2006-08-20 12:08:55 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Although dictator, Tito was the only politician in modern Balkans history who succeeded in keeping South Slavic people together in a modern and progressive state. Yugoslavia was a great multicultural country with a strong middle class. People could travel all around the world not needing visas for most countries. They could also equally study at the most of remarkable world universities. Comparing Tito with Sadam is wrong. People in ex Yugoslavia used to have the most of basic human rights, moreover YU was one of the first countries in Europe where women were equally paid and given the right for vote.
Moreover, during the WW2, Tito joined the Allies. Thus he turned incidental local conflicts between "Cetnici" and "Ustase" to the Antifascist Revolution, clearly declaring its international character.
The reason why he was considered as a dictator is the fact how he treated his political opponents, mostly nationalists. The biggest threat for Yugoslav federation Tito recognized in local, regressive ethnic-nationalistic streams, what later appeared as truth. Suppressing those streams and stressing more global and more modern interests of future Yugoslavia, Tito didn't hesitate to use the most radical solutions like sending his opponents to Goli Otok, a kind of Yugoslav Gulag - which was not much democratic way. However, different from the rest of socialistic countries, Tito didn't close the borders of Yugoslavia to the West. He didn't see the Western culture and economy as a threat for Yugoslav self-governing economical system.
After he died, there was no politician in any of former Yugoslav countries, able to keep Yugoslav people together and adapt its further development to the recent European integration processes. Local, ethnic-national interests gain upon liberal democratic ones. Criminals took over the country putting people in isolation and misery... although it is safe now to travel to Croatia, Bosnia and Serbia, it will take a lot of time for those countries to accept its responsibilities for the war crimes, to find the way to punish the criminals, to overcome their local interests and differences and to find the best way to live as normal, democratic neighbors.
2006-08-21 08:33:16 · answer #1 · answered by Aurora 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Tito kept stability in former Yugoslavia. Look what happened since he died. The whole break up of former Yugoslavia. As some saying in here he was like Saddam what a load of rubbish.Those who say this don't have a clue about the history of this region of Europe
2006-08-20 13:20:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
He was a dictator who used a firm hand to control Yugoslavia but also held the country together by his force of personality. He was a good enough poker player to keep the Russians from invading Yugoslavia.
2006-08-20 12:15:52 · answer #3 · answered by Kenneth H 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Tito was like Sadam Hussen. He keep the country together in any way he could. Now it is all busted up. They both served a porpose.
Sadam keep Iraq from falling into civil war the only way he could. The country was really a bunch of tribes who did not like each other. They r still a bunch of tribes who don't like each other. But now there is no Sadam Hussen to keep them in place. Yugoslavia was about the same way.
Our governemnt in all it's wisdom thought that everybody would love them. So our country intruded. Now our government is stuck with the mess, as you can tell by the news. And we Americans have to pick up the bill.
Yugoslavia separated into different countries without Tito. And Iraq will too.
2006-08-20 12:38:40 · answer #4 · answered by mannmk7 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Harry Truman. even as he left workplace he became noticeably unpopular, yet historians immediately state he's between the great presidents we had. i wager he wasn't afraid to make the right decision, even with if it became unpopular. this is the mark of a real chief - each in certain situations you should make an unpopular decision. Many historians say he became the most suitable citizen president - we now have not something yet professional politicians and attorneys now. also, he did not use all his presidential perks. He became notorious for paying his own way and in no way abusing public money. He even retired to a similar living house in Independence Missouri that became his living house formerly he became President.
2016-11-30 21:43:09 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One of the greatest leaders of the 20th century
2015-03-05 10:04:00 · answer #6 · answered by jaroslav 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
many people like him.
but many hate him too
cause he ordered to kill many Macedonians in the name of serbian propaganda...
We Macedonian were betreaded by tito he gave the Aegean Macedonia to greece & Pirin Macedonia to Bulgaria just to keep his own serbo-croatian piese
2006-08-21 03:04:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋