Why was there so much infighting? Why couldn't it be one state? Were they culturally really that different...

Not like croatian nationalism wasnt a thing
But yes, serbs wanted to make krajina serbian even though it had more croats than serbs in it, for 3 centuries old reasons

Maybe, but the US is de facto segregated

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation#United_States_2

White flight and immigrants forming ethnic enclaves (damn Chinese) are still a thing

You have Slavic people speaking three different languages, writing in two different scripts, belonging to three different religions, all in one country. The second Yugoslavia was doomed not only because of the socialist system it was running (which made the collapse inevitable) but also because of rising radical nationalism which had at it roots the ethnic conflicts experienced during WW2; these were in return triggered by conflicts in the first Yugoslavia and had historical background as far back as the Serbian migrations during the times of the Turkish invasions and possibly even the Christian Schism.

>I think Americans are ultimately divided by ideology, and not by race.
Yes but if you look at geographic distribution of ideology you notice it's pretty contiguous. Meaning the leftist and rightist states could separate and go to war with each other and it would be sort of fair. While leftists have massively higher population density in California, southern Florida, New England etc the rightists have all the heartland and all the farmland and vast majority of the guns.

> Liberal homosexual urbanites vs rural rednecks armed to the teeth

"Fair"

It would take about 12 dudes and three pickup trucks to conquer Seattle.

I mean, I don't disagree.

I guess what the US military would decide to do in the event of a real left vs right war would be decisive since military could roflstomp either of them. Which I honestly don't know what they would do, on the one hand military is heavily right wing and conservative and would likely have little or no sympathy for the lliberal cause while on the other I don't see soldiers being willing to fire on US civilians on US soil.

But if those civilians were genuinely shooting at each other and killing each other then they'd sort of have to? But then I guess they'd try to detain and arrest as many of the civilians as possible but THEN US prisons are already over populated and there would be a few more than just few thousand arrests in the case of a civil war.

>Fair

lmao, leftists in America couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag

>conquest

youtube.com/watch?v=R2uISW4N35I
youtube.com/watch?v=vhL2UJtkxmI

Yugoslavia deserved a better ending then the one it got.

because USA is one of the youngest in the world. Slovenia, Croatia, BH, Serbia, Montenegro and Macedonia all have their own histories, old histories, cultures and sacrifice memories. All got invaded, all suffered occupation often, all are crossroads between two continents. Can't compare with the US.

>USA exists since 1776
>Macedonia exists since 1991

Alexander the Great was a Macedonian. 20/21 July 356 BC – 10/11 June 323 BC. Modern Macedonia was freed from Yugoslavia. oO

>Alexander the Great having anything to do with modern Macedonia which is just a post-Yugo state created by wayward Bulgarians

so you deny there is a macedonian culture ?

Yeah. It's just knockoff Bulgarian culture, just like USA is just knockoff Anglo culture.

you mistake on both Macedonia and USA. Travel before taking conclusions. Or at least learn about these countries histories and how they where built. Language is no sufficient to say they are anglo. English have an an island culture, americans don't

Pretty much this.
>Slovenia and Croatia are Catholic
>Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia are Orthodox
>Bosnia had a shaky history of being a place where Orthodox heresy was popular, then it was "converted" into Catholicism, and now is muslim
Although the languages are similar enough now, as far as I know.

Based Tito couldnt keep it together from the grave

This. Tito's only fault is that he died.

The people in former Yugoslav republics lived there for much longer than the settlers on US soil.

literally made kosovo and voivodina into autonomies so that they can have 3 + 1(montenegro) votes in the praty

That was Tito, not the Serbs.

I always find these arguments ludicrous, as Serbs were virtually absent from Yugoslavia's leadership after Rankovic was kicked out of the inner circle. The country's leader was Croat, his main ministers and policymakers were Croat and Slovene, and the last leaders before the war (Ante Markovic and Stjepan Mesic) were Croat as well.

The notion that Yugoslavia was Serb run is nothing short of revisionist propaganda. It was only in the last 3-4 years that Milosevic acquired his voting bloc and Serbs had significant authority.

Alexander the Greek was a Macedonian, meaning Greek-related tribe in modern day Greek/Slavic Macedonia.

Modern Macedonians are Serb/Bulgarian Slavs with no genetic, historical or cultural connection to the Greek Macedonians aside from living in the same geographical space they once occupied. By that logic, the US could claim that Pocahontas is American, or the Serbs could claim Constantine the Great was Serbian.

>30 posts in
>only autistic macedonians, no serb vs croat shitflinging yet

doing ok lads...

at any rate...
One thing to note is that before the 20th century and especially before the 19th century ideas of panslavism, the nations of Yugoslavia were very much in different cultural and political spheres.
Slovenes were considered habsburg crown land and basically germans in denial, the croats were under the hungarians, with bosnians and serbs being under the byzantines, turks and influenced to varying degrees.

One has to remember that the old west/east rome and later HRE/Byzantine (Turkish) border was a big cultural divider and it lasted from just about 100 years after the slavs arrived in the area to the dissolution of the A-H.

It was basically never meant to be, the first Yugoslavia was plagued by monarchical and serbian imperial ambitions, the second one by communist economic-political experiments and crazy debts.

I don't think you can really get a short, concise or even an agreeable answer on this, opinions are heavily divided still, but starting with reading about southern panslavic movements of the 1830 and 1848 or watching "The death of Yugoslavia" is a good start.

Bad troll. South Slavs arrived in then future former Yugoslavia in the 6th or 7th century AD. First Americans came to what is today US in 1609 but the colony wasn't really started until the late 19th century and that was as a British colony.

Why did the unification of Germany work out whereas the Yugoslavian one didn't?

Germans are hard working, civilized and sensible people while Yugoslavs are always uncivilized village people at heart.

having those autonomous was bad for us in the long run

Germany: one nation
Yugoslavia: various nations

And we must also consider that the Yugoslav states were in the past ruled by empires made of various nations (A-H and the Ottomans).

race=/=nationality

Germans were united throughout history in some way, just loosly. Yugoslavia came literally within 4 years due to WW1, while the people didnt feel like they want to be united. Do we need another world war to show who's the superior race?

Germans, while they generally weren't unified for most of their history, were a single cultural sphere and a cultural sphere with tremendous pull (especially when you consider than French are just Germans that adopted Latin language and customs).

Whereas South Slavs were never single unified cultural sphere after roughly 8th century. Slovenes and Croats got pulled towards the west, towards the Catholic southern German world (especially Slovenes that ended up ruled by south Germans for 1200 years, there's barely any difference between them and Austrians besides language), Serbs, Macedonians and Bulgars always got pulled towards the eastern Orthodox world that was often in competition or outright hostility with the western world and Bosnians were the overly stubborn mountain people that never ever wanted to conform and eventually ended up converting to Islam and being pulled towards Muslim, Middle Eastern world.

The great tragedy of South Slavs is that they are a single people pulled apart into three different directions by external imperialistic forces. You have to remember that the border between Western and Eastern Roman Empire pretty much was the modern border between Bosnia and Serbia.

>great tragedy
pffgt

I honestly think the military would side against the side that fomented the insurrection and made the first attacks on fellow citizens. You don't hear a lot of liberals talking about militias and 'cold dead hands', so I imagine it'd be the right-wing that might instigate.

Either way, I sincerely doubt anything like this will happen. People are too tied to comfortable lives and easy paychecks to support their families these days.