Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 136 posts

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#101

Post by lhorie »

Foivos wrote: post #77
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #54

I continue to regard this as the stupidest geopolitical dispute our reality can safely support.

What would it mean for Portugal if Spain decided to change its name to Iberia? This is exactly what is happening here. They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders.

> They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders.

Surely that can't be the whole reason for this dispute. I mean, the name "United States of America" would also fall into that description, but nobody's up in arms about it.

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#102

Post by andmarios »

everdev wrote: post #56

> By agreeing to rename itself the Republic of North Macedonia the country will replace an interim accord under which it joined the UN 23 years ago as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. > The agreement means Skopje will need to make more than 150 changes to its constitution before Greece brings the pact before its own parliament for ratification – a task replete with challenges for Zaev, who like Tsipras has…

It is not just a name change, this is only the most title-worthy part of the deal.

The FYROM constitution includes claims to Greek territories. Part of the deal (among others) is for these claims to be removed.

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#103

Post by oblio »

djif wrote: post #18
black_puppydog wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greece didn't claim the country for itself, it claimed the name for it's own northern province.

Greece didn't claim anything. Macedonia has been a Greek region for thousands of years. The so-called 'macdonia' state and the whole naming dispute emerged out of nowhere after WWII.

Second Balkan war? :)

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#104

Post by Sangermaine »

newfoundglory wrote: post #96
Sangermaine wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, lol, it’s the reverse of the Macedonia-Greece issue: the US was the only recognized independent state in the Americas when they chose their name. If “Canada and Mexico and all of South America would like a word” they should invest in time machines.

No, I don't see how you think it's opposite. Macedonia is a name for a large area. FYROM/Northern Macedonia is being used to name a country that takes up only part of this area. Similarly, the Americas are two continents, and USA is being used to name a country that takes up only part of this area. Neither the USA nor FYROM are granted any claim to the rest of their nominal superset.

>No, I don't see how you think it's opposite.

Because you're misunderstanding the issue at hand.

Greece and Macedonia aren't having an abstract argument over sets. As the article explains, Greece has two specific objections to its neighbor using the name Macedonia: that the name (and certain actions) are thinly-disguised territorial claims against its own province of Macedonia, and are an attempt to lay lay claim to the historical/cultural legacy of the ancient Greeks.

This is why the US situation is the opposite, because the US as a separate nation predates all of the other nations you mentioned in the Americas. It therefore can't have been claiming territory of other neighboring states because there weren't any, nor were they claiming anyone's cultural legacy (except arguably the natives, but that's a charge that can be brought against every modern nation in the Americas).

It might help to recall that after the American Revolution the 13 colonies became 13 separate sovereign states that would only come together as a single nation in 1789 with the adoption of the U.S. Constitution. The new nation was a union of all then-extant states on an American continent, hence the United States of America. That other independent nations eventually came to be in the Americas has no bearing on what America chose to call itself at the time of its founding.

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#105

Post by deninho »

ryanlol wrote: post #50
ninjamayo wrote: post #30

I really hope things change for the better. Being from the north of Greece I know first hand the difficulties with the name. I am very passionate about it but I understand we live in a different world. My feeling is that the Greek government and their NATO, EU allies pushed this forward now in order to stop the imperialistic plans of Erdogan in the region. I think with more Balkan countries in the EU, NATO influences…

>I am very passionate about it Could you perhaps expand on this a little? I have a very hard time understanding why someone would be passionate about something like this.

well, as an Albanian neighbor of mine says: "We, Balkan people, see flags and react like morons". It describes Balkan people to the point.

PS As a greek citizen, i couldnt care less about the name of our neighbors, as long as we live together in peace (and we do live in peace with them)

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#106

Post by refoundglory »

Sangermaine wrote: post #104
newfoundglory wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't see how you think it's opposite. Macedonia is a name for a large area. FYROM/Northern Macedonia is being used to name a country that takes up only part of this area. Similarly, the Americas are two continents, and USA is being used to name a country that takes up only part of this area. Neither the USA nor FYROM are granted any claim to the rest of their nominal superset.

>No, I don't see how you think it's opposite. Because you're misunderstanding the issue at hand. Greece and Macedonia aren't having an abstract argument over sets. As the article explains, Greece has two specific objections to its neighbor using the name Macedonia: that the name (and certain actions) are thinly-disguised territorial claims against its own province of Macedonia, and are an attempt to lay lay claim to…

(logged out, discovered last pass doesn't have the password for hn: new account to continue) I think you skipped over the comment that I was responding to, which said this: > They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders.

Sounds exactly like the USA at the time of their founding, and is in no way describable as "the opposite".

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#107

Post by jimmydddd »

lhorie wrote: post #101
Foivos wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would it mean for Portugal if Spain decided to change its name to Iberia? This is exactly what is happening here. They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders.

> They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders. Surely that can't be the whole reason for this dispute. I mean, the name "United States of America" would also fall into that description, but nobody's up in arms about it.

Think of it like a portion of Canada bordering Montana seceding from Canada and calling themselves Montana. Also, a lot of the people of a certain ethnicity from that portion of Canada move into Montana in the US. In time, the ex-Canada Montana people lay claim to the US Montana region. After all, it's all Montana, right? That's what they are worried about.

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#108

Post by GFischer »

lhorie wrote: post #101
Foivos wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would it mean for Portugal if Spain decided to change its name to Iberia? This is exactly what is happening here. They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders.

> They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders. Surely that can't be the whole reason for this dispute. I mean, the name "United States of America" would also fall into that description, but nobody's up in arms about it.

I mean, the name "United States of America" would also fall into that description, but nobody's up in arms about it.

Many people in South America think it's a ridiculous, pretentious name.

It's not even the only United States in America (for example, Mexico is formally United States of Mexico).

But nobody is that worried, it's true.

Re: Macedonia changes name, ending bitter dispute with Greece

#109

Post by grzm »

refoundglory wrote: post #106
Sangermaine wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No, I don't see how you think it's opposite. Because you're misunderstanding the issue at hand. Greece and Macedonia aren't having an abstract argument over sets. As the article explains, Greece has two specific objections to its neighbor using the name Macedonia: that the name (and certain actions) are thinly-disguised territorial claims against its own province of Macedonia, and are an attempt to lay lay claim to…

(logged out, discovered last pass doesn't have the password for hn: new account to continue) I think you skipped over the comment that I was responding to, which said this: > They want to be named after a geographical region which is way bigger than their borders. Sounds exactly like the USA at the time of their founding, and is in no way describable as "the opposite".

If you have an email address associated with an account, you can reset your password.
Post reply on HN