsky played a key role in aligning both the American Slav Congress and the Macedonian People’s League with the International Workers Order, and by extension, the Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA)" p.192 - SALVATION ABROAD: MACEDONIAN MIGRATION TO NORTH AMERICA AND THE MAKING OF MODERN MACEDONIA, 1870-1970 dr.Gregory Michaelidis ~ [1]

yet earlier as always Macedonians were recognized by usA [1] there were even proud macedonians in the us army [1] simply macedonians were real and pushing for independence and recognition by the western world, here are european pleas [1] even there was recognition of the macedonian revolutionaries who in 1902 have kidnapped us-missionary for ransom coz their struggle (the quote bellow) and in the next year the Leader of The Krushevo Republic made clear statement to the greek newspaper acropolis who is he [1][1][1] simply the macedonian ethnic consciousness was not invented in ww2 but as I stated earlier it was present as separate from the rest of its neighbors in all ottoman rule, even before but for that I can offer medieval logic later ...

https://sp-zarov.medium.com/macedonian-slavs-claiming-the-ancients-is-not-a-recent-phenomenon-c83d443aaaa5

If the Macedonian taxpayers were compelled to pay the ransoms demanded and it were apparent that the burden of carrying on this guerrilla warfare must be borne by the people in whose alleged interest it is waged, the public sentiment in favor of such methods would be reversed and brigandage would be stamped and starved to death.18 Dickinson to Hill, November 3, 1902, p. 7, Dickinson Mss.
[1][1]

believe me, if tito wasnt british masonic stooge [1][1] macedonian partisans from Vardar Macedonia would join those from Aegean Macedonia and would went to liberate Salonica after what the United Macedonia would have become reality ... tho general Apostolski betrayed this idea and the troops were diverted to the srem front, but first by executing all that were against in Skopje on 7th of January 1945 [2][2] something that nowadays is spinned as bulgarian resistance coz back then tito have used such excuse for his executions [2][2] and altho this was seen as necessary or reasanable by the yugoslav commies, still knowing how Stalin was eager to exit on aegean sea macedonian partisans had have big chance, yet tito turned the back to ussR for the first time - "Why Srem and not Solun?" - p.130 [3] the second time was in case of aiding the aegean partisans in the greek civil war and that lead to their split [4][4]

so all in all Your facts noemon are just modern propaganda aimed to support the still alive greek exceptionalism!

Balkan States – Report 3 - January 29th, 1945 Brigadier Maclean to Sir Orme Sargent

I TRANSMIT herewith a report on Macedonia. F. MACLEAN British Military Mission, Belgrade, 7th January, 1945. Enclosure. Report No. 1.

1. Now that some time has elapsed since enemy forces evacuated Macedonia, an attempt can be made to asses the extent to which the Partisans have been able to implement their policy of creating a Macedonian federal unit. Although the Partisans are somewhat prone to discuss the problem as “solved” by the mere proclamation of Macedonia’s autonomy, it is clear that a real solution can only be achieved through a long process of educational, administrative and economic reconstruction.

2. It will be recalled that provision was made for full Macedonian autonomy by a decree passed at the Second Session of A.V.N.O.J. at Jaice in November 1943. By this decree Macedonia was accorded a status equal in all respects to that of Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia and Slovenia in the new federal Yugoslavia. The first step towards carrying this autonomy into effect was taken by the formation of the Anti-Fascist Assembly for the Liberation of Macedonia (A.S.N.O.M.) as the acting federal authority.

3. It appears, however, that there is to be a considerable difference in the degree of autonomy which the Partisans intend to allow in the various spheres of Macedonian national life. In cultural matters Macedonia is to be accorded immediate and complete autonomy; in political and administrative matters as much autonomy as can be digested; in economic life there are so far few signs of autonomy and, indeed, in opposite policy of centralized state control may well be introduced.

4. Macedonia’s cultural autonomy is finding its immediate expression in the official stimulus given to the “Macedonian language.” The later has hitherto been generally denied existence
20and has been claimed as a Serb or a Bulgar dialect according to the national prejudices of rival philosophies. Nova Makedonija and other papers are now regularly published in the Macedonian language and a place of special honour given to Macedonian poems and songs.

5. Special efforts are also been made to educate and develop the most backward sections of the population. The Anti-Fascist Women’s Front is reported to be receiving a special response from amongst the Macedonian women, and the backward Turkish minority is being courted by solemn celebration of the Feast of Bajram, by Moslem rallies held in Skopje and by frequent favourable publicity in the press.

6. The right to political and administrative autonomy is being more differently applied. In the first place, this right is by no means universally recognized by the other Yugoslav peoples, especially the Serbs in who the old great Serb conviction that there is no Macedonia but only a “southern Serbia” is still strong. Significant confirmation of this was recently afforded by an article published in Borba criticizing a meeting of educationalists at Nis who acquiesced in a statement made by one speaker to the effect that Macedonia was “just a part of Greater Serbia.” The article went on to complain that at another meeting of the Women’s Anti-Fascist Front, also held at Nis, a delegate from Macedonia was denied the much publicized right of making a speech in her own language.

7. If the Serbs are slow to admit the right of the Macedonians to equal partnership in the Yugoslav State, the Macedonians for their part, are not quick to forgive the Serbs for exploiting their former hegemony. Macedonia was generally regarded in pre-war Yugoslavia as a colony – a sort of south Slav Siberia to which corrupt, inefficient or recalcitrant civil servants were relegated. Their task in Macedonia was less to promote the well-being of the population than to propagate the Great Serb creed. The Macedonians are now to provide their own administrators. Although local government by the committee or “odbor” system reduces the number of officials required, it would seem that a shortage of experienced Macedonian civil servants must be felt for some time to come.

8. Perhaps more resented by the Macedonian people than the old Serbian officials were the Serbian colonists settled by Government grant on Macedonian soil. The great Serbian outlook of these colonists, together with the economic privileges they enjoyed, led to considerable ill-feeling among the Macedonian population. That this ill-feeling has not yet been wholly dissipated has been confidentially admitted by Father Vlada Zecevic, Commissar for the Interior in the National Committee, who has recently returned from a visit to Macedonia. Father Zecevic states that a redistribution of land, by which it is hoped to satisfy the needs of the poorer Macedonian peasantry without entirely dispossessing the Serb settlers, is being now carried through and is inevitably giving rise to some cases of personal resentment.

9. In the meantime economic conditions in Macedonia remain confused, as has been reported by my No. 791 of the 29th December quoting a report received from my mission there; “the economic situation here is bad largely through lack of transport and inefficiency. There is sufficient food in Macedonia but distribution problems are acute. The foregoing is probably the reason for the re-election of a new ministerial council of A.S.N.O.M., which is to take place on the 28th December.” The immediate implications of autonomy in the economic field cannot therefore be regarded as an unmixed blessing, and apart from this adjustment of claims between Serb settlers and poor Macedonian peasants it seems doubtful whether the Partisans will attempt a more extensive application of the principle. Indeed, the special character of Macedonian economy suggests an opposite tendency towards State centralism. In addition to opium and cotton cultivation, both of great potential value if wisely fostered by the State, the chief Macedonian crop is tobacco. This furnishes a valuable source of income to the State, who bought it through a monopoly from the peasant cultivators at fixed low prices. The State, however, played no part in organizing or improving cultivation, though the peasant could have been greatly assisted through expert advice in methods of cultivation, model plantations, financial help, co-operatives, &c. State assistance along these lines maybe expected to yield considerable economic results, and if Partisan controlled Yugoslavia is to attempt any promising experiment in agricultural collectivization it may well be in the tobacco fields in Macedonia.

10. That the path of Macedonian autonomy is still beset with thorny problems, both in the sphere of external and internal affairs, is suggested by Marshal Tito’s decision, already reported by telegram, to send his right-hand man Kardelj to attend the Second Session of A.S.N.O.M. held on the 28th of December, 1944. In his speech to the Assembly Kardelj congratulated the Macedonians on their newly won autonomy, but went on to warn them against becoming “giddy with success.” Their enemies, he asserted, were still active and the independence of small Powers was constantly threatened. “Vigilance was all the more necessary as, unfortunately, every-day experience showed that solemn undertakings not to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries” – and here Kardelj made a veil reference to events in Greece – “were in practice only treated as scraps of paper.” Macedonia’s enemies, he continued, were “the Great Bulgarian, Great Albanian, Great Serbian and Greek chauvinists” and their supporters abroad. Equally pernicious were the opposite tendencies towards separatism. Macedonia could only flourish, Kardelj concluded, within the framework of the new federal democratic Yugoslavia.

11. A similar creed was expressed by other speakers at the Assembly, notably by General Tempo-Vukmanovic, who asserted: “We have gained a victory in the field of battle and must now gain it on the field of politics. The danger which threatens to destroy the achievements of our great struggle lies in the efforts made to stir up chauvinism and separatism.” Tempo went on to stress the need for free and democratic elections by secret ballot and affirmed: “We did not fear to give arms to the people – still less shall we fear to give the people the vote.” Thus the official line taken by the Partisan speakers was the avoidance of any territorial claims or suggestion of any eventual South Slav federation and affirmation of a conciliatory and moderate policy of full democracy. These discrete utterances were in contrast with the wild polemics and even wilder territorial claims advanced by General Tempo and Dr. Vlahov in November on the subject which, under instructions from the foreign office, I made strong representations to Marshal Tito.

12. From this and from the various conversations which I have had with him on the subject of Macedonia, there can be little doubt that Tito fully realizes the delicate nature of the internal and external problems involved, and there is every indication that, for the present at any rate, he intends to tread cautiously. What future plans he (or possibly Moscow) has for this traditionally explosive region remains to be seen. He has always told me that he does not intend to prosecute any territorial claims he may have in this region before the Peace Conference, and that in the case of any disputed region he would be prepared to be guided by the results of a plebiscite. In the case of the ethnological patchwork of the Kosovo Polje he has on occasion mentioned the possibility of moving what is left of the Arnaut population, whose loyalty to the Germans was unshaken to the end, to Albania on bloc. The first speeches made by Tempo and Vlahov after the liberation of Macedonia referred to above show that at any rate some leading Macedonians would like to see the present frontiers of Macedonia extended at the expense of Greece and Bulgaria. 13. A possible solution to these problems would, of course, be the creation of a Federal State comprising Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, and even possibly Greece and Albania, with which the frontier of the ideal Macedonia could be firmly established, if not by mutual agreements, then by an over-ruling decision of the Central Federal Authority. On the other hand, even if no Balkan or South Slav Federation should be created it seems likely that, in view of the similarity of outlook of the regimes which either have or eventually will be set up in all these countries, the task of reaching, or if necessary imposing, settlement will present little difficulty. F. MACLEAN., 6th January, 1945

http://www.pollitecon.com/html/ebooks/risto-stefov/Declassified-Documents.pdf

[noemon]

IMRO 1902

Hristo Tatarchev (Macedonian and Bulgarian: Христо Татарчев; December 16, 1869 – January 5, 1952) was a Bulgarian doctor and revolutionary,[1][2][3][4] the first leader of the revolutionary movement in Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace.

Stuff about 1944

The Greek Civil War, 1944-1949

Tito renamed Vardarska to use newly created "Macedonia" as a pretext for his interference in the Greek civil war.

At that time Vukmanović was sent by Tito to macedonianize the Communist struggle in Macedonia, and to give it a new ethnic-Macedonian facade. One of his main achievements was that wartime pro-Bulgarian sentiments of the local communists to be receded into pro-Yugoslavism. As result the pro-Bulgarian Regional Committee of Communists in Macedonia was dissolved and replaced by a new Communist Party of Macedonia, as part of the Yugoslav Communist Party.[6]

The fact is that there are there are Greek Macedonians, Bulgarian Macedonians, Romanian Macedonians, Jewish Macedonians and Yugoslav Macedonians that were formerly Bulgarian speakers, you are the latter, and one of the smallest groups so you cannot monopolise a name that is objectively not representative of reality. We cannot change this to "Greek Macedonians, Bulgarian Macedonians, Romanian Macedonians, Jewish Macedonians and Macedonians" because that would be giving your nationalism both validity and primacy when neither are there.

[Odiseizam]

and here we come to the main fact about Greek Exceptionalism! Yes everyone can call themselves Macedonians and say they are Macedonia, coz various reasons, I dont mind that, its basic human right to selfdetermination, but not calling yourself Macedonian and in same time forbidding others to do so as greeks are doing is delusional! macedonians as always were cosmopolitans giving and sharing not grabbing and possessively holding something, in this case some monopoly on the ancient history, what as in matter of fact the greeks do, tho mostly as marketing touristic spinn, simply without the ancient macedonian empire in the exceptional touristic mosaic the story is not so special right!? even do the modern greeks have nothing with the ancient greeks also, not just as too mixed population later but even the language its not at all the same, aside the fact that even then macedonians were extra different from the inhabitants of the greek city states who despised them as barbarians!

calling me names or seeing me as yugoslav macedonian or else will not change the fact that Greece have occupied Macedonia in 1913 which before that was never greek, and along after made ethnic cleansing on big extent in different ways, what actually contributed to the later negation of any macedonian but only greek one! now even do I have provided plentiful facts that disputes your arguments, still You didnt refute them but play again the greek exceptional negation card! honestly I dont mind, its obvious that even do Republic Macedonia changed its name in Republic North Macedonia, still as greeks You are not satisfied with the result, simply You want no existence of any macedonians but only greek one, and its obvious why!

but hey wait a bit, bulgarians are even exceptional than You, their negation card rests on more suptil spinns and propaganda, misusing us in even greater brainwashing skim claiming that macedonias are bulgars, and what to say tell to the scots they are brits, what a hypocrisy!!! eventually the same argument is used by the greeks as you are bulgarians, but was not so announced like is now with bulgarian veto for eU accession! if not else lets say on behalf of Free Will as Christians your states mostly are getting less Grace, how that backfired and will backfire later is not mine to guess or judge, but can say just be aware that your exceptionalism in the end will bury your pride in unimaginable ways eg. those that have/are following the exceptional nationalistic lines have hardened their hearts and on the judgement day coz that they will be without excuse why they've hated so much their neighbors coz meaningless nationalistic pride!!! what else to say than dont be among them!

[noemon]

and here we come to the main fact about Greek Exceptionalism

This is not Greek exceptionalism:

Hristo Tatarchev (Macedonian and Bulgarian: Христо Татарчев; December 16, 1869 – January 5, 1952) was a Bulgarian doctor and revolutionary,[1][2][3][4] the first leader of the revolutionary movement in Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace.

Do you know why the organisation included Adrianople? Because its focus was on the Bulgarian population as per the calls of its self-declared Bulgarian founder.

Neither is anything else "greek exceptionalism" from my posts.

Exceptionalism is when you try to alter the identity of all these people in order to assume their identity as if wearing a coat.

[Odiseizam]

I'll be glad to inform You that bulgarians were as always eager to bribe bought or brainwash macedonians, especially those with political ambitions, many also saw chance for financial help or free arming opportunity and they didnt care how will present themselves so they would benefit for their cause of Free macedonia, still bulgarians have succeeded to infiltrate in IMRO so that lead to split of probulgarian and promacedonian faction which eventually ended in internal mutual annihilation!

https://archive.is/UK85T#selection-565.11-565.289

but what You need to grasp, also in case with Tatarchev Gruev Sandanski etc. probulgarian revolutionaries, is that they were already conditioned to believe that they are bulgarians from Macedonia, how so, is that possible somehow one ethnic toponym to be substituted with another or one to fell in other!? the problem with the bulgarian brainwashing became enormous after the abolishment of the Ohrid Archiepiscopy 1767 [1] after what macedonians havent other means to refute the greecization but to run to bulgarian exarchate which with russian help was first to escape the greek swaying of the slavic masses [2] altho what happened actually was introduction of bulgarian ethnophiletis in the response to the previous greek one [2] and new assimilation of the macedonians as bulgarians [3] and thus many macedonians were on direct attack of bugarization so they could runoff from greecization, in their view at least they would stay slavs, so many accepted this new substitute identity of slavic toponym in toponym, what again I'll say is hilarious argument by all means!!!

so indeed many macedonians expressed themselves afterwards as bulgarians, BUT MANY WERENT and it was their right, but defacto that was reflex from the bulgarian church assimilation, maybe with excuse either that or nothing! I'll repeat myself and make again same quoted point in this context, simply macedonians were victims en'masse on forceful assimilation in the past two centuries, so ...

the Balkan church leaders rather than attending to the spiritual well-being of the people were ‘the prime movers in every political campaign that it started [1]

... but the problem is that as such even in this century they still are through atill existsing greek and bulgarian exceptionalism, is this somehow the last quiet modern exodus of european negation of some ethnicity, I think as extent of negation on every level as cultural so as national this is unique example ...

[noemon]

bulgarians have succeeded to infiltrate in IMRO

A person who officially identified as Bulgarian founded IMARO with the stated intent "to unite Macedonia and Adrianople to mother Bulgaria".

As I said earlier this is alt-history gone insane. You have to change the identity of every single person you mention so that you can wear these people as if wearing a coat or a fur.

Saying that Tatarchev & Gruev were Bulgarian people who worked for the interests of Bulgaria is not "Greek exceptionalism" as you keep shouting, it's just the truth as stated by themselves. 'Exceptional nationalism' is when one tries to alter people's identities so that they can be worn as fashion accessories.

[Odiseizam]

'Exceptional nationalism' is when one tries to alter people's identities so that they can be worn as fashion accessories.

exactly that happened, for once check the footnoted links I have provided! what is true about IMRO Gotse Delchev was removed by Dame Gruev who was bulgarian mason in the Svetlost lodge, so he was even greater treated not just on the macedonian cause but also to Orthodoxy ... I am more like spiritual than revolutionary type of macedonian so for me role model would be Gyorgiya Pulevski ... not that I dont respect the sacrifice of the ilinden revolutionaries, but they were mislead and misused by the bulgarian state so they would rise too early the macedonia insurrection like that later opening room for free rush&grab by the neighbors dividing Macedonia easily, even more than wrong because many took the bulgarian side, its something like nowadays isis they were backed by saudis by turks by americans but in the end eventually when didnt made their victory lasting fell in forgetfulness ...

tell me why I need to identify myself with them, if people are historically blind that is their matter, Free Will what else to say, but now patronizing me that whole IMRO was probulgarian that is propaganda with excatly with altering intentions on behalf of macedonian selfconsciousness! even DameG and JaneS were macedonians even more HristoT but drawn by the opportunity to have backing from some state they usered to state openly that they are bulgarians, probably hoping that after Free United Macedonia became reality they would be own on their own ...

what is symptomatic, is whether greek and bulgarians have such intential deal as animosity towards macedonians because 1. like that greeks had buffer, if bulgaria want to reach more southern, but also 2. when and if (what later happened) greeks have strength to expel macedonians upnorth, so from one side macedonians were under attack of greekization so they would be buffer, and from other on bulgarization so macedonians would become spare infantry ...

when in question is the period before 1913, its interesting that greeks because this risk of admitting that macedonians are separate from bulgarians, were forced to see all balkan slavs as threat, so they designated all of them as bulgarians ... some say that greeks saw all the slavs ethnically as bulgars i.e. pejorative vulgars as similarly in antiquity what was barbarians [1] hm maybe there is even worst analogy [1] altho think this is not strong theory, but in my opinion bulgarian exachate and later kingdom supported by austrian lodges who also supported serbian kingdom in the beginning (think obrenovic clan) contributed for greeks bulgarians to become archenemy, and it was easier macedonians to be seen as such so the common greek would be fearful that some foreign country would invade him, it was propaganda induced hatrate that also would have compacting effect in those places where the slav greekization was present ... what to say ridiculous fear reflex that hit serbs too ...

The Serbian academic, Petar Dragasevic, was in Thessaly and Greece at the end of the 19th century, saying: "Greeks call me Bulgarian, even though I am a Serb from Serbia ... the word Bulgarian means Slav" (Petar Dragasevic "Macedonian Slavs", Belgrade 1890 ). The Serbian propagandist, Cvijic, the fighter for the Serbization of the Macedonians, was among the Aegean Macedonians in Greece as well, so for his impressions, he wrote: The Greeks call also the Serbs as Bulgarians , if they don't know that they are from Serbia ... The name Serb for the Greek villager is only a political term ... and the Bulgarian is an ethnographic term ... half'hellenized macedonians are called themselves Chifchii, talk little bit greek, but consider themselves as Greeks "(Professor Jovan Cvijić (1865-1927), work "Macedonian Slavs, observations on the ethnography of Macedonian Slavs ", Gece Kona Bookstore, Belgrade 1906)

https://mkd-mcd.blogspot.com/2010_07_01_archive.html

[noemon]

greeks bulgarians to become archenemy

Your story does not exist without this necessary ingredient because you are trying to transfer Greek and Bulgarian people and attack them for calling themselves Greek and Bulgarian. Your narrative is aggressive like that because it was created as propaganda for war during WW2, your narrative is the only WW2 narrative that remains as a guiding national principle in Europe today.

The reason Greek people saw the Slavic people in Macedonia as Bulgarians was because Bulgarian is their language and because they identified with the Bulgarian nation and Church.

A Greek person mistaking a Serb for a Bulgarian sometime in the past is not evidence that Greeks mislabelled communities by calling them Bulgarian and that these communities who never said otherwise are also complicit with the Greeks and that they are both in a grande conspiracy to hide you guys from the world.

If a community calls itself Bulgarian and is recognised as such by others then there is no reason calling it anything else.

[Odiseizam]

@noemon Please provid source where bulgarian language was bulgarian in middle ages, the language was Slavic i.e. south slavic dialects ... definitely macedonian dialects are close to the bulgarian but serbian too, macedonian dialects are transitory between serbian and bulgarian one yet distinct, on other hand slav people identified themselves as different by the toponyms, thus those slavs that were living in Macedonia were Macedonians, any intentional misleading that they were toponym in toponym is due to historical forgery and biased interpretation later by the new nationalistic vibe as from Greece so as from Bulgaria for collonial reasons presented above in my posts ...

... in romanticism because the new nations (except macedonian) were in hands of the big powers who were seeking not just to dismantle the Ottoman Empire but also position themselves through proxies more widely in the balkan peninsula, simply resulted in european imposed territory clash between the new balkan nations, macedonians didnt had that luck because as I've said earlier Ottoman Empire kept strong grip on Macedonia, thus macedonians couldnt force their way out and make own state and nation, and later they become victim of harsh assimilation when ottomans were expelled and Macedonia divided ...

here is how twisted were circumstances before the enlightenment era of nationalism, that lead to our forcible assimilation of macedonians i.e. this struggle was present even before romanticism, in ottoman times mostly on church level coz greater jurisdiction mostly like slavic vs greek battle for Macedonia and Iliricum, altho this strech till late'antiquity when Constantinople Patriarchate even in the first centuries was in jurisdiction battle with Vatican for Macedonia and Iliricum, what was put at halt in 6th century by Justinian-I who made Justiniana Prima as middlemen with vasilevs decree for new Archepyscopy in Scopia (now capital of modern north Macedonia) [1] this emergence later in 10th century was transferred as juridical inheritance by Tsar Samoil with papal decree on level of Ohrid Patriarchate in his macedonian capital Ohrid [1] and here comes all the confusion whether macedonians were bulgars, Samoil eager to get crown as opposition to Byzantium flea to vatican for church approval but vatican accepted this with ultimatum that he would be Tsar of Macedonia and Bulgaria, in the decree exactly is stated the crown like that what probably was done so the popes could have later greater influence in balkans, and Samoil accepted, but defacto then slavs officially didnt saw themselves as bulgars or macedonians but simply slavs, so ethnicity wasnt some kind of partial national identity but broader slavic ethnic one, yet nowadays bulgarian historiographers say that was not true because some medieval byzantian authors classified samoil army as bulgars, yet this was mocking reflex coz the original bulgarian state was not slavic but gagauz turkic, but also it was reflex of byzantian forgery of the macedonian atiquity as own inheritance ... falsification in history was almost norm due to hidden intentions behind the scenes, this was practice in whole history eg. later the vaticvan forgerarium [1][1] but also was case with Byzantium, as is show in the work quoted bellow, where actually in 10th adn 11th centuries greeks were after the famous macedonian past so they bestowed the etiquette bulgarian to macedonian slavs, so the byzantian"macedonian"dynasty could get more proud heritage ... and nowadays this excuse is still used so we would be negated as separate existance from bulgarians who actually dont know whta they are in same time claiming that they are trakians coz turistic marketing [1] then turko-mongols coz their first Khan Asparuh [2] after maybe macedono'armenians coz Samoil [3] and in the end bulgarians as by toponym! I dont mind whatever they like they can be its their Free Will, but saying me I am bulgarian is kleptomania of my Free Will for own identity, coz obvious shameful past reasons greeks support this too ...

THE IDEOLOGICAL DIMENSION OF THE COLLISION BETWEEN VASILIY II AND SAMUIL
Dr. Mitko B. Panov ~ UKIM Skopje !Institute of National History

...

page 7

The acceptance of the argued views for the later addition of the created epithet “Bulgaroslayer” to the legend of Vasily II, as well as for the existence of the presumed political agreement between Vasily II and Samuil, opens more complementary aspects of the collision, in whose basis they are
consists of ideology. This effort, in fact, pretends to show that not only
the epithet “Bugaroslayer” but also the terms “Bulgarians” and “Bulgaria” for identification of Samuel and his newly formed state in Macedonia, were gentle construction of Byzantium.

The Byzantine political and ecclesiastical establishment, after 1018, in fact, constructed an original idea of ​​Samuel's state, through the introduction of the new meaning of "Bulgarian" terminology in the political and religious sense. This was done in order to demonstrate the political and ecclesiastical domination of Constantinople, after the liquidation of Samuel's state and the restoration of power in most of the Balkans. Based on this, it can be stated that the created ideology of the Byzantine dynasty and the political and church elite in Constantinople were the key factors that predetermined the projected terminological representation in the Byzantine sources for the new state, formed in Macedonia in 969, as and for the collision itself between Basil and Samuel, who later took on a legendary character.

As initial basis for the analysis of the ideological dimension of the legendary clash between Basil II and Samuel, its crucial the formation of a Byzantine dynasty by the emperor Basil I (867-886) .
The key ideological component of the new dynasty became the fabricated genealogy of blood ties with the Armenian Arsakids, as well as with Constantine I and Alexander the Great.
The constructed connection of the dynasty with Constantine I as the founder of the Christian ideology in Byzantium, with the ancient imperial domination of Alexander and the Armenian Arsakids, was complementary to the tendency to create an ideological notion to glorify the humble origins of Basilian I. Such an ideology was directly reflected in the
early representation for the representatives of the dynasty, who were represented and identified as "Macedonians" from "Macedonia".
For the creation of such an identity representation, in addition to the fabricated
genealogy connection with Alexander the Great, also was used the origin of Basil I on the thema of Macedonia in western Thrace.
The created ideological concept, developed in particular by Constantine VII Perfirogenit, was
in the function of the political propaganda of the dynasty, which had a direct reflection on the complexity of the use of the terms "Macedonia" and "Macedonians" in the 10th century (Panov, 2009a: 150-160; Panov, 2010: 43-66). That directly reflected in the terminological use and spatial thought of the byzantian historians later when identifying the new state formed by Samoil in Macedonia, in 969 ...

Seen from this perspective, it is not surprising that following the logic of the ideology of the Byzantine dynasty and their identity representation with the Macedonian terminology, the Byzantine historians, who were for the most part the representatives of the elite in Constantinople, when identifiing the newly formed Samoils state. tendentiously avoided using the terms "Macedonia" and "Macedonians".
That was understandable, considering that the same
terms were used to identify the Byzantine emperors of
the Macedonian dynasty, which would cause identity confusion in the
Byzantian documentation.
It is indicative that the avoidance of macedonian terminological appeal applied exclusively to the part of Macedonia, which represented the sail of Samuel's state.

on other hand, For the part of the macedonian territory which was under Byzantine control, as well as for the Thema of Macedonia in western Thrace, which included members of that thema army, byzantines continued to use the macedonian terminology, what was compatible with the ideology of the Byzantine dynasty.

An in-depth critical analysis of Byzantine sources shows that they sought to make a terminological distinction between Samuel's state, which covered greater part of the region Macedonia, and the rest of macedonian territory controlled by Byzantium, with the use of the general ethnonyms "Mizi", "Scythians" or "barbarians". Pritoa,
It is possible that the Byzantine authors, who were contemporaries of Samuel, did not use the terms "Bulgaria" or "Bulgarians" to identify "others" in the newly formed state of Macedonia, but only the terms "Mizi", "Scythians" or "barbarians".
...
http://www.qb.mk/iml/images/dokumenti/kniga1.pdf

[noemon]

The Carnegie Report which was founded to record all the atrocities of the Balkan Wars, describes all the slavic villages in Macedonia as "Bulgarian" in 1913.

This was a mixed committee, and its members were composed, by Austrian, German, British, French, American and Russian experts.

The Dillingham Immigration Commission of the USA(1907-1910), that records "Macedonians" among the immigrants, clarifies:



See page 92 in the Harvard Library. And then click on page 27 to read the entry under 'Bulgarian'.

IMRO got divided as to whether the Bulgarians should go for Unification or Independence. It is worth noting that even the Independence movement of IMRO, clarified that the Governor shall be ethnic-Bulgarian, and the official language of the independent "Macedonian country" shall be Bulgarian.

The Leaders & Founders explained the reasons behind this:

We talked a long time about the goal of this organization and at last we fixed it on autonomy of Macedonia with the priority of the Bulgarian element. We couldn't accept the position for "direct joining to Bulgaria" because we saw that it would meet big difficulties by reason of confrontation of the Great powers and the aspirations of the neighbouring small countries and Turkey. It passed through our thoughts that one autonomous Macedonia could easier unite with Bulgaria subsequently and if the worst comes to the worst, that it could play a role as a unificating link of a federation of Balkan people. The region of Adrianople, as far as I remember, didn't take part in our program, and I think the idea to add it to the autonomous Macedonia came later.

The revolutionary organization should be established within Macedonia and should act there, so that the Greeks and Serbs couldn't label it as a tool of the Bulgarian government.
Its founders should be locals and living in Macedonia.
The political motto of the organization should be the autonomy of Macedonia.
The organization should be secret and independent, without any links with the governments of the liberated neighborly states, and
From the Macedonian emigration in Bulgaria and the Bulgarian society, only moral and material help for the struggle of the Macedonian revolutionaries should be required.

You mentioned Sandansky's terrorism earlier.

In the New York Times April 12, 1902 news from the New York Times Archive we read:

[Odiseizam]

again only exceptional propaganda noemon, cherrypicking "arguments" that suits Your narative whether toponym in toponym is affordable for me as was for probulgarian imro revolutionaries who saw easy exit by colaboration with bulgarian state! again showing examples that were suitable for particular narative of geopolitics back then! if macedonians werent reality in Greece then why in 1925 they got own Abecedar as school book in macedonian dialect?

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

You cant escape from Your own trap, even cant ignore the facts, still You choose to deny me right on own self'determination, why, I mean what gain You have from denying me!? this is not exceptionalism, this is not even xenophoby, this is ethnic misanthropy, even more this is absurd!!!

I provided Pulevsky example of 19th century macedonian consciousness, and You are ignoring that fact, there were macedonians that saw themselves nonbulgarians, those who were on other hand I provided evidence why, still its Free Will whether or not they were manipulated or assimilated by the bulgarian propaganda, as was case with many progreek slav macedonians that fell under the greek agitprop spells!

on top, this dont dispute anyhow any mine right to identify as I wish, logically by the toponym where I was born Macedonia thus Macedonian, we are talking here about basic human right! if others want to call themselves this or that, or in the past had have own understanding of its ethnicity, that is their right! I've provided historical examples that show macedonians calling themselves macedonians, You provided such that saw themselves as bulgarians, even if there is historical status quo on this basis somehow, that dont gives You the right as greeks or bulgarians to negate my right to see myself as I wish! what You are doing stil in the 21st century as neighbors is ongoing modern propaganda assimilation!

[noemon]

if macedonians werent reality in Greece then why in 1925 they got own Abecedar as school book in macedonian dialect?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abecedar

Reality:

Miletich, Lyubomir. New latin alphabet for Macedonian Bulgarians under Greece, Macedonian review, 1925

The book was commissioned by the Department for the Education of Foreign-Speakers in the Greek Ministry of Education. It was submitted by the Greek government to the League of Nations to support its assertion that it fulfilled obligations towards the Bulgarian minority.[4]

You cant escape from Your own trap, even cant ignore the facts,

The fact is that the Slavic speakers that used to reside in Macedonia Greece called themselves Bulgarians. They accepted to go to Bulgaria when the 2 countries exchanged populations. They were also called Bulgarians by the League of Nations, by the Carnegie report that included Russian officials, they were called Bulgarians by the New York Times in 1902, they were called Bulgarians by the leaders and founders of the IMARO organisation.

I am not insulting you or denying your your human rights by showing what these Bulgarian people called their own selves and what they were called by others.

It is not a Greek conspiracy as you claim to call these people 'Bulgarian'.

In Macedonia, there are Greek Macedonians, Bulgarian Macedonians, Romanian Macedonians, Jewish Macedonians and Yugoslav Macedonians. Why are you insulted by this reality?