My old friend Pratap Bhanu Mehta, in the Indian Express, over here.
(The Michael Mann article he mentions is over here.)
This entry was posted on Thursday, February 28th, 2008 @ 9:27 am on the category europe.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
It is not true. It is completely ahistoric. Yugoslavia was not a nation state. The birth of Kosovo is a product of the deep crisis of the former Yugoslavia. Which was in many respect a modell state of ethnic tolerance. This is not a question of Mill vs. Acton.
↓ Quote | Posted 29 February, 2008, 5:47 pmHow can Yugoslavia not be a nation state, and yet be “a modell [sic] state of ethnic tolerance”? Confused.
↓ Quote | Posted 29 February, 2008, 8:30 pmYugoslavia was a (federal) state of many nations, and nationalities. So it was not a nation state. Wikipedia: “The post-World War II Yugoslavia was in many respects a model of how to build a multinational state.”
↓ Quote | Posted 29 February, 2008, 10:40 pmAn example: Official languages in Vojvodina: Serbo-Croatian, Hungarian, Slovak, Romanian, Rusyn. And see the Wikipedia about Vojvodina: “At first, the province enjoyed only a small level of autonomy within Serbia, but it gained extensive rights of self-rule under the 1974 Yugoslav constitution, which gave both Kosovo and Vojvodina de facto veto power in the Serbian and Yugoslav parliaments, as changes to their status could not be made without the consent of the two Provincial Assemblies.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voivodina
Hope this helps…