Bulgaria and Yugoslavia unite

Sorry, that's effectively ASBs. Yugoslavia was an idiotic idea formed because Serbia wanted to dominate its Slavic brethren, was on the side of the victorious Allies, and President Wilson was a complete moron when it came to the actual circumstances of Europe. Seriously, sticking catholic Croats and orthodox Serbs (who have been fighting like cats and dogs for centuries) into the same country solely on the reasoning that they shared similar languages? There is a reason why Yugoslavia colapse in the 90's, the only thing holding the country together was Tito and his American backed army. (Yes, the USA backed Tito.)
Would Serb domination of OTL Yugoslavia be one reason for Tito to want a counterpoise in the form of Bulgarians who WEREN'T used to ruling the Croats, Bosnians, etc.?
 

Angel Heart

Banned
As far as Official languages are considered this mostly stands, because most of the vocabulary is mutually understandable though as time passes from when Yugoslavia fell apart younger generations find it hard to comprehend what their peers are saying.

Well at least I as a native Serbo-Croatian speaker had no problems in understanding my friends from Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia. IMO it is like the difference between British English and American English.


Would Serb domination of OTL Yugoslavia be one reason for Tito to want a counterpoise in the form of Bulgarians who WEREN'T used to ruling the Croats, Bosnians, etc.?

The Serbian domination was at least one reason why he split the Serbs into three republics and gave Kosovo and the Vojvodina autonomy status. You know Serbs are still today almost one thrid of the Ex-Yu population. So technically Tito might have been in favour of it.
 
Would not Bulgaria be divided into three parts (Pirin Macedonia, which would unite with other Macedonias) , Central Bulgaria and some other Bulgarian entity?
As for Yugoslavia, it started with Iliriyan movement (which was Croatian, not Serbian by the way; it started by thath name because they thought they were of Illiric origin or so). One of the Illiriyan agreement was creation of so called serbo-croatian language. Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic reformed Serbian language, Croatian came and asked for his help and voila - Serbo-Croatian is born. (Althought it would be better to have some neutral languages).
Dude, it is in wikipedia, just have to connect it all.
Ah yes, Tito wanted also Albania in federation, north Greece (but Stalin backed him up because of the promise to let Greece to West), Dimitrov wanted Romania...
Super Wank Balkan!
(And still do not know how would they fixed things with languages.
Esperanto anyone?
Have fun and a nice da to all.
 
Still thinking...
Made it like Switzerland with cantons, but that kind of state would be pain in the butt of Vatican (go for it!!).
:D
 

Giladis

Banned
Well at least I as a native Serbo-Croatian speaker had no problems in understanding my friends from Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia. IMO it is like the difference between British English and American English.

I am a native speaker as well and had a bit different experience, I can more easily understand older than younger generations. Only last summer when I met a couple of people from Niš, we had to come to an agreement that we would speak English after repeated question from both sides "what that word means?".

I guess the local dialects and words are making a greater influence now when the official languages have been separated.

On the basis of the vocabulary it could be compared to the English divide, but the grammar of the languages is what creates the true difference.



On topic:

With Yugoslavia and Bulgaria joined there would be a serious diferentiation between east and west on the number of people living in each part. Also it would be quite probable that Serbs would not be broken into 3 territories to keep the balance towards the Bulgarians. On the other hand should Bulgaria get divided it would be quite likely that Serbs would have gotten divided on even less favorable terms.

Should we add Albania to that union there would be even further rochades and the borders we know today mighty be unrecognisable to those living in that TL.

Results of census held in Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania between '45 and '48

Bulgarians 7 029 000
Serbs 6 547 117
Croats 3 784 353
Slovenians 1 425 532
Macedonians 810 126
Muslims(late Bosniaks) 808 921
Montenegrins 342 009
Albanians total 1 862 786

Albanians in Yu 750 431

For some reason a "Balkanoslavia" made up from Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania in my mind seams a more stable land than OTL Yu. was. There would not have been any one linguistic or ethnic dominant group and at the same time all would be watching so any one doesn not come to prominence. Yet all that would in my opinion only be possible if Tito stays with Stalin.

On the other hand what would the disolution of such "Balkanoslavia" would look like is almost imopssible to predict. As it would depent if any of the natiotions would feel slighted by living in such a state.

Croatian expatriot terroist groups could become a problem as the time would move on.

 
Dude, I understand most of the words (well, more words for one thing, as you noticed in Niš). But it was my "hobby" to learn differences, and basically, can understand all south slavic languages (Bulgarian and Macedonian if spoken slowly, but with reading I have no problem). Even Serbs from Banja Luka can talk different than the ones in Novi Sad.
But as Serbo-Croatian was made official language, probably new rules would be made to unify them a little bit more (Bulgaro-Slovene as second language?). =)
As I recall, most of internal borders in Yugoslavia were made to compensate and prevent another war (after WW2) between Serbs and Croats (look where that got us). Hm, if they want to compensate more... I know for sure a part of Bulgaria would be in Macedonia, but others... (rumors were they wanted to give part of Vojvodina to Hungary and part of Kosovo to Albania, but I did not check this one out yet).
Tito-Stalin split was made in a bad time: lack of Soviet support for western borders (while the Soviet Union friendly advised Yugoslavia not to demand parts of Hungary and Romania).
But another issue: nobody was clear about how unification would be alike: Yugoslavs wanted Bulgaria as another republic, Bulgars thought they will be treated equal partner with Yugoslavia (like in union).
Also, if this issue (Tito vs. Stalin) is not at this time, general Markos (from Greek communists) does not stand on the Stalin's side, does not lose support from Yugoslavia (and Great Britain gets mad if Greece is communistic state).
Havefun!
 
Sorry, that's effectively ASBs. Yugoslavia was an idiotic idea formed because Serbia wanted to dominate its Slavic brethren, was on the side of the victorious Allies, and President Wilson was a complete moron when it came to the actual circumstances of Europe. Seriously, sticking catholic Croats and orthodox Serbs (who have been fighting like cats and dogs for centuries) into the same country solely on the reasoning that they shared similar languages? There is a reason why Yugoslavia colapse in the 90's, the only thing holding the country together was Tito and his American backed army. (Yes, the USA backed Tito.)

I just want to clarify something.

Could you tell me of any instance of Croats and Serbs fighting eachother prior to the formation of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia? I am no apologist of Serb nationalism and Yugoslavia was certainly doomed from the begining, but the hatred between Serbs and Croats started only after the first world war. In fact in the 19th century there were many leading Croats and Serbs who viewed eachother with friendship. For example in the 1848 revolution the Croats and Serbs were allied against the Hungarians; and many early proponents of South Slavic unity (the Illyrian movement) were Croats themselves.

This hatred was by no means centuries old in 1921. In fact there wasn't really any.
 
Top