On Sat, 10 Apr 1999 Johannes.Schneider at gmx.net wrote:
> > > The following article, "Kosova's long struggle for independence", by
> > > Doug Lorimer
> >
> > is smart but painfully one-sided.
>
> Michael,
> perhaps I dont get the irony, but please be more specific.
> Isnt the truth always painfull and one-sided?
Actually, I think of the truth as many-sided, as something comprehends opposing perspectives, and one sided stuff as polemical.
> But what do you mean by smart?
I just meant that the writer included many things that aren't usually included in what is now becoming a stock summary (like the partnership between Tito and Hoxha and their negotiations over Kosovo) and other things I hadn't heard before and are very interesting if they are true (i.e., that Arboria re-established itself after the battle of Kosovo -- implying that Kosovo itself was independent for a century while Serbia was not); but he also left out lots of relevant things that certainly belonged in the story, like the Balkan War of 1912 and the importance of religion.
By one-sided, I meant it was all slanted towards the idea of Albania's claim on Kosovo, from the idea of ur-descent from the Illyrians to the ignoring of the pressuring of Serbs in the 80's. And of course he leaves out for better or worse what Kosovo means to the Serbs in terms of religion and nationality and makes it look like a big lease dispute.
By everything is one-sided on this issue, I just meant that all the really knowledgeable people seem to be polemical to the point of bending the truth, but who can blame them? There's a war on.
Michael __________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com