As someone who lives in what was once Yugoslavia, I always held an irrationally negative view of it since its collapse led to the formation of this unviable, non-sovereign, demographically collapsed statelet in which I am forced to reside.
However, looking back at it in a less emotional way, its collapse was an inevitability after the revolutionary and victorious zeal wore off after a few decades.
Its lifespan is no different to that of other nominally 'socialist' regimes of states divided along sectarian lines, with the collapse occurring after around half a century (as did Assad's Syria or Hussein's Iraq).
Although, compared to those regimes, Yugoslavia achieved far greater results in all areas while being a complete hell-hole to govern given the ethnic and religious grievances.
During WW2, Croatians supported and conducted genocide of the Serb and Bosniak population, Serbs had vast monarchist, reactionary units which collaborated with the Axis against the 'Communists', Albanians formed their own SS unit.
According to the 1948 census, literacy among Albanians in the South was no greater than 20%.
Imagine having to govern these vapid imbeciles while having a fully literate Slovenian population which had an astronomically better economic situation in the same state.
Comparatively in history, I can't think of a more fragmented society in any remotely viable, civilized state.
The fact that the 'socialists' (who couldn't have conducted any socialist policies due to the deeply reactionary, backward nature of the state and thus played into every nationalist prerogative imaginable) managed to keep peace, attain exemplary diplomatic status through a unique array of third world politics with the formation of the Non-aligned movement, get American aid while still receiving tacit Soviet support after Stalin's death and build one of the best economies in the East in a 35 year period is truly a remarkable feat of governance, however degenerate its downfall may have been.
However, looking back at it in a less emotional way, its collapse was an inevitability after the revolutionary and victorious zeal wore off after a few decades.
Its lifespan is no different to that of other nominally 'socialist' regimes of states divided along sectarian lines, with the collapse occurring after around half a century (as did Assad's Syria or Hussein's Iraq).
Although, compared to those regimes, Yugoslavia achieved far greater results in all areas while being a complete hell-hole to govern given the ethnic and religious grievances.
During WW2, Croatians supported and conducted genocide of the Serb and Bosniak population, Serbs had vast monarchist, reactionary units which collaborated with the Axis against the 'Communists', Albanians formed their own SS unit.
According to the 1948 census, literacy among Albanians in the South was no greater than 20%.
Imagine having to govern these vapid imbeciles while having a fully literate Slovenian population which had an astronomically better economic situation in the same state.
Comparatively in history, I can't think of a more fragmented society in any remotely viable, civilized state.
The fact that the 'socialists' (who couldn't have conducted any socialist policies due to the deeply reactionary, backward nature of the state and thus played into every nationalist prerogative imaginable) managed to keep peace, attain exemplary diplomatic status through a unique array of third world politics with the formation of the Non-aligned movement, get American aid while still receiving tacit Soviet support after Stalin's death and build one of the best economies in the East in a 35 year period is truly a remarkable feat of governance, however degenerate its downfall may have been.
