![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
ArchiveĀ 1 | ArchiveĀ 2 | ArchiveĀ 3 | ā | ArchiveĀ 5 |
PIO, stop adding the same information you have been trying to add to the Tito page. What you are stating is hardly NPOV, not to mention unfactual. I have yet to see any proof of what you have added, and will revert it until you get a valid source for the information.
Ethnic cleansing in Croatia is a method which was used by Croats several times to change the balance in national composition of Croatia in twentieth century. It went hand in hand with genocide against the Serbs and foibe massacres of the Italians in WWII, but the method was used again in '91-'95 Croatian secession war.
Croatia, as it is today, consisted of several regions with very different history. The northern part of this country belonged to Austro-Hungarian Empire and Hungary, while the Dalmatian coast had a fate similar to the other parts of Adriatic coast, and cities like Venice. Republic of Ragusa was one example of such a city state, and it was later included in Austro-Hungarian Empire after the conquest of Napoleon.
Dalmatia had a distinct population, which consisted of Italians and Slavs. Italians were mostly concentrated in cities, like Zara, Fiume, Ragusa and other. Istria was always a part of Italy, up to 1945 when it was occupied by the Croatian Tito's communists. But even further to the south, around 400,000 Italians lived, which constituted around 40% of the population of Dalmatia. The remaining population was mainly Slavic, roughly half of which were Serbs, and the rest were Catholic Dalmatians, later turned into Croats. Serbs were also concentrated in Krayina region which extended further to the north, along the boundary with Turkish Empire. They lived there for centuries, and there were around a million of them in the present day Croatia in 1900. Out of 4 million people almost half were not Croats, even if one counts Dalmatian Catholics, indeed all Slavic Catholics, as Croats.
After WWI, Italy lost part of the Dalmatian coast. It remained in Istria and some other towns, like Zara further to the south. The Serbian forces, who victoriously defeated the Austro Hungarian army at the Solun front marched all way to the Slovenia, and the country, dominated by the victorious Serbs, was created.
In WWII, Italians regained control of most of the Dalmatian coast, despite some of it being incorporated in the notorious NDH. The NDH was involved in the genocide against the Serbs, and almost a million of them were killed in present day Croatia and Bosnia, which were both included in this Nazi puppet state. Their plan was to get rid of the Serbs, by killing one third, expelling the other third and assimilating the rest. The first goal was achieved in WWII by the Ustasha genocide.
However, in 1943, with the fall of Mussolini's Italy, Germany regained control of the Dalmatian coast, while partisans engaged in the first wave of killings of Italians in the notorious foiba pits. The worst atrocities perpetuated by Croatian communists were done however in 1945, with German withdrawing. Tito's communists killed several thousand Italians and foiba's were filled with Italian bodies. They occupied Istria, cities of Trieste, Fiume, historical capital of Dalmatia Zara, which were always Italian, and expelled several hundred thousand of Italians in the first wave of ethnic cleansing.
Some Germans, who lived in Slavonia, were also expelled, but their number was not so large as Germans were a small minority there. While Germans were Nazis up to '45, Italians fought on the side of Allies since '43, like they did in the WWI.
The final episode of ethnic cleansing happened in '95, where all of the Krajina Serbs were expelled, while thousands of mostly elderly and hapeless were mercilesly killed. Out of over 500,000 Serbs present in Croatia in '91, most of who lost someone in the genocide in WWII. Out of them, only around 100,000 Serbs remained, mostly in cities where they were further discriminated against, just as the remaining Italians are forcibly assimilated and slowly expelled from Croatia after WWII.
Thus, the 95% population of present day Croatia claims to be purely Croat. This is up from 82% in the 1991, 68% after WWII, and 35% (52% if one counts all Slavic Catholics) after WWI. The results of ethnical cleansing in Croatia are indeed impactful.Dalmatian language, a dialect of Italian is now extinct. āPreceding unsigned comment added by GiovaniGiovany ( talk ā¢ contribs) 17:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
We need to figure out some way of solving the edit war that is currently going on here. Apparently, one side is consistently trying to impose an Italian POV over a clear Yugoslav POV that had previously taken over. I appeal to both for joint cooperation so that we don't waste time on useless and endless reverts. E.Cogoy 05:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I apologize as I did a major editing, trying to write a few NPOV paragraphs, and forgot to log in. There is still a Reference section that should be added. FrancescoMazzucotelli 19:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I consider simple history!-- PIO 17:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I've verified. The persecutions among Istrians with Italian ethnicity was caused suddenly the Armistice (1943-1945) by local populations following revenge's desire caused by Fascism and its nationalist politic. A second phase (started in the 1945) was caused by Tito and Yugoslav Army who had the aim to acquire Trieste before other Allied Forces. In this last situation the aim was not an revenge, but a political aim. If Allied Forces had been persuaded that the Slav ethnic presence was a majority (or the entirety) in comparison with Italian presence, the Istria and Trieste would been assigned easily to Yugoslavia. The aim of Tito was political, but it was present. In fact in the following years Tito became aware that in some parts of Istria these aims were destroying the economic structure because a lot of Italians were traders or artisans, and he changed his politic. -- Ilario 10:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Now i add in article some identical informations of foibe massacres: in fact is the same historic context!-- PIO 11:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
It surprises me that some people have not even read this article fully before making changes to it ad-hoc. The London Memorandum of 1954 gave to the ethnic Italians either the choice of opting to leave (the so-called optants) or staying. These exiles were to be given compensation for their loss of property and other indemnity by the Italian state under the terms of the peace treaties. Get it now? Now, read the definition of Ethnic cleansing and tell me if it matches up. Nobody was forced to leave, and they were given compensation if they did leave. Also, with regards to the Tito, he was not the leader until 1954 (see List_of_leaders_of_communist_Yugoslavia). You, PIO/Jxy, see bent on accusing anything you can think of that is negative. -- Zivan56 20:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
In 1954 the exodus was over since a long time. The refugees were already in Italy or somewhere else. They had no choice whatsoever. They fled in mass under threat of mass murder, of becoming apolids, of living in a Communist country with no right. They've lost everything, lived in refugees camps and never came back. Many people suffered this kind of tragedies at the end of many wars. Now it's time to acknowledge rights and wrongs on both sides. Italians did it already. They do not want any kind of revenge. Southern Slavs should give up all this hostility and hatred. āPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.62.178.67 ( talk) 15:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC) About command of Broz and ethnic cleansing you must apprehending above statements of Ilario and mine: Tito's command expression is in foibe massacres too and ethnic cleansing is in see also section of foibe too! Your interpretation about optants is wrong because you ignore Prominent Italian historians like..... This article is simple an other part of same historic event of foibe: both were ethnic cleansing for prominent Italian historians! Your changes are POV very much because you are an admirer of dictator Broz and you are negative obstructionist. Moreover in my next change i approve your some words added in article to verify your real intention of neutral collaboration! In Slovenia you can find this book: Tudi mi smo umrli za domovino.-- PIO 16:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Prominent Italian historians - need I say more? Either way, it is very clear you have an inherent bias against Tito, no matter what "sources" you provide. Anybody can find any source with any POV easily, but finding more than a few is what will allow you to prove your argument (especially with non-peer reviewed sources) -- Zivan56 19:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
You don't know history! You are alone troublesome admirer of dictator Broz in this discussion: an administrator needs block you! Moreover in my next change i use different words.-- PIO 16:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
So, despite the fact that 5 people so far have reverted some of your edits, you still think you are right? Two of them were Italian, so you can't say they were "admirers." You are the one that clearly needs to be blocked, its just wikipedia bureaucracy that keeps them from doing it. Furthemore, I don't even want to start with your violations of the English language; I suggest taking an in depth course instead of doing ad-hoc translation from Italian. -- Zivan56 06:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Che facciamo, comunichiamo in italiano? LEO
DIRETTORE stop your propaganda against Italians!!!! LEO 25 August 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.95.202 ( talk) 17:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
Dear Sirs, I am afraid you are neglecting a simple truth: in Istria and Dalmatia lived and prospered a vast population who defined themselves Italian.They were majority in many towns (e.g. Fiume (Rjieka) and Pola (Pula)). They left their houses in mass after WWII. In 1948 most of them had left. They never came back. They lost everything. They had no compensation whatsoever. They flew after some mass murders accomplished by yugoslav army and irregulars. The aim was to free those places from any "foreign" presence. This is widely accepted by most Italian and non-Italian scholars. Probably something different is taught in Slovenian and Croatian schools. I understand the nationalistic reasons, but if we blame Turkey for denial of Armenian genocide, we should blame Croatia and Slovenia in the same way. āPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.62.178.67 ( talk) 11:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
If my Italian collegues would merely list their proposed changes, we could get to work on getting this version of theirs finallized. On the other hand, your uncompromising editing would lead to an edit war (I will never let you bully people into your version without a consensus). Let us therefore discuss the issues, Slavic communist barbarian to Italian fascist oppresors. Please? DIREKTOR 15:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
PIO!, my favourite fascist oppresor (a joke, of course, see my post above)! Here's the situation, PIO: I had my version, you had your version. I edited your version somewhat to produce a compromise version. This compromise version is here to be the article while we discuss changes. Are you willing/able to discuss changes? I repeat: the version I made will stay only until we can reach a civilized democratic consensus. You edited the compromise version so I reverted that edit, for now, only until we reach conenesus. Can you discuss in English? Will you discuss in English?
DIREKTOR 10:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
This is not gonna work, PIO. I'm not gonna let you push your fanatical POV. Get this: I am not "denying" anything! Nowhere did I write that the foibe massacres or the exodus did not occur. I am merely questioning (not denying!) the connection between the two. I also rewrote your Italian city names that were historically Slavic after World War 2 and I removed your obvious personal oppinions added to a text copy-pasted from a real source.
FYI:
I did not report you for your (frequent) previous personal attacks, but I believe I may now be forced to do so. I will never let you push your version without consensus, remember that. DIREKTOR 18:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
1) I have no consensus because you (and your buddies) categoricly refuse to discuss anything.
2) Tito is not a criminal dictator (officially, he was the most liberal Socialist leader of the eastern bloc), nor even a textbook dictator for that matter. I support his ideals because they kept the second Yugoslavia together.
3) I am an Italian (Venetian) by ancstry so it would be kind of STUPID if I was an "anti-Italian". I merely answered to Italian military boasting and utterly riddiculous war threats of several users (LOL) by stating several historic facts about Italian miltary exploits.
4) Look it up on the UN websites. The Istrian exodus was not ethnic cleansing, the people left VOLUNTARILY (hell! even the Croatian
Operation Storm isn't ethnic cleansing).
5) And finally, before you bother another Admin, please remember that there is currently an Arbitration taking place on this and other articles, that you add historically incorrect data (example: "Fiume" was "Rijeka" after WW2, when the exodus took place etc...), and that you are about to be reported for your repeated, open, and unmistakable personal attacks against me and other editors. DIREKTOR 09:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
"Italians" and "Italianization" should be used only when referring to Mussolini's propaganda. It should not be used to describe the historical ethnicity of Istrians, and Venetians for that matter.
Just because Istrians spoke a romance-language for centuries, they were not speaking an "Italian" dialect. Even Venetian (that subplanted the autoctonous Istrian tongue) is not an "Italian" dialect. Romance languages (Spanish, Portuguese, French, Catalan, Venet, etc...) are not Italian dialects. They are all sister languages with closer ties than Slavic ones, but it does not make them a dialect of one another.
The Venet tongues spoken from Verona to Istria are very similar to one another, and belong to the same language, with a distinct literature dating back to the 9th century (that's right, the Verona's riddle was written in Venet). Dante Alighieri himself, in his De Vulgari Eloquentia highlighted the different language spoken in Verona, Vicenza, Venice and Istria.
I object to historically referring to Venetians as Italians. They were an indipendent country who fought fiercely against Italians, often enlisting Sclavones in their army. Istrians were part of the Venet Republic as far back as the 12th Century, much before Padua, Vicenza, and Verona joined. Culturally Venice looked to the East (the Greek world, Bisantium and the East) rather than Tuscany, Genoa and Rome. By the way, during the League of Cambrai, Venice had to fight against the Italians, the Germans, the French and the Spanish,...and won.
When Napoleon inveaded the Venet mainland, it was the Dalmatians and the Istrians who insisted to temporarily bring the Venet government across the Adriatic. Most of the military resistance to Napoleon in the Venet mainland was fought by Dalmatians. The Venet Republic was almost more theirs than anyone's. So much for the "occupied lands" theory. Even under the Austrian Empire, Venet, Istrian and Dalmatians fought together in the 1866 Battle of Lissa (Vis) against the Italians,...and won.
When Italy annexed Venetia (thanks to their alliance to Prussia against Austria) they made a referendum-farce, where people voting NO had to use a different ballot box. Less than a quarter of the population voted, and the result would have made any dictatorship blush (646thousand YES, 69 NO). And by the way, Istrians did not even vote in the referendum and remained under Austria until World War I. After millenia (because the Roman Regio X went from Mantua to Pola), Venets and Istrians were divided. 138.88.200.242 22:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not here to question the objective intent of Italian contributors to this page. But after a century of propaganda to Italianize the Venetian territories, by default it has become customary to refer to non-Slavs as Italians, even by the Istrians (and Dalmatians) themselves. If there are no objections I will correct the ethnic references. 138.88.200.242 19:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Venetian were and are italians, hethnically, historically and culturally. The original population of Venice was from Roman cities of Italian peninsula fleeing successive waves of Germanic and Huns invasions. The city has always been strongly supportive of italian cause even, as most of the italian city, it has a distiguished, proud, and glorious history and identity. Everything in Istria and Dalmatia, except the gifts given by the nature, is a product of the italian civilization and culture. Sadly, balcanic nationalism prevent many to admit this disturbing thruth.-- 151.100.9.229 ( talk) 15:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
the only balcanic nationalism i see here comes from the italian penninsula. "italian civilization" is an oxymoron, as it's based on exploitation and conquering of other civilizations, so do consider refraining from posting all your propaganda crap, this shit is getting old.
esse quam videri - to be rather than to seem (
talk) 00:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone has an odd view of history and doesn't fear to express ridiculous opinions. Stating that italian civilization is based on exploitation and conquering of other civilizations it is one of silliest things ever said. Check any subject concerning human intellectual activity (art, science....) and be prepared to be appaled by the massive italian creative contribution to any fields during the centuries....The coastline cities of Istria and Dalmatia have always been under italian cultural influence by any point of view. Slavs were peasants from the inland forcibly introduced by foreigner power in order to diluite and weaken italian presence in those towns. I don't have problems saying that alto adige (Sudtyrol) region in italy is a territory more related to german than to italian culture, the only difference is that when it was annexed to Italy after one of the bloody war ever fought none in Italy thought to take revenge against innocent indigenous population by throwing them in alpine crevasse,something different happened somewhere else some years after ( the term foibe sound you familiar?....) with italian population... but you know balcanic are very good at cleaning...especially ethnically!!! āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.100.9.229 ( talk) 13:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know wich is the pourpose to pass the strange idea that Firefighters are a combattant forces (never been nowere!!!) but anyone like you can easely enlarge the picture by your/his self and will see that there are naked bodies on the ground, 1 firefighter wearing a head (like a spelealogist!) light close to a civilian (on his left), two womans (on his right) an a bust of a man in an Anglo-american tunic with Boots (yes... for who are attempting to make some propaganda the Italians were dressing whool Jacket, shirt&tie and the infamous cardboard shoes during the war Russian front included!!!...) nevertheless is impossible that this picture was taken in 1943 just and simply because the first bodies exumations took place in the A zone of the Trieste Free Territoy since 1945 managed by English troops and firefighters! Nickel Chromo 17:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
We can always use support against radical Serb (Äetnik) and (especially) Italian theses in Wikipedia.
Arrivederci, signore Nickel Chromo... DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
This block will not end the dispute, I'm afraid. While I realise I am an involved party here, it is nevertheless a certain objective fact that the other side in this conflict (namely,
User:PIO, in his favourite IP "form") refused repeated requests for discussion on the article even when he faced a tiresome edit war if he refused. It is therefore highly unlikely that he is about to start cooperating now, when his version is temporarily enforced by the block. I also doubt that he is going to give up on this, since he has patiently waited for the longer semi-block to expire.
Once again, even though I realise I am an involved party, I feel I must reccomend the reinstatement of the old prudent semi-block as the only means to secure an end to this edit war.
DIREKTOR 09:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
My efforts to achieve consensus through discussion are clear at the History and the Discussion pages. The accusations brought forth by User:PIO are, of course, utterly riddiculous. My only intention was to engage in civil discussion at some time.
In case of further fanciful accusations, note that only User:PIO, myself an User:Nickel Chromo (in a much smaller cappacity) participated in the dispute about this version of the article. PIO would not hesitate to go back ten years to find someone who confronted me in some way, in order to create the illusion of me being the invading madman confronted by a whole pack of editors. He has even claimed there are a dozen editors confronting me (at
User:Riana's talkpage), wich is an outright lie.
DIREKTOR 09:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Related administrators I report list of editors trying to stop DIREKTOR's POV edits since 08:58, 12 July 2007, when he started:
Dear administrators do you think are they few users???? PIO, 11:50 14 September 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.91.76 ( talk) 11:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
, :D , at least three of those IPs are your sockpuppets....
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
DIREKTOR we can collaborate like as for
foibe massacres.
PIO, 15:04 17 September 2007 āPreceding
unsigned comment added by
151.33.88.231 (
talk) 15:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, this version that was blocked on is so POV towards one side that it requires a thourough makeover. Nickel Chromo does not like it either. I'm not saying "no", though.
Let's first clear a couple of things up:
So you insist on irrational behaviour and unsourced edits? (I hope this will not destroy our work on the Foibe massacres article version.) You must understand that claims and accusations of ethnic cleansing and forced migration are very hot stuff that absolutely needs reliable proof and sources. Do not start another edit-ar! Discuss!
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 17:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, for God's sake! I know, your IPs start with 151.33.**.***. Just respond to my previous post. Do you insist on ethnic cleansing and forced migration allegations without proper unbiased sources?
Italian sources are just as reliable as Yugoslav ones. The problem is they contradict, we need to move beyond that, we need things like encyclopedias and books by objective emotionally uninvloved (NON-ITALIAN, NON-YUGOSLAV) authors.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Giove, discussion is currently taking place (between PIO and myself) on the more acceptable version for both sides, do not edit widly and without consultation as you may endanger the fragile "ceasefire" (or "cease", if you will). DIREKTOR ( TALK) 16:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Just for the record Giove, your undiscussed and incorrect edits won't last. I'm backing down for the time being to discuss with PIO and maybe reach a consensus.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 15:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
DIREKTOR needs to reach a consensus between all involved users not between you and myself!!!! Points of ethnic cleansing and political cleansing against Italian people were discussed above and we can to wait opinions of other users.
PIO, 16:26 25 September 2007
I know that PIO, it just seed to me that Giove did not respect our efforts and went on to edit as he pleased. All I'm saying is that he should do what we do.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone isn't happy even with this POV version. I thought this matter was finally closed! DIREKTOR ( TALK) 20:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
You really are "confused", as you say. I'm allowed to edit in all articles. Also I'm not "under warning by administrators", where do you get that from? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Look Leo, this version was worked hard on by both User:PIO and myself. It is POV even without your edits. I thought we finished this matter! Why are you reopening this? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Here I have seen some sources that are disputable:
There is an English translation of the book that can be viewed ob Google Books here
That book is disaster as well and unreliable for several resons.It is full of errors and scandalous(at the moments fascistoid interpretations )
-- Anto ( talk) 20:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
-- Anto ( talk) 20:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
It would be comical if it was not tragical. Ā :( Brothers RadiÄ as Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday vs. PuniÅ”a RaÄiÄ as Billy the Kid
-- Anto ( talk) 21:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Anto is total out of this talk: this page is for exodus not for that Petacco's book!!!! Your personal opinions against fascist idiots or communist idiots or anarchist idiots or socialist idiots are propaganda too!!!! LEO, 24 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.86.203 ( talk) 17:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to punctuate how reliable are Italian sources here. Petacco's book mentions Raoul Pupo's book as one of the source so I guess we can find the same mistakes there.
Perhaps
Giorgio Napolitano has found an inspitation for his
speech in Petacco's book.
Also , there is no any non-italian book quoted hereĀ !!
-- Anto ( talk) 19:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Amico croato, ti rispondo in italiano perchĆØ conosci questa lingua e il mio inglese non ĆØ buono: complimenti per la tua buona conoscenza di certe lingue! Il problema dell'attendibilitĆ e neutralitĆ delle fonti riguarda l'essenza di questo progetto ma se i libri sono di autori solo italiani ĆØ perchĆØ gli storici italiani hanno studiato meglio di tutti le situazioni delle foibe quindi esodo! Se tu conosci libri di autori croati, sloveni, serbi, montenegrini e altri puoi inserire i collegamenti con tali libri: la citazione dei libri di autori non italiani ĆØ valida per la neutralitĆ dell'articolo! Puoi citare autori e testi nella sezione historical debate. Io disprezzo Napolitano perchĆØ ĆØ un vecchio sovietico e servitore fedele dei russi ma proprio per questo la sua dichiarazione ha importanza storica: il vecchio comunista Napolitano ha riconosciuto la pulizia etnica che i comunisti capeggiati dallo schifoso Palmiro Togliatti negavano. Condivido il tuo parere riguardo il comunismo the worst political movement in 20th century e il cambiamento della bandiera australiana quando ci sarĆ la Repubblica Australiana: forse un giorno mi trasferirĆ² nella splendida isola australe. Puoi comunicare a DIREKTOR che il suo fanatismo ĆØ noto a tutti e la sua ostinazione sarĆ causa della sua messa al bando!!!! LEO, 25 nov 2007
"Former times"? What does that mean specificly? Also, why did you remove the link and turn it into a reference? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Another matter, in the recently added "Periods of the exodus" section I found the 1943 exodus period, is there actual confirmation of some kind mass Italian emmigration in 1943, I mean this was wartime!?
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 22:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I did several edits. They are mainly evident corrections of historical errors. They are self evident from the wikilinks. They do not affect the "political" POV of the article.-- Giovanni Giove ( talk) 13:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Giovanni approvo il tuo testo e integrerĆ²: collaboriamo con l'amico sloveno che mi sembra in buona fede.
Slovenian friend AlasdairGreen27,
this proposal by DIREKTOR or message number 4 is vandalism!!!! In next edit I add other links and fix link of Slovenian historian Darovec: your link is uncorrected then impossible to visualize! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding
unsigned comment added by
151.67.85.5 (
talk) 14:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words about me, Leo. The link is
http://www2.arnes.si/~mkralj/istra-history/naslovna.html
Feel free to correct it if it doesn't work for some reason.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk) 14:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
User:AlasdairGreen27, your revert seems edit warring and I don't understand: why???? I insert sentences of Slovenian historian Darovec and you remove: this is non plus ultra!!!! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 17:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
LEO is here, editing from 151-numbered IPs. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 16:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
What is your problem???? Why removed my version???? LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 16:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I saw your messages above and in my talk IP: Gp75motorsports, this is not a war against inexistence sockpuppets!!!! Citizen of world, stay calm!!!! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 17:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
There's this bit near the end of the article:
Some famous postwar exiles from territories include actresses
Alida Valli and
Laura Antonelli, race driver
Mario Andretti, singer
Sergio Endrigo, boxer
Nino Benvenuti, tennis player
Orlando Sirola, stylist
Ottavio Missoni and chef
Lidia Bastianich.
That's just a list of famous(ish) Italians that were born in Istria. Having read all their Wikis, only two -
Mario Andretti and
Lidia Bastianich - mention that their families left as part of the exodus. For all we know, the others might still be there if they hadn't gone on to have successful careers elsewhere.
I'd say this bit needs some attention. Re-write or delete, in my view.
AlasdairGreen27 23:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've just added some references for Sirola and Endrigo mentioning that they were indeed refugees. It turns out that Missoni spent years as a prisoner of war in Egypt and then went straight to Trieste, and Alida Valli had left the region long before the war. Couldn't find much about the others, though. Ko'oy 03:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
For famous postwar exiles I will insert a section. AlasdairGreen27, formulation of articles is standard: never references stay in bottom! For section periods of exodus I fix years 1943 beginning and 1960 finish: beginning of exodus was in wartime because many Italian or Istrian fascists, after fascist regime collapsed, escaped. I will restore sentences of Slovenian historian Darovec in section historical debate; AlasdairGreen27, if you support this historian, I support too but I insert him and you remove: your action is strange very much!!!! LEO, 1 December 2007
AlasdairGreen27, good and dear person, list of exiles is important: I restore it. You have no valid reason for remove list.-- PIO ( talk) 18:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Amico sloveno AlasdairGreen27, so che capisci l'italiano quindi possiamo capirci meglio. Tu non hai valido motivo per rimuovere la lista perchĆØ la puoi leggere anche nella versione Wiki in italiano. Se Alida Valli e altri hanno lasciato prima la regione non ĆØ significativo poichĆØ poi non sono potuti tornarci: anche se son andati via prima, poi non riuscirono a tornare in Istria e Dalmazia a causa della politica anti-italiana del dittatore Tito. Se vuoi collegamenti a siti con informazioni puoi leggere la versione Wiki in italiano di questo articolo. Ripristino la lista.-- PIO ( talk) 18:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
You can read here or in alphabetical list sources pertinent Alida Valli, Laura Antonelli, Fulvio Tomizza, Agostino Straulino and many others. List in article is incomplete: needs to add painter Mario Gasperini, composer Luigi DonorĆ and others.-- PIO ( talk) 10:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Slovenian friend, we have incomprehension pertinet conception of postwar exiles definition what means. I explained reason for to consider Alida Valli and others postwar exiles too: you can read here. It's not Italian POV: because for these exiles was impossible the return in their homes confiscated by communist dictatorship of Josip Broz. No reason for remove just one of persons in list.-- PIO ( talk) 14:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Now now, PIO, a post war exile is a post war exile, in other words, somebody that left after the war. And saying that somebody is an exile because they couldn't return is pure and simple speculation - who says they wanted to return? Alida Valli was doing very nicely in her acting career, so was quite happy in Hollywood, I expect - and is wrong, anyway. There was nothing to stop people returning. To say anything else is just Italian propaganda, exactly as is Italian Wikipedia. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 17:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
You are in error. Propaganda was made by historians under command of Josip Broz. In Italian Wikipedia seems propaganda only for some anti-Italians editors and sure you are not anti-Italian.-- PIO ( talk) 15:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Basil, I've read and reverted your edit marked "let's put thing in perspective, long live to truth and death to political correctness". Unfortunately, what you see as the truth is to others simply propaganda. You simply cannot change "voluntary diaspora" to "forced diaspora" without adding any sources to support your statement and expect nobody to notice. Similarly, you have removed balanced sentences which leave possibilities on the table such as "Their motives for leaving may have been fear of reprisals, economic motives, or ethnically based" and changed it to "Their motive for leaving was mostly fear of reprisals" as though this is a simple statement of fact. Well, just a moment, please. Were you there? Did you personally interview people as they were leaving asking them to tick a particular box on your questionnaire?
As I have said previously on this talk page, the purpose of this article is to help people who don't know to find out more or less what happened. Not to say one side or the other was right or wrong, good or bad. So therefore, if you casually throw your POV into the article (with statements like "long live to truth and death to political correctness") then you can expect to have them reverted. Mostly, you should bear in mind that controversial material carrying no sources whatsoever has no place here.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk) 09:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Slovenian friend, I agree your reasoning pertinent sources but not all integration of Basil II is wrong. In next edit I add section -Slovenian, Croatian and Serb view pertinent exodus- with warning to Italian editors for not edit in this section: we all collaborate for accurate and sourced article.-- PIO ( talk) 15:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I have fully read the article page and this discussion page with its many petty debates and arguements but in general I think this is a balanced article which airs all view points and appears to be based on interpretation of facts rather than personal opinions. I am a British person living in Trieste but I frequently visit Slovenia and Croatia. I'm of the view that neither 'side' is entirely clean, wrongs have been committed by Italians, Triestines, Slovenes and Croats (and therefore also Yugoslavs). Istria and its surroundings are the most beautiful parts of the world and the people whether they are Italian, Slovene or Croatian are truly great. Thank god we now live in a peaceful European Union (which should include Croatia as soon as possible) and where the borders can once again become invisible. 213.230.130.56 ( talk) 18:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
2 simple questions, and I'd also like a simple answers:
QUESTION 1, Is president Napolitano a respected historian, by any chance? or is he a historical layman?
QUESTION 2, Does the stated oppinion of laymen (no matter their position) matter in these complex historical disputes? -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 17:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The declarations of an Italian official may be includable in the Italian Wiki, but they are of no concern to the wider public that wants professional historians to answer these matters. (One exclamation mark would have sufficed) -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 02:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I changed the voice, because the Treaty of Rome (1983) speaks only about the property in the former
Free Territory of Trieste! Here
[4] you can see the text (in italian) of the treaty:
ART. 1 of the Annex 1: I BENI, DIRITTI ED INTERESSI INDICATI NEL CITATO ART. 4 DEL TRATTATO DI OSIMO SONO CONSIDERATI COME DEFINITIVAMENTE ACQUISITI DALLA REPUBBLICA SOCIALISTA FEDERATIVA DI JUGOSLAVIA.
Free translation: All the properties inclused in the art. 4 of the Treaty of Osimo are Yugoslav.
ART. 2 IN VISTA DI QUANTO PRECEDE, IL CONSIGLIO ESECUTIVO FEDERALE DELLA ASSEMBLEA DELLA RSF DI JUGOSLAVIA VERSERĆ AL GOVERNO ITALIANO A TITOLO DI INDENNIZZO LA SOMMA DI 110 MILIONI DI DOLLARI USA.
Free translation: For this properties, the Yugoslavia have to paid 110.000.000 US$.
Now, let's see the art. 4 of the Treaty of Osimo
[5]:
ARTICOLO 4 I due governi concluderanno, al piĆ¹ presto possibile, un Accordo relativo ad un indennizzo globale e forfettario che sia equo ed accettabile dalle due Parti, dei beni, diritti ed interessi delle persone fisiche e giuridiche italiane, situati nella parte del territorio indicata all'articolo 21 del Trattato di Pace con l'Italia del 10 febbraio 1947, compresa nelle frontiere della Repubblica Socialista Federativa di Jugoslavia, che hanno fatto oggetto di misure di nazionalizzazione o di esproprio o di altri provvedimenti restrittivi da parte delle AutoritĆ militari, civili o locali jugoslave, a partire dalla data dell'ingresso delle Forze Armate Jugoslave nel suddetto territorio.
Free translation: Yugoslavia have to pay the due for the properties inclused in the art.21 of the Treaty of Peace with Italy.
Article 21 of the Treaty of Peace (
Scroll down!): There is hereby constituted the Free Territory of Trieste, consisting of the area lying between the Adriatic Sea and the boundaries defined in Articles 4 and 22 of the present Treaty. The Free Territory of Trieste is recognized by the Allied and Associated Powers and by Italy, which agree that its integrity and independence shall be assured by the Security Council of the United Nations.
So: the treaty of 1983 speaks only about the properties in the
Free Territory of Trieste.
Italy have more laws regarding the property reparations. My family received FEW money more than fifty years ago, from Italy. If you want, I can write a complete legal/historic report about property reparations here in Italy, but I need a translator (I speak a terrible English)! --
Luigi 28 (
talk) 18:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Luigi, as you and I discussed last December at Talk:Istrian_exodus#Famous_Italians_from_Istria, just being from an Italian family and being born in Istria does not make a person an exile. I'll go through the list and see what's what. If they really left Istria at the time in question that's no problem. But last time I went through the list there was all manner of nonsense on it, with people who'd left the region long before WWII on it. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 16:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
None of the stuff you wrote actually means anything. You're not discussing. Prove that: 1) they are, undoubtedly, Italian, 2) that they were born in Istria/Dalmatia, and 3) that they moved due to the so-called "exodus", before writing them up. If they are as "famous" as you say, then it should not be hard to find a biographical reference on the World Wide Web. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 21:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this [6], when you stated that official data from the Slovenian Statistical Office shows that between 1953 and 1961 the numbers of ethnic Italians living in Slovenia - almost exclusively in Slovenian Istria and along the Italian border - actually increased by nearly 360%, maybe you don't know that in 1953 the Free Territory of Trieste, weren't Slovenian (only from 1954, after the London Memorandum). The Slovenian census of 1953 doesn't registered the Italians of Koper/Capodistria, Piran/Pirano, Izola/Isola, almost all the Italians in the today Slovenia! Tomorrow I'll correct the voice, obviously all my edit will be well sourced!-- Luigi 28 ( talk) 22:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Luigi, KlemenÄiÄ is a good source, but you should bear in mind that he is very firm that "We have to emphasize that the data of the Yugoslav censuses are unreliable in relation to the real number of Italians, since many members of the Italian minority, for various reasons, chose āNationally Undeclaredā or their regional identity (mostly as āIstriansā)". AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 07:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Right: now I add that quote.-- Luigi 28 ( talk) 08:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
It wasn't a voluntary free-will departure. It's incredible the this part of text is write on Wikipedia -- En.mat003 ( talk) 09:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Read here, it everything write: http://www.lefoibe.it/approfondimenti/dossier/02-puliziaetnica.htm -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Among the reasons for emigration, one should above all mention the oppression by the regime, which with its totalitarian nature made it impossible for people to freely express their national identity, oppose the redistribution of the leading national and social roles in Istria, and refuse major changes in the economy. The oppressed and frightened people were not so much attracted by the propaganda of the local Italian agencies, spread without any special instructions from the Italian government, but more by the neighboring democratic Italian nation state, although the Italian government more than once exerted its influence to stop or at least restrict immigration. One should also not ignore the deterioration of the living conditions, which was typical of socialist societies, and the break of contacts with Trieste, which made Italians in Istria fear that they would find themselves on the wrong side of the "iron curtain". The Italian population recognised the impossibility of retaining its national identity - with the conglomerate of the living habits and feelings, exceeding the mere political and ideological dimension - in the situation offered by the Yugoslav state, and experienced emigration as the choice of freedom. Within the broader historical framework, the special features of the Italian emigration from Istria belong to a more general process of the formation of nation states on ethnically mixed territories, which led to the disintegration of the multilingual and multicultural reality in Central and South Eastern Europe. The fact that Italians emigrated from a federal state, based on the internationalist ideology, demonstrates that national differences and discrepancies within the framework of the Communist social and political systems continuously and profoundly conditioned the political developments. [7] (SLOVENE-ITALIAN RELATIONS 1880-1956. Report of the Slovene-Italian historical and cultural commission. Koper-Capodistria, July 25th, 2000. Published by: Krožek PREMIK, Trst-Trieste with permission of Nova Revija Trst-Trieste, January 2004)-- 151.48.47.96 ( talk) 12:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, IP 151.48.47.96, a useful contribution. Thank you. This one, which is already in the article, is also helpful. In its 1996 report on 'Local self-government, territorial integrity and protection of minorities' the
Council of Europe's European Commission for Democracy through Law (the
Venice Commission), i.e. an unimpeachably reliable source, put it that "a great majority of the local Italians, Italianites (of Slavic and other origin), many thousands of Slovenes and of nationally undefined bilingual 'Istrians' used their legal right from the peace treaty to 'opt out' of the Yugoslav controlled part of Istria. In several waves they moved to Italy and elsewhere (also overseas) and claimed Italian or other citizenship. The mass exodus of the optanti (or esuli as they were called in Italy) from 'godless communist Yugoslavia' was actively encouraged by the Italian authorities, Italian radio and the
Roman Catholic bishop of Trieste. After this huge drain, the numerical strength of the remaining Italian minority became stable".
[8].
If we are collecting reliable English language sources in order to see about improving this article, I'd like to add
[9], a thoughtful and scholarly introduction to a much longer book;
[10]
which discusses the Italian government's encouragement of people to leave and the violence and intimidation suffered by Slavs at the hands of extremists (p144, 145); this article
[11] by a professor at the American University of Rome which includes valuable first hand testimony and puts it into context of admissions that (some of) those who suffered reprisals had collaborated first with the Italian and the German occupying forces; lastly, this one
[12] by a British professor should be required reading for all before they even think of editing this article. In short, therefore, once everyone has read that lot, we can see that:
Any simplistic POV-motivated attempt to say in this article "Tito's butchery and savagery led to about 350,000 poor terrified innocent Italians being murdered/expelled from barbaric Yugoslavia" will be rejected. The article is much better than it was last year. The improvement of it will continue. All additions will be based on scholarly reliable sources. That's all. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 13:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) There is no "of course" about it, my friend. First, there is absolutely no indication that the article has been edited in any way, except by Prof Thomassen himself. You are confusing the publication with its publisher, Acta Histriae [15], which, irrespective of the location in which it is based, is undoubtedly a scholarly and a useful source in that it publishes numerous texts written by academics on a variety of themes. I very much doubt that the publisher has the temerity to edit any of the material submitted to it. Perhaps, though, you may wish to ask Thomassen, as his e-mail address is very clearly on the first page. Next, if your post was open to misinterpretation, forgive me for doing so. I will try harder in future to try to work out what you really mean. Now, if you would kindly refrain from referring to me and stick to the matter at hand, which would undoubtedly assist your campaign to be taken seriously, perhaps you could take a moment to address the main issue here, which is whether you agree with my five points above? AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 15:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Ethnic cleansing? oh no, Bosnia was ethnic cleansing, not even Operation Storm is (officially) ethnic cleansing. You need to be at gunpoint (or very near to it) to be ethnically cleansed. Italians left of their own free will, the Yugoslav government did not tell them they would be killed, imprisoned or forcibly expelled if they did not leave. This may seem "naive" of me, but ethnic cleansing is a very strict official term, and such events are mostly kept track of by the UNHCR. Have a look at the much more violent Operation Storm, even that is not considered "ethnic cleansing". -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 16:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Here's the thing: Yugoslavia was at the time a fully communist/Stalinist state (later not so), and people everywhere felt the difference. In the first years after the war, before the
Tito-Stalin split it was a problem for everybody to go to church. People everywhere were in danger of being proclaimed "
UstaŔe" or "
Chetniks" or "
NediÄevci", i.e. criminals. The esuli are not editing this article? Well, of course, this is an encyclopedia, not a "historical complaints department". Let me ask you this: do you think the esuli are
NPOV on this subject? If so you're biased as well. I'm just a guy from Dalmatia I'm not a communist, nor do I support them or their actions.
I've worked for a while on
Yugoslav Wars articles and I have some experience with the term "ethnic cleansing". The strikingly similar example I've pointed out before is the Croatian
Operation Storm. The
HDZ and
Franjo TuÄman wanted to get rid of the Serbs, so they accomplished it very elegantly by frightening them to leave. The alleged ("alleged" - because you can never get evidence for this kind of stuff) plan unfortunately worked nicely. The Serbian "exodus" was far larger than the Italian one 40 years earlier, (For the record this is evil, down-handed, and wrong.) but it was not ethnic cleansing, and had the Serbs stayed TuÄman could not have expelled them by force (because of
Clinton). If he somehow did, that would be ethnic cleansing.
Exactly the same case in Istria, but on a much smaller scale. Premier Broz wanted the Italians out, so he got them out by frightening them with the kind of massacre and/or forced expulsion he could never have actually gone through with because of Yugoslavia's tenuous diplomatic position (he would be condemned in the UN and lose all his western backing). This kind of sneaky "psychological ethnic cleansing", is, I'm afraid, not really ethnic cleansing, and its certainly not "
democide". --
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 16:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
For sure it was not as in Bosnia, but calling it "Voluntary free-will departure" is out of place. Maybe "mass emigration" is better, and like "esuli" is labelled "as they were called in Italy", "optanti" should be labelled "as they were called in Yugoslavia". These choices maybe would avoid edit wars... 79.17.238.247 ( talk) 17:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
So you think the Yugoslav government or somebody actually had a gun to their heads while they were writing it? I must say, your theory is completely improbable and very hard to prove. Yugoslavia was well known as the most liberal socialist state in Europe, it was not even part of the Eastern Bloc because of this. You've apparently "demonized" the country in your mind... -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 17:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
"All except three", how many were there? I'd say they were probably imprisoned not because they were Italian people, but for nationalism and "demanding autonomy", which is separatism (Kosovo, for example, only "demanded autonomy"). Any prominent Croat or Serb would face prison sentences for the same offenses. Why? For good reason. Have you heard of the Yugoslav Wars? nationalism is generally very bad for Yugoslavia. And even if they were all sent to Goli, that does not make the departure of the Italian population "ethnic cleansing". -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 18:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I know about Furio, he's generally ok (nice last-minute touch with BrunodamĀ ;) but is he a historical scholar? Or is he a politician working towards a political goal? -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 18:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I'm the defender of the "holy soil of Croatia", and I absolutely loooove old Franjo and his fantasies. LOL! You don't know much about my editing, do you? Maybe you need to look at the kind of stuff I've had to deal with from the reeal Croatian nationalists? And maybe you should ask my cousin in Milan weather or not I think he is "fascistic/irredentistic/separatistic" or whatever? As for Radin, he does indeed have quite a few political goals, not the least of which is getting double voting rights for Italians and so on. You know, twice the culture, twice the vote, right?Ā ;) -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
First of all, I disagree with your summary of the issue. I hardly think Italian historians, for example, have a consensus on this matter. Even if they did, this is not a matter of "what do nations think", as you simplified it, this is a matter of actual events and evidence. And here's the problem with the "forced migration/ethnic cleansing" idea: please show me the directive of the Yugoslav Federal Government ordering the JNA to "force the migration" of the Italian minority, or anything even close to that. Where's the soldiers on the streets, where are the trucks and trains taking people against their will, i.e. "forcing them to migrate"? Where are the long winding columns of Italian refugees fleeing from their homes in terror... you get the picture. Let me put this in so simple terms its almost offensive: Tito duped a large part of the Italian minority into leaving of their own free will. Actually forcing them out ("forced migration") would be completely and utterly impossible for Yugoslavia in that period. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 00:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Just a digression concerning your earlier statements on my position regarding Operation Storm. I want to make myself clear as you may have drawn some completely wrong conclusions ("But you think that during Operation Storm we have no ethnic cleansing... (...) Now I understand more... about you!"). Only small incidents therein might be considered "ethnic clensing", but the whole operation is not considered so by the United Nations. I am personally deeply saddened by the fact that Croatia lost so many of its citizens. I am sure that the HDZ and TuÄman (my hero :P) prayed to god for the Serbs to leave, but there's a catch: the Croatian Army was built up by NATO (= USA) and TuÄman could not risk actually ethnically cleansing the Serbs. Why? because the Clinton administration would be seen as indirectly supporting ethnic cleansing, and crossing the Americans is a very bad idea. So you see, the matter is a tad bit more complex than you might think (this is only a part of the equation), and Storm could not be organized as an ethnic cleansing operation. Not because that #X%&! TuÄman is a nice democratic ex-communist, but because it simply could not be executed as such. As it happened, TuÄman unfortunately had it his way and came out clean. Much like the Italians, if the Serbs stayed, they could not have been removed by force. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 01:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
DIREKTOR do you know what is a Diaspora? Go to read what does it mean and then say if this wasn't a Diaspora -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Maybe I can't speak English like DIREKTOR but I live in Trieste and I know better than him this historical facts. I think DIREKTOR is too involved infact he writes that he strongly supports Josip Broz Tito ideas. Tito who kills thousands of Italians. However Italian was forced to leave Istrian territory. This is history -- En.mat003 ( talk) 09:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
There's a lot of illustrious books that talk about these facts confirming that was a Diaspora. I invite you to read someone like "Il Lungo Esodo" di Raoul Pupo -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
So you are saying that is correct write that it was a Diaspora. We have to rewrite it in the text -- En.mat003 ( talk) 12:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Everywhere is written that is a diaspora, only on this Wikipedia we cannot write this. At least write "departure" and not " voluntary free-will departure" --
En.mat003 (
talk) 06:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you don't know that "diaspora" is an international word. So I know what does it mean -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry my teacher, it will be the last time that I make this mistake. I'm saying that the correct word to use is "diaspora" but you and Director don't want to use this word (I don't know why). So I'm saying that is more correct to write "departure" and not " voluntary free-will departure"- Only this. Sorry if my english is not at your level --
En.mat003 (
talk) 08:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Every historian agree that it wasn't a voluntary departure. Tito and his army killed thousands of Italian and so the remaining people were forced to leave their own home. Do you agree at least on this? -- En.mat003 ( talk) 18:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
If they didn't leave their home, they would have been killed sure -- En.mat003 ( talk) 19:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
So, in your opinion Tito's army didn't kill thousands of italian -- En.mat003 ( talk) 19:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Are you serious? Really you think that Tito didn't known nothing? Did you really think that the motivations were only ideologically and not ethnically? You are re-writing the History as you want, but this is not possible on an Encyclopedia -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
There are a lot of source that agree with what I'm saying. The problem is that you consider them POV only because say something different than what you are saying. Is useless to talk with you, you are too involved infact you "strongly support Josip Broz Tito's views". -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand where's the problem if I send that massage. I think that you are writing something wrong on this page so I'm finding someone that can help me to improve it. -- En.mat003 ( talk) 12:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I do not want to keep flogging a dead horse, but I think there is a valuable point that En.mat003 made, which got a bit lost in the course of the discussion: could not the initial statement just read: "The expression Istrian exodus or Istrian-Dalmatian exodus is used to indicate the departure of ethnic Italians..." etc? This would not put up front a judgment on the character of the departure and would be, I think, more in tune with the rest of the article (which I find quite good, by the way), which hints to a multiplicity of causes leading to the departure (or departures). The quotes from the Italian-Slovenian relation (which I personally consider a capital document on the issue) at the bottom of the article also seem to reinforce the idea that different interpretations can be reached of the nature of the exodus and that, in some instances, historians are left with "deducing" what really happened. Simply calling it a "departure" in the opening would not prejudge the final views on such a debate, leaving up to the reader to form his/her own opinion after a careful reading of the article. Thanks Farinata1260 ( talk) 20:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
ArchiveĀ 1 | ArchiveĀ 2 | ArchiveĀ 3 | ā | ArchiveĀ 5 |
PIO, stop adding the same information you have been trying to add to the Tito page. What you are stating is hardly NPOV, not to mention unfactual. I have yet to see any proof of what you have added, and will revert it until you get a valid source for the information.
Ethnic cleansing in Croatia is a method which was used by Croats several times to change the balance in national composition of Croatia in twentieth century. It went hand in hand with genocide against the Serbs and foibe massacres of the Italians in WWII, but the method was used again in '91-'95 Croatian secession war.
Croatia, as it is today, consisted of several regions with very different history. The northern part of this country belonged to Austro-Hungarian Empire and Hungary, while the Dalmatian coast had a fate similar to the other parts of Adriatic coast, and cities like Venice. Republic of Ragusa was one example of such a city state, and it was later included in Austro-Hungarian Empire after the conquest of Napoleon.
Dalmatia had a distinct population, which consisted of Italians and Slavs. Italians were mostly concentrated in cities, like Zara, Fiume, Ragusa and other. Istria was always a part of Italy, up to 1945 when it was occupied by the Croatian Tito's communists. But even further to the south, around 400,000 Italians lived, which constituted around 40% of the population of Dalmatia. The remaining population was mainly Slavic, roughly half of which were Serbs, and the rest were Catholic Dalmatians, later turned into Croats. Serbs were also concentrated in Krayina region which extended further to the north, along the boundary with Turkish Empire. They lived there for centuries, and there were around a million of them in the present day Croatia in 1900. Out of 4 million people almost half were not Croats, even if one counts Dalmatian Catholics, indeed all Slavic Catholics, as Croats.
After WWI, Italy lost part of the Dalmatian coast. It remained in Istria and some other towns, like Zara further to the south. The Serbian forces, who victoriously defeated the Austro Hungarian army at the Solun front marched all way to the Slovenia, and the country, dominated by the victorious Serbs, was created.
In WWII, Italians regained control of most of the Dalmatian coast, despite some of it being incorporated in the notorious NDH. The NDH was involved in the genocide against the Serbs, and almost a million of them were killed in present day Croatia and Bosnia, which were both included in this Nazi puppet state. Their plan was to get rid of the Serbs, by killing one third, expelling the other third and assimilating the rest. The first goal was achieved in WWII by the Ustasha genocide.
However, in 1943, with the fall of Mussolini's Italy, Germany regained control of the Dalmatian coast, while partisans engaged in the first wave of killings of Italians in the notorious foiba pits. The worst atrocities perpetuated by Croatian communists were done however in 1945, with German withdrawing. Tito's communists killed several thousand Italians and foiba's were filled with Italian bodies. They occupied Istria, cities of Trieste, Fiume, historical capital of Dalmatia Zara, which were always Italian, and expelled several hundred thousand of Italians in the first wave of ethnic cleansing.
Some Germans, who lived in Slavonia, were also expelled, but their number was not so large as Germans were a small minority there. While Germans were Nazis up to '45, Italians fought on the side of Allies since '43, like they did in the WWI.
The final episode of ethnic cleansing happened in '95, where all of the Krajina Serbs were expelled, while thousands of mostly elderly and hapeless were mercilesly killed. Out of over 500,000 Serbs present in Croatia in '91, most of who lost someone in the genocide in WWII. Out of them, only around 100,000 Serbs remained, mostly in cities where they were further discriminated against, just as the remaining Italians are forcibly assimilated and slowly expelled from Croatia after WWII.
Thus, the 95% population of present day Croatia claims to be purely Croat. This is up from 82% in the 1991, 68% after WWII, and 35% (52% if one counts all Slavic Catholics) after WWI. The results of ethnical cleansing in Croatia are indeed impactful.Dalmatian language, a dialect of Italian is now extinct. āPreceding unsigned comment added by GiovaniGiovany ( talk ā¢ contribs) 17:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
We need to figure out some way of solving the edit war that is currently going on here. Apparently, one side is consistently trying to impose an Italian POV over a clear Yugoslav POV that had previously taken over. I appeal to both for joint cooperation so that we don't waste time on useless and endless reverts. E.Cogoy 05:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I apologize as I did a major editing, trying to write a few NPOV paragraphs, and forgot to log in. There is still a Reference section that should be added. FrancescoMazzucotelli 19:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
I consider simple history!-- PIO 17:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I've verified. The persecutions among Istrians with Italian ethnicity was caused suddenly the Armistice (1943-1945) by local populations following revenge's desire caused by Fascism and its nationalist politic. A second phase (started in the 1945) was caused by Tito and Yugoslav Army who had the aim to acquire Trieste before other Allied Forces. In this last situation the aim was not an revenge, but a political aim. If Allied Forces had been persuaded that the Slav ethnic presence was a majority (or the entirety) in comparison with Italian presence, the Istria and Trieste would been assigned easily to Yugoslavia. The aim of Tito was political, but it was present. In fact in the following years Tito became aware that in some parts of Istria these aims were destroying the economic structure because a lot of Italians were traders or artisans, and he changed his politic. -- Ilario 10:09, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Now i add in article some identical informations of foibe massacres: in fact is the same historic context!-- PIO 11:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
It surprises me that some people have not even read this article fully before making changes to it ad-hoc. The London Memorandum of 1954 gave to the ethnic Italians either the choice of opting to leave (the so-called optants) or staying. These exiles were to be given compensation for their loss of property and other indemnity by the Italian state under the terms of the peace treaties. Get it now? Now, read the definition of Ethnic cleansing and tell me if it matches up. Nobody was forced to leave, and they were given compensation if they did leave. Also, with regards to the Tito, he was not the leader until 1954 (see List_of_leaders_of_communist_Yugoslavia). You, PIO/Jxy, see bent on accusing anything you can think of that is negative. -- Zivan56 20:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
In 1954 the exodus was over since a long time. The refugees were already in Italy or somewhere else. They had no choice whatsoever. They fled in mass under threat of mass murder, of becoming apolids, of living in a Communist country with no right. They've lost everything, lived in refugees camps and never came back. Many people suffered this kind of tragedies at the end of many wars. Now it's time to acknowledge rights and wrongs on both sides. Italians did it already. They do not want any kind of revenge. Southern Slavs should give up all this hostility and hatred. āPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.62.178.67 ( talk) 15:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC) About command of Broz and ethnic cleansing you must apprehending above statements of Ilario and mine: Tito's command expression is in foibe massacres too and ethnic cleansing is in see also section of foibe too! Your interpretation about optants is wrong because you ignore Prominent Italian historians like..... This article is simple an other part of same historic event of foibe: both were ethnic cleansing for prominent Italian historians! Your changes are POV very much because you are an admirer of dictator Broz and you are negative obstructionist. Moreover in my next change i approve your some words added in article to verify your real intention of neutral collaboration! In Slovenia you can find this book: Tudi mi smo umrli za domovino.-- PIO 16:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Prominent Italian historians - need I say more? Either way, it is very clear you have an inherent bias against Tito, no matter what "sources" you provide. Anybody can find any source with any POV easily, but finding more than a few is what will allow you to prove your argument (especially with non-peer reviewed sources) -- Zivan56 19:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
You don't know history! You are alone troublesome admirer of dictator Broz in this discussion: an administrator needs block you! Moreover in my next change i use different words.-- PIO 16:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
So, despite the fact that 5 people so far have reverted some of your edits, you still think you are right? Two of them were Italian, so you can't say they were "admirers." You are the one that clearly needs to be blocked, its just wikipedia bureaucracy that keeps them from doing it. Furthemore, I don't even want to start with your violations of the English language; I suggest taking an in depth course instead of doing ad-hoc translation from Italian. -- Zivan56 06:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Che facciamo, comunichiamo in italiano? LEO
DIRETTORE stop your propaganda against Italians!!!! LEO 25 August 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.95.202 ( talk) 17:38, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
Dear Sirs, I am afraid you are neglecting a simple truth: in Istria and Dalmatia lived and prospered a vast population who defined themselves Italian.They were majority in many towns (e.g. Fiume (Rjieka) and Pola (Pula)). They left their houses in mass after WWII. In 1948 most of them had left. They never came back. They lost everything. They had no compensation whatsoever. They flew after some mass murders accomplished by yugoslav army and irregulars. The aim was to free those places from any "foreign" presence. This is widely accepted by most Italian and non-Italian scholars. Probably something different is taught in Slovenian and Croatian schools. I understand the nationalistic reasons, but if we blame Turkey for denial of Armenian genocide, we should blame Croatia and Slovenia in the same way. āPreceding unsigned comment added by 195.62.178.67 ( talk) 11:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
If my Italian collegues would merely list their proposed changes, we could get to work on getting this version of theirs finallized. On the other hand, your uncompromising editing would lead to an edit war (I will never let you bully people into your version without a consensus). Let us therefore discuss the issues, Slavic communist barbarian to Italian fascist oppresors. Please? DIREKTOR 15:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
PIO!, my favourite fascist oppresor (a joke, of course, see my post above)! Here's the situation, PIO: I had my version, you had your version. I edited your version somewhat to produce a compromise version. This compromise version is here to be the article while we discuss changes. Are you willing/able to discuss changes? I repeat: the version I made will stay only until we can reach a civilized democratic consensus. You edited the compromise version so I reverted that edit, for now, only until we reach conenesus. Can you discuss in English? Will you discuss in English?
DIREKTOR 10:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
This is not gonna work, PIO. I'm not gonna let you push your fanatical POV. Get this: I am not "denying" anything! Nowhere did I write that the foibe massacres or the exodus did not occur. I am merely questioning (not denying!) the connection between the two. I also rewrote your Italian city names that were historically Slavic after World War 2 and I removed your obvious personal oppinions added to a text copy-pasted from a real source.
FYI:
I did not report you for your (frequent) previous personal attacks, but I believe I may now be forced to do so. I will never let you push your version without consensus, remember that. DIREKTOR 18:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
1) I have no consensus because you (and your buddies) categoricly refuse to discuss anything.
2) Tito is not a criminal dictator (officially, he was the most liberal Socialist leader of the eastern bloc), nor even a textbook dictator for that matter. I support his ideals because they kept the second Yugoslavia together.
3) I am an Italian (Venetian) by ancstry so it would be kind of STUPID if I was an "anti-Italian". I merely answered to Italian military boasting and utterly riddiculous war threats of several users (LOL) by stating several historic facts about Italian miltary exploits.
4) Look it up on the UN websites. The Istrian exodus was not ethnic cleansing, the people left VOLUNTARILY (hell! even the Croatian
Operation Storm isn't ethnic cleansing).
5) And finally, before you bother another Admin, please remember that there is currently an Arbitration taking place on this and other articles, that you add historically incorrect data (example: "Fiume" was "Rijeka" after WW2, when the exodus took place etc...), and that you are about to be reported for your repeated, open, and unmistakable personal attacks against me and other editors. DIREKTOR 09:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
"Italians" and "Italianization" should be used only when referring to Mussolini's propaganda. It should not be used to describe the historical ethnicity of Istrians, and Venetians for that matter.
Just because Istrians spoke a romance-language for centuries, they were not speaking an "Italian" dialect. Even Venetian (that subplanted the autoctonous Istrian tongue) is not an "Italian" dialect. Romance languages (Spanish, Portuguese, French, Catalan, Venet, etc...) are not Italian dialects. They are all sister languages with closer ties than Slavic ones, but it does not make them a dialect of one another.
The Venet tongues spoken from Verona to Istria are very similar to one another, and belong to the same language, with a distinct literature dating back to the 9th century (that's right, the Verona's riddle was written in Venet). Dante Alighieri himself, in his De Vulgari Eloquentia highlighted the different language spoken in Verona, Vicenza, Venice and Istria.
I object to historically referring to Venetians as Italians. They were an indipendent country who fought fiercely against Italians, often enlisting Sclavones in their army. Istrians were part of the Venet Republic as far back as the 12th Century, much before Padua, Vicenza, and Verona joined. Culturally Venice looked to the East (the Greek world, Bisantium and the East) rather than Tuscany, Genoa and Rome. By the way, during the League of Cambrai, Venice had to fight against the Italians, the Germans, the French and the Spanish,...and won.
When Napoleon inveaded the Venet mainland, it was the Dalmatians and the Istrians who insisted to temporarily bring the Venet government across the Adriatic. Most of the military resistance to Napoleon in the Venet mainland was fought by Dalmatians. The Venet Republic was almost more theirs than anyone's. So much for the "occupied lands" theory. Even under the Austrian Empire, Venet, Istrian and Dalmatians fought together in the 1866 Battle of Lissa (Vis) against the Italians,...and won.
When Italy annexed Venetia (thanks to their alliance to Prussia against Austria) they made a referendum-farce, where people voting NO had to use a different ballot box. Less than a quarter of the population voted, and the result would have made any dictatorship blush (646thousand YES, 69 NO). And by the way, Istrians did not even vote in the referendum and remained under Austria until World War I. After millenia (because the Roman Regio X went from Mantua to Pola), Venets and Istrians were divided. 138.88.200.242 22:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I am not here to question the objective intent of Italian contributors to this page. But after a century of propaganda to Italianize the Venetian territories, by default it has become customary to refer to non-Slavs as Italians, even by the Istrians (and Dalmatians) themselves. If there are no objections I will correct the ethnic references. 138.88.200.242 19:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Venetian were and are italians, hethnically, historically and culturally. The original population of Venice was from Roman cities of Italian peninsula fleeing successive waves of Germanic and Huns invasions. The city has always been strongly supportive of italian cause even, as most of the italian city, it has a distiguished, proud, and glorious history and identity. Everything in Istria and Dalmatia, except the gifts given by the nature, is a product of the italian civilization and culture. Sadly, balcanic nationalism prevent many to admit this disturbing thruth.-- 151.100.9.229 ( talk) 15:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
the only balcanic nationalism i see here comes from the italian penninsula. "italian civilization" is an oxymoron, as it's based on exploitation and conquering of other civilizations, so do consider refraining from posting all your propaganda crap, this shit is getting old.
esse quam videri - to be rather than to seem (
talk) 00:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone has an odd view of history and doesn't fear to express ridiculous opinions. Stating that italian civilization is based on exploitation and conquering of other civilizations it is one of silliest things ever said. Check any subject concerning human intellectual activity (art, science....) and be prepared to be appaled by the massive italian creative contribution to any fields during the centuries....The coastline cities of Istria and Dalmatia have always been under italian cultural influence by any point of view. Slavs were peasants from the inland forcibly introduced by foreigner power in order to diluite and weaken italian presence in those towns. I don't have problems saying that alto adige (Sudtyrol) region in italy is a territory more related to german than to italian culture, the only difference is that when it was annexed to Italy after one of the bloody war ever fought none in Italy thought to take revenge against innocent indigenous population by throwing them in alpine crevasse,something different happened somewhere else some years after ( the term foibe sound you familiar?....) with italian population... but you know balcanic are very good at cleaning...especially ethnically!!! āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.100.9.229 ( talk) 13:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know wich is the pourpose to pass the strange idea that Firefighters are a combattant forces (never been nowere!!!) but anyone like you can easely enlarge the picture by your/his self and will see that there are naked bodies on the ground, 1 firefighter wearing a head (like a spelealogist!) light close to a civilian (on his left), two womans (on his right) an a bust of a man in an Anglo-american tunic with Boots (yes... for who are attempting to make some propaganda the Italians were dressing whool Jacket, shirt&tie and the infamous cardboard shoes during the war Russian front included!!!...) nevertheless is impossible that this picture was taken in 1943 just and simply because the first bodies exumations took place in the A zone of the Trieste Free Territoy since 1945 managed by English troops and firefighters! Nickel Chromo 17:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
We can always use support against radical Serb (Äetnik) and (especially) Italian theses in Wikipedia.
Arrivederci, signore Nickel Chromo... DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
This block will not end the dispute, I'm afraid. While I realise I am an involved party here, it is nevertheless a certain objective fact that the other side in this conflict (namely,
User:PIO, in his favourite IP "form") refused repeated requests for discussion on the article even when he faced a tiresome edit war if he refused. It is therefore highly unlikely that he is about to start cooperating now, when his version is temporarily enforced by the block. I also doubt that he is going to give up on this, since he has patiently waited for the longer semi-block to expire.
Once again, even though I realise I am an involved party, I feel I must reccomend the reinstatement of the old prudent semi-block as the only means to secure an end to this edit war.
DIREKTOR 09:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
My efforts to achieve consensus through discussion are clear at the History and the Discussion pages. The accusations brought forth by User:PIO are, of course, utterly riddiculous. My only intention was to engage in civil discussion at some time.
In case of further fanciful accusations, note that only User:PIO, myself an User:Nickel Chromo (in a much smaller cappacity) participated in the dispute about this version of the article. PIO would not hesitate to go back ten years to find someone who confronted me in some way, in order to create the illusion of me being the invading madman confronted by a whole pack of editors. He has even claimed there are a dozen editors confronting me (at
User:Riana's talkpage), wich is an outright lie.
DIREKTOR 09:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Related administrators I report list of editors trying to stop DIREKTOR's POV edits since 08:58, 12 July 2007, when he started:
Dear administrators do you think are they few users???? PIO, 11:50 14 September 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.91.76 ( talk) 11:49, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
, :D , at least three of those IPs are your sockpuppets....
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
DIREKTOR we can collaborate like as for
foibe massacres.
PIO, 15:04 17 September 2007 āPreceding
unsigned comment added by
151.33.88.231 (
talk) 15:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, this version that was blocked on is so POV towards one side that it requires a thourough makeover. Nickel Chromo does not like it either. I'm not saying "no", though.
Let's first clear a couple of things up:
So you insist on irrational behaviour and unsourced edits? (I hope this will not destroy our work on the Foibe massacres article version.) You must understand that claims and accusations of ethnic cleansing and forced migration are very hot stuff that absolutely needs reliable proof and sources. Do not start another edit-ar! Discuss!
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 17:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh, for God's sake! I know, your IPs start with 151.33.**.***. Just respond to my previous post. Do you insist on ethnic cleansing and forced migration allegations without proper unbiased sources?
Italian sources are just as reliable as Yugoslav ones. The problem is they contradict, we need to move beyond that, we need things like encyclopedias and books by objective emotionally uninvloved (NON-ITALIAN, NON-YUGOSLAV) authors.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Giove, discussion is currently taking place (between PIO and myself) on the more acceptable version for both sides, do not edit widly and without consultation as you may endanger the fragile "ceasefire" (or "cease", if you will). DIREKTOR ( TALK) 16:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Just for the record Giove, your undiscussed and incorrect edits won't last. I'm backing down for the time being to discuss with PIO and maybe reach a consensus.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 15:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
DIREKTOR needs to reach a consensus between all involved users not between you and myself!!!! Points of ethnic cleansing and political cleansing against Italian people were discussed above and we can to wait opinions of other users.
PIO, 16:26 25 September 2007
I know that PIO, it just seed to me that Giove did not respect our efforts and went on to edit as he pleased. All I'm saying is that he should do what we do.
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 14:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone isn't happy even with this POV version. I thought this matter was finally closed! DIREKTOR ( TALK) 20:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
You really are "confused", as you say. I'm allowed to edit in all articles. Also I'm not "under warning by administrators", where do you get that from? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Look Leo, this version was worked hard on by both User:PIO and myself. It is POV even without your edits. I thought we finished this matter! Why are you reopening this? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 14:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Here I have seen some sources that are disputable:
There is an English translation of the book that can be viewed ob Google Books here
That book is disaster as well and unreliable for several resons.It is full of errors and scandalous(at the moments fascistoid interpretations )
-- Anto ( talk) 20:51, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
-- Anto ( talk) 20:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
It would be comical if it was not tragical. Ā :( Brothers RadiÄ as Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday vs. PuniÅ”a RaÄiÄ as Billy the Kid
-- Anto ( talk) 21:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Anto is total out of this talk: this page is for exodus not for that Petacco's book!!!! Your personal opinions against fascist idiots or communist idiots or anarchist idiots or socialist idiots are propaganda too!!!! LEO, 24 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.86.203 ( talk) 17:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to punctuate how reliable are Italian sources here. Petacco's book mentions Raoul Pupo's book as one of the source so I guess we can find the same mistakes there.
Perhaps
Giorgio Napolitano has found an inspitation for his
speech in Petacco's book.
Also , there is no any non-italian book quoted hereĀ !!
-- Anto ( talk) 19:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Amico croato, ti rispondo in italiano perchĆØ conosci questa lingua e il mio inglese non ĆØ buono: complimenti per la tua buona conoscenza di certe lingue! Il problema dell'attendibilitĆ e neutralitĆ delle fonti riguarda l'essenza di questo progetto ma se i libri sono di autori solo italiani ĆØ perchĆØ gli storici italiani hanno studiato meglio di tutti le situazioni delle foibe quindi esodo! Se tu conosci libri di autori croati, sloveni, serbi, montenegrini e altri puoi inserire i collegamenti con tali libri: la citazione dei libri di autori non italiani ĆØ valida per la neutralitĆ dell'articolo! Puoi citare autori e testi nella sezione historical debate. Io disprezzo Napolitano perchĆØ ĆØ un vecchio sovietico e servitore fedele dei russi ma proprio per questo la sua dichiarazione ha importanza storica: il vecchio comunista Napolitano ha riconosciuto la pulizia etnica che i comunisti capeggiati dallo schifoso Palmiro Togliatti negavano. Condivido il tuo parere riguardo il comunismo the worst political movement in 20th century e il cambiamento della bandiera australiana quando ci sarĆ la Repubblica Australiana: forse un giorno mi trasferirĆ² nella splendida isola australe. Puoi comunicare a DIREKTOR che il suo fanatismo ĆØ noto a tutti e la sua ostinazione sarĆ causa della sua messa al bando!!!! LEO, 25 nov 2007
"Former times"? What does that mean specificly? Also, why did you remove the link and turn it into a reference? DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Another matter, in the recently added "Periods of the exodus" section I found the 1943 exodus period, is there actual confirmation of some kind mass Italian emmigration in 1943, I mean this was wartime!?
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 22:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I did several edits. They are mainly evident corrections of historical errors. They are self evident from the wikilinks. They do not affect the "political" POV of the article.-- Giovanni Giove ( talk) 13:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Giovanni approvo il tuo testo e integrerĆ²: collaboriamo con l'amico sloveno che mi sembra in buona fede.
Slovenian friend AlasdairGreen27,
this proposal by DIREKTOR or message number 4 is vandalism!!!! In next edit I add other links and fix link of Slovenian historian Darovec: your link is uncorrected then impossible to visualize! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding
unsigned comment added by
151.67.85.5 (
talk) 14:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words about me, Leo. The link is
http://www2.arnes.si/~mkralj/istra-history/naslovna.html
Feel free to correct it if it doesn't work for some reason.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk) 14:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
User:AlasdairGreen27, your revert seems edit warring and I don't understand: why???? I insert sentences of Slovenian historian Darovec and you remove: this is non plus ultra!!!! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 17:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
LEO is here, editing from 151-numbered IPs. -- Gp75motorsports ( talk) 16:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
What is your problem???? Why removed my version???? LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 16:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I saw your messages above and in my talk IP: Gp75motorsports, this is not a war against inexistence sockpuppets!!!! Citizen of world, stay calm!!!! LEO, 28 nov 2007 āPreceding unsigned comment added by 151.67.85.5 ( talk) 17:23, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
There's this bit near the end of the article:
Some famous postwar exiles from territories include actresses
Alida Valli and
Laura Antonelli, race driver
Mario Andretti, singer
Sergio Endrigo, boxer
Nino Benvenuti, tennis player
Orlando Sirola, stylist
Ottavio Missoni and chef
Lidia Bastianich.
That's just a list of famous(ish) Italians that were born in Istria. Having read all their Wikis, only two -
Mario Andretti and
Lidia Bastianich - mention that their families left as part of the exodus. For all we know, the others might still be there if they hadn't gone on to have successful careers elsewhere.
I'd say this bit needs some attention. Re-write or delete, in my view.
AlasdairGreen27 23:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've just added some references for Sirola and Endrigo mentioning that they were indeed refugees. It turns out that Missoni spent years as a prisoner of war in Egypt and then went straight to Trieste, and Alida Valli had left the region long before the war. Couldn't find much about the others, though. Ko'oy 03:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
For famous postwar exiles I will insert a section. AlasdairGreen27, formulation of articles is standard: never references stay in bottom! For section periods of exodus I fix years 1943 beginning and 1960 finish: beginning of exodus was in wartime because many Italian or Istrian fascists, after fascist regime collapsed, escaped. I will restore sentences of Slovenian historian Darovec in section historical debate; AlasdairGreen27, if you support this historian, I support too but I insert him and you remove: your action is strange very much!!!! LEO, 1 December 2007
AlasdairGreen27, good and dear person, list of exiles is important: I restore it. You have no valid reason for remove list.-- PIO ( talk) 18:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Amico sloveno AlasdairGreen27, so che capisci l'italiano quindi possiamo capirci meglio. Tu non hai valido motivo per rimuovere la lista perchĆØ la puoi leggere anche nella versione Wiki in italiano. Se Alida Valli e altri hanno lasciato prima la regione non ĆØ significativo poichĆØ poi non sono potuti tornarci: anche se son andati via prima, poi non riuscirono a tornare in Istria e Dalmazia a causa della politica anti-italiana del dittatore Tito. Se vuoi collegamenti a siti con informazioni puoi leggere la versione Wiki in italiano di questo articolo. Ripristino la lista.-- PIO ( talk) 18:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
You can read here or in alphabetical list sources pertinent Alida Valli, Laura Antonelli, Fulvio Tomizza, Agostino Straulino and many others. List in article is incomplete: needs to add painter Mario Gasperini, composer Luigi DonorĆ and others.-- PIO ( talk) 10:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Slovenian friend, we have incomprehension pertinet conception of postwar exiles definition what means. I explained reason for to consider Alida Valli and others postwar exiles too: you can read here. It's not Italian POV: because for these exiles was impossible the return in their homes confiscated by communist dictatorship of Josip Broz. No reason for remove just one of persons in list.-- PIO ( talk) 14:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Now now, PIO, a post war exile is a post war exile, in other words, somebody that left after the war. And saying that somebody is an exile because they couldn't return is pure and simple speculation - who says they wanted to return? Alida Valli was doing very nicely in her acting career, so was quite happy in Hollywood, I expect - and is wrong, anyway. There was nothing to stop people returning. To say anything else is just Italian propaganda, exactly as is Italian Wikipedia. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 17:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
You are in error. Propaganda was made by historians under command of Josip Broz. In Italian Wikipedia seems propaganda only for some anti-Italians editors and sure you are not anti-Italian.-- PIO ( talk) 15:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Basil, I've read and reverted your edit marked "let's put thing in perspective, long live to truth and death to political correctness". Unfortunately, what you see as the truth is to others simply propaganda. You simply cannot change "voluntary diaspora" to "forced diaspora" without adding any sources to support your statement and expect nobody to notice. Similarly, you have removed balanced sentences which leave possibilities on the table such as "Their motives for leaving may have been fear of reprisals, economic motives, or ethnically based" and changed it to "Their motive for leaving was mostly fear of reprisals" as though this is a simple statement of fact. Well, just a moment, please. Were you there? Did you personally interview people as they were leaving asking them to tick a particular box on your questionnaire?
As I have said previously on this talk page, the purpose of this article is to help people who don't know to find out more or less what happened. Not to say one side or the other was right or wrong, good or bad. So therefore, if you casually throw your POV into the article (with statements like "long live to truth and death to political correctness") then you can expect to have them reverted. Mostly, you should bear in mind that controversial material carrying no sources whatsoever has no place here.
AlasdairGreen27 (
talk) 09:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Slovenian friend, I agree your reasoning pertinent sources but not all integration of Basil II is wrong. In next edit I add section -Slovenian, Croatian and Serb view pertinent exodus- with warning to Italian editors for not edit in this section: we all collaborate for accurate and sourced article.-- PIO ( talk) 15:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I have fully read the article page and this discussion page with its many petty debates and arguements but in general I think this is a balanced article which airs all view points and appears to be based on interpretation of facts rather than personal opinions. I am a British person living in Trieste but I frequently visit Slovenia and Croatia. I'm of the view that neither 'side' is entirely clean, wrongs have been committed by Italians, Triestines, Slovenes and Croats (and therefore also Yugoslavs). Istria and its surroundings are the most beautiful parts of the world and the people whether they are Italian, Slovene or Croatian are truly great. Thank god we now live in a peaceful European Union (which should include Croatia as soon as possible) and where the borders can once again become invisible. 213.230.130.56 ( talk) 18:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
2 simple questions, and I'd also like a simple answers:
QUESTION 1, Is president Napolitano a respected historian, by any chance? or is he a historical layman?
QUESTION 2, Does the stated oppinion of laymen (no matter their position) matter in these complex historical disputes? -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 17:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The declarations of an Italian official may be includable in the Italian Wiki, but they are of no concern to the wider public that wants professional historians to answer these matters. (One exclamation mark would have sufficed) -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 02:42, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
I changed the voice, because the Treaty of Rome (1983) speaks only about the property in the former
Free Territory of Trieste! Here
[4] you can see the text (in italian) of the treaty:
ART. 1 of the Annex 1: I BENI, DIRITTI ED INTERESSI INDICATI NEL CITATO ART. 4 DEL TRATTATO DI OSIMO SONO CONSIDERATI COME DEFINITIVAMENTE ACQUISITI DALLA REPUBBLICA SOCIALISTA FEDERATIVA DI JUGOSLAVIA.
Free translation: All the properties inclused in the art. 4 of the Treaty of Osimo are Yugoslav.
ART. 2 IN VISTA DI QUANTO PRECEDE, IL CONSIGLIO ESECUTIVO FEDERALE DELLA ASSEMBLEA DELLA RSF DI JUGOSLAVIA VERSERĆ AL GOVERNO ITALIANO A TITOLO DI INDENNIZZO LA SOMMA DI 110 MILIONI DI DOLLARI USA.
Free translation: For this properties, the Yugoslavia have to paid 110.000.000 US$.
Now, let's see the art. 4 of the Treaty of Osimo
[5]:
ARTICOLO 4 I due governi concluderanno, al piĆ¹ presto possibile, un Accordo relativo ad un indennizzo globale e forfettario che sia equo ed accettabile dalle due Parti, dei beni, diritti ed interessi delle persone fisiche e giuridiche italiane, situati nella parte del territorio indicata all'articolo 21 del Trattato di Pace con l'Italia del 10 febbraio 1947, compresa nelle frontiere della Repubblica Socialista Federativa di Jugoslavia, che hanno fatto oggetto di misure di nazionalizzazione o di esproprio o di altri provvedimenti restrittivi da parte delle AutoritĆ militari, civili o locali jugoslave, a partire dalla data dell'ingresso delle Forze Armate Jugoslave nel suddetto territorio.
Free translation: Yugoslavia have to pay the due for the properties inclused in the art.21 of the Treaty of Peace with Italy.
Article 21 of the Treaty of Peace (
Scroll down!): There is hereby constituted the Free Territory of Trieste, consisting of the area lying between the Adriatic Sea and the boundaries defined in Articles 4 and 22 of the present Treaty. The Free Territory of Trieste is recognized by the Allied and Associated Powers and by Italy, which agree that its integrity and independence shall be assured by the Security Council of the United Nations.
So: the treaty of 1983 speaks only about the properties in the
Free Territory of Trieste.
Italy have more laws regarding the property reparations. My family received FEW money more than fifty years ago, from Italy. If you want, I can write a complete legal/historic report about property reparations here in Italy, but I need a translator (I speak a terrible English)! --
Luigi 28 (
talk) 18:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Luigi, as you and I discussed last December at Talk:Istrian_exodus#Famous_Italians_from_Istria, just being from an Italian family and being born in Istria does not make a person an exile. I'll go through the list and see what's what. If they really left Istria at the time in question that's no problem. But last time I went through the list there was all manner of nonsense on it, with people who'd left the region long before WWII on it. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 16:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
None of the stuff you wrote actually means anything. You're not discussing. Prove that: 1) they are, undoubtedly, Italian, 2) that they were born in Istria/Dalmatia, and 3) that they moved due to the so-called "exodus", before writing them up. If they are as "famous" as you say, then it should not be hard to find a biographical reference on the World Wide Web. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 21:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this [6], when you stated that official data from the Slovenian Statistical Office shows that between 1953 and 1961 the numbers of ethnic Italians living in Slovenia - almost exclusively in Slovenian Istria and along the Italian border - actually increased by nearly 360%, maybe you don't know that in 1953 the Free Territory of Trieste, weren't Slovenian (only from 1954, after the London Memorandum). The Slovenian census of 1953 doesn't registered the Italians of Koper/Capodistria, Piran/Pirano, Izola/Isola, almost all the Italians in the today Slovenia! Tomorrow I'll correct the voice, obviously all my edit will be well sourced!-- Luigi 28 ( talk) 22:00, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Luigi, KlemenÄiÄ is a good source, but you should bear in mind that he is very firm that "We have to emphasize that the data of the Yugoslav censuses are unreliable in relation to the real number of Italians, since many members of the Italian minority, for various reasons, chose āNationally Undeclaredā or their regional identity (mostly as āIstriansā)". AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 07:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Right: now I add that quote.-- Luigi 28 ( talk) 08:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
It wasn't a voluntary free-will departure. It's incredible the this part of text is write on Wikipedia -- En.mat003 ( talk) 09:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Read here, it everything write: http://www.lefoibe.it/approfondimenti/dossier/02-puliziaetnica.htm -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Among the reasons for emigration, one should above all mention the oppression by the regime, which with its totalitarian nature made it impossible for people to freely express their national identity, oppose the redistribution of the leading national and social roles in Istria, and refuse major changes in the economy. The oppressed and frightened people were not so much attracted by the propaganda of the local Italian agencies, spread without any special instructions from the Italian government, but more by the neighboring democratic Italian nation state, although the Italian government more than once exerted its influence to stop or at least restrict immigration. One should also not ignore the deterioration of the living conditions, which was typical of socialist societies, and the break of contacts with Trieste, which made Italians in Istria fear that they would find themselves on the wrong side of the "iron curtain". The Italian population recognised the impossibility of retaining its national identity - with the conglomerate of the living habits and feelings, exceeding the mere political and ideological dimension - in the situation offered by the Yugoslav state, and experienced emigration as the choice of freedom. Within the broader historical framework, the special features of the Italian emigration from Istria belong to a more general process of the formation of nation states on ethnically mixed territories, which led to the disintegration of the multilingual and multicultural reality in Central and South Eastern Europe. The fact that Italians emigrated from a federal state, based on the internationalist ideology, demonstrates that national differences and discrepancies within the framework of the Communist social and political systems continuously and profoundly conditioned the political developments. [7] (SLOVENE-ITALIAN RELATIONS 1880-1956. Report of the Slovene-Italian historical and cultural commission. Koper-Capodistria, July 25th, 2000. Published by: Krožek PREMIK, Trst-Trieste with permission of Nova Revija Trst-Trieste, January 2004)-- 151.48.47.96 ( talk) 12:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, IP 151.48.47.96, a useful contribution. Thank you. This one, which is already in the article, is also helpful. In its 1996 report on 'Local self-government, territorial integrity and protection of minorities' the
Council of Europe's European Commission for Democracy through Law (the
Venice Commission), i.e. an unimpeachably reliable source, put it that "a great majority of the local Italians, Italianites (of Slavic and other origin), many thousands of Slovenes and of nationally undefined bilingual 'Istrians' used their legal right from the peace treaty to 'opt out' of the Yugoslav controlled part of Istria. In several waves they moved to Italy and elsewhere (also overseas) and claimed Italian or other citizenship. The mass exodus of the optanti (or esuli as they were called in Italy) from 'godless communist Yugoslavia' was actively encouraged by the Italian authorities, Italian radio and the
Roman Catholic bishop of Trieste. After this huge drain, the numerical strength of the remaining Italian minority became stable".
[8].
If we are collecting reliable English language sources in order to see about improving this article, I'd like to add
[9], a thoughtful and scholarly introduction to a much longer book;
[10]
which discusses the Italian government's encouragement of people to leave and the violence and intimidation suffered by Slavs at the hands of extremists (p144, 145); this article
[11] by a professor at the American University of Rome which includes valuable first hand testimony and puts it into context of admissions that (some of) those who suffered reprisals had collaborated first with the Italian and the German occupying forces; lastly, this one
[12] by a British professor should be required reading for all before they even think of editing this article. In short, therefore, once everyone has read that lot, we can see that:
Any simplistic POV-motivated attempt to say in this article "Tito's butchery and savagery led to about 350,000 poor terrified innocent Italians being murdered/expelled from barbaric Yugoslavia" will be rejected. The article is much better than it was last year. The improvement of it will continue. All additions will be based on scholarly reliable sources. That's all. AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 13:29, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) There is no "of course" about it, my friend. First, there is absolutely no indication that the article has been edited in any way, except by Prof Thomassen himself. You are confusing the publication with its publisher, Acta Histriae [15], which, irrespective of the location in which it is based, is undoubtedly a scholarly and a useful source in that it publishes numerous texts written by academics on a variety of themes. I very much doubt that the publisher has the temerity to edit any of the material submitted to it. Perhaps, though, you may wish to ask Thomassen, as his e-mail address is very clearly on the first page. Next, if your post was open to misinterpretation, forgive me for doing so. I will try harder in future to try to work out what you really mean. Now, if you would kindly refrain from referring to me and stick to the matter at hand, which would undoubtedly assist your campaign to be taken seriously, perhaps you could take a moment to address the main issue here, which is whether you agree with my five points above? AlasdairGreen27 ( talk) 15:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Ethnic cleansing? oh no, Bosnia was ethnic cleansing, not even Operation Storm is (officially) ethnic cleansing. You need to be at gunpoint (or very near to it) to be ethnically cleansed. Italians left of their own free will, the Yugoslav government did not tell them they would be killed, imprisoned or forcibly expelled if they did not leave. This may seem "naive" of me, but ethnic cleansing is a very strict official term, and such events are mostly kept track of by the UNHCR. Have a look at the much more violent Operation Storm, even that is not considered "ethnic cleansing". -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 16:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Here's the thing: Yugoslavia was at the time a fully communist/Stalinist state (later not so), and people everywhere felt the difference. In the first years after the war, before the
Tito-Stalin split it was a problem for everybody to go to church. People everywhere were in danger of being proclaimed "
UstaŔe" or "
Chetniks" or "
NediÄevci", i.e. criminals. The esuli are not editing this article? Well, of course, this is an encyclopedia, not a "historical complaints department". Let me ask you this: do you think the esuli are
NPOV on this subject? If so you're biased as well. I'm just a guy from Dalmatia I'm not a communist, nor do I support them or their actions.
I've worked for a while on
Yugoslav Wars articles and I have some experience with the term "ethnic cleansing". The strikingly similar example I've pointed out before is the Croatian
Operation Storm. The
HDZ and
Franjo TuÄman wanted to get rid of the Serbs, so they accomplished it very elegantly by frightening them to leave. The alleged ("alleged" - because you can never get evidence for this kind of stuff) plan unfortunately worked nicely. The Serbian "exodus" was far larger than the Italian one 40 years earlier, (For the record this is evil, down-handed, and wrong.) but it was not ethnic cleansing, and had the Serbs stayed TuÄman could not have expelled them by force (because of
Clinton). If he somehow did, that would be ethnic cleansing.
Exactly the same case in Istria, but on a much smaller scale. Premier Broz wanted the Italians out, so he got them out by frightening them with the kind of massacre and/or forced expulsion he could never have actually gone through with because of Yugoslavia's tenuous diplomatic position (he would be condemned in the UN and lose all his western backing). This kind of sneaky "psychological ethnic cleansing", is, I'm afraid, not really ethnic cleansing, and its certainly not "
democide". --
DIREKTOR (
TALK) 16:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
For sure it was not as in Bosnia, but calling it "Voluntary free-will departure" is out of place. Maybe "mass emigration" is better, and like "esuli" is labelled "as they were called in Italy", "optanti" should be labelled "as they were called in Yugoslavia". These choices maybe would avoid edit wars... 79.17.238.247 ( talk) 17:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
So you think the Yugoslav government or somebody actually had a gun to their heads while they were writing it? I must say, your theory is completely improbable and very hard to prove. Yugoslavia was well known as the most liberal socialist state in Europe, it was not even part of the Eastern Bloc because of this. You've apparently "demonized" the country in your mind... -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 17:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
"All except three", how many were there? I'd say they were probably imprisoned not because they were Italian people, but for nationalism and "demanding autonomy", which is separatism (Kosovo, for example, only "demanded autonomy"). Any prominent Croat or Serb would face prison sentences for the same offenses. Why? For good reason. Have you heard of the Yugoslav Wars? nationalism is generally very bad for Yugoslavia. And even if they were all sent to Goli, that does not make the departure of the Italian population "ethnic cleansing". -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 18:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I know about Furio, he's generally ok (nice last-minute touch with BrunodamĀ ;) but is he a historical scholar? Or is he a politician working towards a political goal? -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 18:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I'm the defender of the "holy soil of Croatia", and I absolutely loooove old Franjo and his fantasies. LOL! You don't know much about my editing, do you? Maybe you need to look at the kind of stuff I've had to deal with from the reeal Croatian nationalists? And maybe you should ask my cousin in Milan weather or not I think he is "fascistic/irredentistic/separatistic" or whatever? As for Radin, he does indeed have quite a few political goals, not the least of which is getting double voting rights for Italians and so on. You know, twice the culture, twice the vote, right?Ā ;) -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 19:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
First of all, I disagree with your summary of the issue. I hardly think Italian historians, for example, have a consensus on this matter. Even if they did, this is not a matter of "what do nations think", as you simplified it, this is a matter of actual events and evidence. And here's the problem with the "forced migration/ethnic cleansing" idea: please show me the directive of the Yugoslav Federal Government ordering the JNA to "force the migration" of the Italian minority, or anything even close to that. Where's the soldiers on the streets, where are the trucks and trains taking people against their will, i.e. "forcing them to migrate"? Where are the long winding columns of Italian refugees fleeing from their homes in terror... you get the picture. Let me put this in so simple terms its almost offensive: Tito duped a large part of the Italian minority into leaving of their own free will. Actually forcing them out ("forced migration") would be completely and utterly impossible for Yugoslavia in that period. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 00:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Just a digression concerning your earlier statements on my position regarding Operation Storm. I want to make myself clear as you may have drawn some completely wrong conclusions ("But you think that during Operation Storm we have no ethnic cleansing... (...) Now I understand more... about you!"). Only small incidents therein might be considered "ethnic clensing", but the whole operation is not considered so by the United Nations. I am personally deeply saddened by the fact that Croatia lost so many of its citizens. I am sure that the HDZ and TuÄman (my hero :P) prayed to god for the Serbs to leave, but there's a catch: the Croatian Army was built up by NATO (= USA) and TuÄman could not risk actually ethnically cleansing the Serbs. Why? because the Clinton administration would be seen as indirectly supporting ethnic cleansing, and crossing the Americans is a very bad idea. So you see, the matter is a tad bit more complex than you might think (this is only a part of the equation), and Storm could not be organized as an ethnic cleansing operation. Not because that #X%&! TuÄman is a nice democratic ex-communist, but because it simply could not be executed as such. As it happened, TuÄman unfortunately had it his way and came out clean. Much like the Italians, if the Serbs stayed, they could not have been removed by force. -- DIREKTOR ( TALK) 01:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
DIREKTOR do you know what is a Diaspora? Go to read what does it mean and then say if this wasn't a Diaspora -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Maybe I can't speak English like DIREKTOR but I live in Trieste and I know better than him this historical facts. I think DIREKTOR is too involved infact he writes that he strongly supports Josip Broz Tito ideas. Tito who kills thousands of Italians. However Italian was forced to leave Istrian territory. This is history -- En.mat003 ( talk) 09:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
There's a lot of illustrious books that talk about these facts confirming that was a Diaspora. I invite you to read someone like "Il Lungo Esodo" di Raoul Pupo -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
So you are saying that is correct write that it was a Diaspora. We have to rewrite it in the text -- En.mat003 ( talk) 12:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Everywhere is written that is a diaspora, only on this Wikipedia we cannot write this. At least write "departure" and not " voluntary free-will departure" --
En.mat003 (
talk) 06:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe you don't know that "diaspora" is an international word. So I know what does it mean -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry my teacher, it will be the last time that I make this mistake. I'm saying that the correct word to use is "diaspora" but you and Director don't want to use this word (I don't know why). So I'm saying that is more correct to write "departure" and not " voluntary free-will departure"- Only this. Sorry if my english is not at your level --
En.mat003 (
talk) 08:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Every historian agree that it wasn't a voluntary departure. Tito and his army killed thousands of Italian and so the remaining people were forced to leave their own home. Do you agree at least on this? -- En.mat003 ( talk) 18:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
If they didn't leave their home, they would have been killed sure -- En.mat003 ( talk) 19:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
So, in your opinion Tito's army didn't kill thousands of italian -- En.mat003 ( talk) 19:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Are you serious? Really you think that Tito didn't known nothing? Did you really think that the motivations were only ideologically and not ethnically? You are re-writing the History as you want, but this is not possible on an Encyclopedia -- En.mat003 ( talk) 07:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
There are a lot of source that agree with what I'm saying. The problem is that you consider them POV only because say something different than what you are saying. Is useless to talk with you, you are too involved infact you "strongly support Josip Broz Tito's views". -- En.mat003 ( talk) 11:55, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand where's the problem if I send that massage. I think that you are writing something wrong on this page so I'm finding someone that can help me to improve it. -- En.mat003 ( talk) 12:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I do not want to keep flogging a dead horse, but I think there is a valuable point that En.mat003 made, which got a bit lost in the course of the discussion: could not the initial statement just read: "The expression Istrian exodus or Istrian-Dalmatian exodus is used to indicate the departure of ethnic Italians..." etc? This would not put up front a judgment on the character of the departure and would be, I think, more in tune with the rest of the article (which I find quite good, by the way), which hints to a multiplicity of causes leading to the departure (or departures). The quotes from the Italian-Slovenian relation (which I personally consider a capital document on the issue) at the bottom of the article also seem to reinforce the idea that different interpretations can be reached of the nature of the exodus and that, in some instances, historians are left with "deducing" what really happened. Simply calling it a "departure" in the opening would not prejudge the final views on such a debate, leaving up to the reader to form his/her own opinion after a careful reading of the article. Thanks Farinata1260 ( talk) 20:59, 6 October 2008 (UTC)