English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2 answers

I think Tito in Yugoslavia had the right idea.

Yugoslavia had two major ethnic groups that hated and killed one another - Croats and Serbs. There was also a smaller group, ethnic Albanians who were majority Muslims. Tito was a Croat, leading a majority Serb force, that was also highly respected in the Muslim areas. He had members of ALL the groups in his army.

The Yugoslav guerrilla army that he led kicked the Nazis out of their country WITHOUT help from American, British or Soviet troops, unlike most of Europe.

When their army came to town, they would take the local leader of the Nazis out into the town square and shoot him.

They would then take the leader of the majority ethnic group's militia out into the town square and shoot him.

Knowing that minority ethnic groups were oppressed, they would then offer the leader of the minority group's militia a job in the new government. If he refused, OR if he accepted but then gave unfair advantages to his own ethnic group, they would take him out into the town square and -- you guessed it! Shoot him.

Force is the only language that racists and ethnic haters understand.

You will notice that once this excellent policy was abandoned, Yugoslavia broke up into fighting ethnic states.

2007-12-17 15:42:58 · answer #1 · answered by Dont Call Me Dude 7 · 0 0

the way the resources, power and status has been divided is unjust and illegitimate and as a result people identify by IE; race, religion, gender, etc. and group in order to fight over the crumbs. on the surface it seems as if they are fighting over IE, religion and the public media and authority also make it look as that is the reason as well. so in order to enhance the relations between these groups has to include the redistribution of resources, power and status. peace

2007-12-18 00:34:32 · answer #2 · answered by macmanf4j 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers