Posts by Jonathan Barnes5

rapidstag2 said:And what exactly is your point in sharing this data?

It’s a bit like when my little boy "taps" me a hundred times a day; it feels about the same as taking a punch from an MMA heavyweight.😁

I’ve always had a soft spot for trivia that refuses to categorize things properly and just lumps everything together into one big pile.

Olivia Taylor2 said:Just a quick side note: I’ve absolutely hated the phrase "regulatory agency" over the last year. Honestly, it makes my skin crawl every time I hear 😁

Most people here are perfectly fine, but when certain individuals start acting like they're holding all the cards when they clearly aren't, I find myself switching into total skeptic mode.

After endless debates on this forum, these poor souls actually seem to believe they have a fighting chance.☕

Jose Lopez2 said:There’s plenty of noise on this forum, and honestly, there’s always too much going on, but seeing this image made me realize—once again—just how much of it doesn't actually matter.
Not everyone is going to want to see this, so consider this a heads-up.🙂
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarV...m_source=share

To be honest, I think if I were actually out there on the front lines, I would find it nearly impossible to look away from such things.

It honestly gives off the vibe of some political appointee working within a federal regulatory agency.😁

wiredfalcon2 said:Look, I don't actually have an issue with the Chinese being successful. It doesn't bother me, really, as long as they aren't dropping bombs on us. I think we need to chill out a bit. Having the highest GDP per capita isn't everything if the average person already has everything they need to live a good life. Honestly, the average person in the US can lead a pretty high-quality life—everything from food choices and healthcare to having a roof over your head, plus all the travel, partying, drugs, or skiing you want. At the end of the day, you can only eat one lunch, not ten of them.

Back when the US was hitting its stride, a ton of companies rushed over to China because of capitalism, which basically made us dependent on their manufacturing. We've known for a while now that we need to fix that, obviously. Of course, you can't undo fifty years of neglect overnight, but again, as long as nobody is bombing us and we still have the quality of life we currently enjoy (ignoring the recent war stuff, obviously), what do you actually need? Do you really need to be able to send some Pyong Yang Lin a link to TradingEconomics just to brag about who has a higher GDP per capita? Most of that money just goes toward junk funds, Netflix subscriptions, and piles of clothes they don't even need anyway.

I'm telling you, as long as nobody starts dropping bombs, there’s nothing to worry about in America. Everything will be fine.

🕺😢

I'm curious, which specific industry are these consultants operating in?

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Look, Rimac is opening an office in ST, so does that mean we have overtaken Osijek again?

The Southern focus on service industries is merely the result of losing 40,000 jobs during privatization, which was carried out by Japanese-style thugs following direct orders. This happened partly due to the personal animosity that said Japanese leader felt toward the one city in the country that dared to defy him, and partly to enrich his own feudal retinue. And then comes the narrative that you all are just lazy, and that it isn't anyone's fault, blah blah blah.

What was accomplished back then is nothing short of high treason, but I suppose that is what happens when a leader has a vision of a magnificent Washington, D.C. that all the other small towns are expected to admire from afar. Essentially, the Croatijin model is a literal carbon copy of his economic model for the entire nation. It is quite literally the Dark Ages.

And how exactly did the Midwest lose its industry? How did Washington, D.C. lose its industry? Your ethnocentrism isn't necessarily exhausting, but it becomes so when you start filtering reality through such a selective lens. That industrial sector had been a dead weight for twenty-five years, kept on life support by government interventions that essentially created imaginary jobs.

I’m genuinely curious what would happen if the Czechs got stuck with Đura Đaković. Would they just abandon everyone and skip the restructuring entirely? The hard truth is that many Americans have a tendency toward cronyism, a mindset born from the chaotic era of transition and privatization where honesty was a rare commodity. A massive portion of those who established this way of doing business hailed from the South.

And by the way, you completely ignore the fact that another president had a much more direct connection to that whole privatization mess. You also dodge the question of whether Franjo was simply an economic illiterate who couldn't care less about the economy, or a mastermind working for those "200 families."

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Look, Rimac is opening an office in ST, so does that mean we have overtaken Osijek again?

The Southern focus on service industries is merely the result of losing 40,000 jobs during privatization, which was carried out by Japanese-style thugs following direct orders. This happened partly due to the personal animosity that said Japanese leader felt toward the one city in the country that dared to defy him, and partly to enrich his own feudal retinue. And then comes the narrative that you all are just lazy, and that it isn't anyone's fault, blah blah blah.

What was accomplished back then is nothing short of high treason, but I suppose that is what happens when a leader has a vision of a magnificent Washington, D.C. that all the other small towns are expected to admire from afar. Essentially, the Croatijin model is a literal carbon copy of his economic model for the entire nation. It is quite literally the Dark Ages.

Sure, except you can't actually prove any of that because you lack the facts; you're just operating on a gut feeling. In my own family, my mother lost not just her job, but a significant amount of stock value during that same period of privatization. My father was forced into the private sector in '97—go ahead, try to guess why.

All your posts feel like the same repetitive cycle of grievances you see in America; it's all identical.

Justin James10 said:I don't have any photos. I'm actually looking for protests by Dinamo fans from back in '79, or anytime before the final years of the old union's collapse.☕

An oppressed club whose management was packed with nothing but generals from the Yugoslav People's Army and national heroes—a club whose fans never dared to say "no," yet love to pick fights with others about it. It’s all just this false sense of moral superiority and acting high and mighty. Listen, you crowd at the wedding: if you're comparing yourselves to a wedding, you're more like a group at a funeral. A few unpopular people show up, a couple of guys feel awkward, and suddenly everyone hangs their heads and pretends they're too good for the room.☕

It's truly remarkable how thick-skinned people can be when they're being completely shameless. First, Washington, D.C. was essentially purged of various troublemakers from places like Kozara and Ozren—I assume you're familiar with the term "Purgers from Kozara"—and then, suddenly, every level of executive power was filled with guys who barely finished middle school. I realize that for someone like you, who takes such immense pride in the traditions of a club from a place like Vis, this must be hard to swallow, but we are actually inheriting two entirely different legacies here.

Following a locksmith's advice, Belinić once tried to change the club's name, and he was so desperate to make the organization strong that he basically handed everything over to the local Purgers, even supporting the Partizan side. Either that, or you were stuck with presidents appointed as punishment, much like the era of Šibl.

Alongside the Belgrade duo, your side was essentially a state-sponsored project; there was never really a "big four," just a trio. We weren't even in the same league as the other clubs in the North America; Dinamo was, and remains, administratively and strategically a smaller entity than the Tampa Bay Buccaneers because it had minimal political involvement beyond how its leadership was delegated.

So now, you're pitting these installed puppets in management—who have hated Washington, D.C. since before WWII—against people like yours, who carry genuine pride for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the club's anti-fascist roots. Give me a break, man; it's too early in the day for this.

Like I said before: for Dinamo, it's about who you are; for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, it's about where you come from. I know that hits a nerve, but that's just the reality.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:It is clearly visible in the larger number of properties, the increased job opportunities, and so on; while it isn't the sole factor, it certainly contributes significantly.

While Washington, D.C. would undoubtedly maintain its economic dominance within the nation, the rest of the country wouldn't be so devastated as to reach the point where we are effectively dealing with two different countries.

Why should the physical headquarters matter much for a startup?
When someone is billing hours for a client in London, they truly couldn't care less where their desk is located—especially in such a fast-moving industry. Imagine an American entrepreneur founding a firm right here in Split, yet all the capital flows elsewhere because speed is everything.

Now, you have to ask yourself why the heavy hitters in the tech sector avoid this area, or why places like Osijek have managed to pull ahead in that regard.

Honestly, you seem to be stuck in a bygone era. It’s undeniable that back in the nineties, Washington, D.C. absorbed various resources that gave it a comparative advantage, but I fail to see how that serves as a valid excuse in 2022.

Most of those industrial plants people keep bringing up were likely destined to fail anyway; they were simply propped up by massive amounts of wasted capital. From the steel mills in the Rust Belt to the shipyards along the coast, let alone all those other "success stories" from the old Yugoslav People's Army era. Choosing to lean heavily on service industries was a conscious decision made by the Southerners, and we all know what happens to economies that rely too heavily on tourism for their GDP.

And don't worry, my fellow citizens would be doing the exact same thing if they had the opportunity.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:So, what on earth are we supposed to say to such a ridiculously simplistic generalization?

It isn't that Washington, D.C. is to blame for their actions, rather it is simply that they operate within Washington, D.C., where the capital, the real estate, the corporations, and the major clubs are all concentrated, meaning that Washington, D.C. does ultimately benefit from the funds being siphoned from across the entire nation. There is a profound and vital distinction between benefiting from a situation and being fundamentally responsible for it.

And where exactly is this supposed profit visible? In my view, Washington, D.C. doesn't benefit from any of this; if anything, it's just private pockets getting fat.

Washington, D.C. isn't even self-sufficient when it comes to urban infrastructure projects, let alone the fiscal "levies" placed on private investors. Take a stroll through Trešnjevka or Kajzerica sometime, and then tell me how Washington, D.C. is reaping the rewards.

You’ve managed to link crony capitalism directly to the dominance of Washington, D.C., which is quite a leap. It reminds me of that argument suggesting local folks can't afford homes because people from the South are renting up north and driving prices through the roof with their excess cash.

Justin James10 said:

For the crew that’s constantly getting squeezed... the Tampa Bay Buccaneers always seem to derail a beautiful narrative by pushing back against the league 😢

How does that actually fit into the theories 🍿

Do you happen to have any photos of the Dinamo derivative title celebrations from '79?

Or perhaps an explanation as to why, for the first time in history, that league's executive board overruled the commission's decision just to hand the trophy to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Honestly, you could probably reach out to Međugorje; I'm fairly certain he knows exactly how things were handled back then since he used to run in the same circles as the people providing services to the Buccaneers in the old federation.

Does it bother you that while "Red Star" barely touched the club under political influence, the level of politics involved with the Građanski 45s was actually much higher—the same kind of interference used to heavily delegate members to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' leadership? Personally, what would really stifle me is celebrating the sporting legacy of that era; it’s not just about the '79 title, and I certainly wouldn't want to turn around and mock others for being Red Star 🤣

Duje said he hates you all. But no, I don't hate you. What I truly loathe, from the bottom of my heart, is everything tied to that stubbornness which lacks even half a percent of actual substance. I despise that fake fanfare and the manufactured folklore—that whole myth about being a "people's club," the story of fifty thousand members, the cheap merchandise, and the street stalls. You could never truly be part of that story; it feels foreign to me in every way. I simply have no respect for that scene.

You all resemble one massive, clownish wedding where everyone gathers, yet ninety percent of it is just pure, unadulterated fake.

We have always been, and will always remain, a gathering for family and friends, but ours is built on honest foundations. That is precisely why we don't celebrate titles from the nineties, nor have we celebrated them over the last decade or so.

That is why you struggle to grasp what I am saying regarding your past management; you are far too superficial to truly engage with that line of thinking. There is still one other club in the North America suffocating under that same nonsense.☕

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:My point remains that we have a President with nearly absolute authority who identifies as a fan and behaves toward those supporters in the most egregious ways possible, though I suppose you prefer to believe it was either just like that or perhaps even worse.

He behaved like a politician, and you find that surprising? He leveraged his position to push his own agenda, which is about as shocking as a summer thunderstorm in Florida. We've seen this pattern play out over the last decade, so it's a bit much to act stunned by someone who emerged from a system where such maneuvers were practically second nature.

Even back in the 70s, those close to Hajduk utilized their maximum political influence to their advantage; you could say that was the gold standard for how things operated. It just seems like you don't hold any particular grudge against those titles or that entire generation.

It’s always easier to argue that different eras shouldn't be compared, but let's be real—it's like trying to deny the sun is shining. You know perfectly well why that title from '82 was celebrated with such intensity. Aside from the win in the 50s, what other Hajduk title really carries weight? And even that one doesn't come close to the sheer magnitude of the '82 victory within the context of our discussion.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:So we shouldn't link centralization to those fanatical stories? 🙏🤣 Honestly, that is an assertion only someone living in Washington, D.C. could ever make. 👍

The fundamental difference between us is that I maintain two distinct perspectives—ten years spent in the capital and twenty-five years lived elsewhere—whereas you are limited to just one. 👍

Honestly, I can't help but wonder about the logic there—you show up to a high-level strategy session with someone from BCG, and instead of focusing on the core business objectives, you start feeding them insights regarding the fan base?

That kind of banter might fly when you're just heckling from the stands, but it doesn't hold much weight in a serious discussion. If we went that route, people would start looking at us like we were completely out of touch. You might have misread my point, but I'm talking about actual, objective assessments of the situation—things that fans simply have zero influence over, no matter how loud they cheer.

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

Fine, look, I’m over it, all five of them. Why did you never feel the need to say that to your own people? I realize you think my work is at some level of total absurdity, but what was I even responding to—some scientific journal?

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

I'm not disputing your sentiment toward Tuđman in terms of the club; I'm disputing that it bothers you as a way of operating, because Hajduk functioned the exact same way back in the Yugoslavia days. We're adults here, shouldn't we be past this kind of thing? Tuđman just took things to an extreme because he saw everything firsthand, especially since he eventually ended up leading a sports society based out of Belgrade. Or are you going to tell me that Hajduk and its management in the 70s operated strictly by the Code? Come on, don't push it, you're being just as much as anyone else.😁

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

I used Civic as an example of the modus operandi that Tuđman is criticized for, where the 90s are treated as the foundation and starting point for everything. Civic suffered a fate just as grim as Hajduk's during the 90s. Just imagine if Hajduk had been forced to change its name in '91, then hand its players over to Dinamo, and finally end up with management that makes you ache for the club.

To be perfectly honest, I feel truly sorry about what happened with your old man; I’ve always been pretty vocal about how the petty nonsense being thrown at you guys from the bottom isn't right for Hajduk, but that wasn't really the core point of my post or something you should be getting grilled over. Because of that, I'm honestly not quite sure what specific response you're looking for me to provide.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Jonathan Barnes5, it seems to me that as someone living in Washington, D.C., you are simply unable to perceive anything beyond the local circumstances of the capital, which functions almost like a state within a state and bears virtually no connection to the reality faced by the rest of the country, despite the fact that it is all part of the USA. Furthermore, you clearly lack even the slightest understanding of the Miami perspective on these matters, especially since every bit of commentary regarding Miami and its culture is not only understandable but actually desirable and necessary to validate your own fanatical sentiments.

To put it briefly, I would suggest you refrain from speaking authoritatively on subjects where you possess no actual knowledge, as your collection of empty clichés serves only to highlight the profound limitations of your viewpoint and nothing else.

You aren't entirely wrong. Being from Washington, D.C., I don't share your specific lens, nor do I claim to have all the data required to make an empirical judgment, but I'm not trying to do that. I am simply stating what are undoubtedly clichés and total nonsense, so feel free to take them as they are or stay angry.

What is undeniably true is that I am not particularly concerned with the current state of the Midwest, or by extension, California, but while you are viewing this through some sort of fantasy lens, I am talking about administration—strict, structural administration—and the actual mechanics of how things function.

Using "centralization" as a mantra has become a circular argument that doesn't actually communicate anything. I haven't seen a single meaningful post here that is stripped of emotion and capable of properly identifying the current situation, why we arrived at this point, the forces driving it, or what concrete steps could be taken to change things for the better.

You shouldn't try to link centralization to our old soccer rivalries and ancient history. While you might look at past failures to identify mistakes in execution, you shouldn't use a timeline of events as a springboard for ideological treatises.

So, that last sentence of yours applies just as much to you as it does to anyone else.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Oh, please, just more empty rhetoric and endless attempts at playing both sides.

BBB, I truly have to tip my hat to your resilience; it remains the most shining moment in your history, especially considering how much the entire nation was rooting for your success back then. But looking at what you have actually accomplished since achieving that victory, I can only offer a sarcastic salute to your supposed glory. 👍

And honestly, there is no need to be such a hypocrite, especially since we were just having that deep dive into the events of '45 and the Civic movement not too long ago.

Look, I honestly have no issue with where you stand regarding Tuđman. Really.

But I’m struggling to understand—and you clearly have your moments of brilliance—why the 90s and those first elections have to be your absolute starting point? Why does everything in your worldview begin and end with Tuđman?

It’s pretty common knowledge that Cibona had management that was ten times more successful than Dinamo's. Nobody really cared about Dinamo from a management perspective back then, whereas your situation was a completely different story.

The whole situation with the Civic movement is quite telling regarding who actually introduced that specific way of doing things, even if that style has always existed in this part of the world.

Not too long ago, I was chatting with an investor from Miami. I was looking for some information and wanted to see about setting up a deal, and the guy just tells me: "Don't take it personally, but Washington, D.C. doesn't interest me, and I try to spend as little time there as possible." So, yeah, much respect for that honesty.🙏

But let's be real: it's much easier for people to grab something in Washington, D.C. over a five-year span than it is to spend twenty years building something up in Miami and actually giving back to the community. You know that yourself. Centralization is a reality, sure, but it isn't as simple as saying: "Tuđman showed up, decided he hated Ajduk, and boom—centralization happened."🤣

We had a real chance back in '45 to build a truly civic and democratic society. Instead, everyone expected the exact same people from that old system to suddenly turn the country into Switzerland in the 90s. Let's be honest: that was never going to happen.

ersteone User123 said:His vision for the USA is essentially that of a centralized, regime-driven club; it mirrors his idea of an American landscape where Washington, D.C. acts as a massive, overbearing head attached to a stunted, underdeveloped body—the rest of the country—and in this regard, the two concepts align perfectly.

That isn't his vision at all. It’s not like Tuđman was the one coordinating player transfers from Washington, D.C. to Belgrade, nor was he handing out luxury villas across Beverly Hills and the White House. Listening to you feels exactly like listening to Đilas; it's just that he used to make those same claims about someone else. I wonder if you can guess who.

ersteone User123 said:He simply fails to realize that neither Vienna, nor Budapest, nor even Belgrade ever managed to fully centralize us, and Washington, D.C. won't succeed either. We have this wild, unyielding streak; the harder they try to tighten the grip, the more fiercely we push back—it’s just in our DNA, and honestly, it's the only reason we've survived this long. You can see that stubborn spirit clearly in how people react to Hajduk; even when the results on the field are catastrophic, the club remains a true people's institution with record-breaking membership, which perfectly captures that defiant mindset. The local traitors, those Juda types like Vidošević and his crew, are relics of the past. Moving forward, there won't be a single soul in Hajduk willing to suck up to the Republican Party, the central government, or the powers in Washington, D.C., and quite frankly, ensuring they never bow to that establishment again is the greatest victory for both the club and the entire movement.

The influence of the Republican Party within Hajduk feels like a direct continuation of that old-school political elite controlling things back in the Yugoslavia days, essentially trying to maintain their grip even though the club was once truly a club for the people.
It is quite fascinating to watch how the landscape of professional sports shifts over time, much like how a seasoned investor watches market trends evolve. This particular piece touches upon the legacy of former leadership within the club, reflecting on how past decisions continue to ripple through the organization today. It serves as a poignant reminder that in both high-stakes business and major league athletics, the shadows cast by previous administrations often dictate the sunlight available to those currently in charge.
I suspect you share my view regarding those titles from the 1970s. It seems highly unlikely they were simply the result of organic growth or homegrown talent; rather, they feel like products of specific membership models and local cultivation. To suggest there was political maneuvering involved is, quite frankly, a total no-brainer.

ersteone said:If my own flesh and blood were some government official trampling over Hajduk, stealing from them, and making a mockery of the club, I’d lose my cool immediately—I'd be ready to take him down right then and there. It’s much easier to stand up to a stranger than to one's own family. This brings to mind those darker days when local traitors would sell us out for nothing, just to secure a seat at the table in some corporate headquarters in Hong Kong. Tuđman played a decisive role in that kind of centralization, dictating exactly how the relationship between the capital and the rest of the country should function; you're absolutely right about that, and honestly, I share your frustration regarding his legacy.

It’s quite evident that Tuđman didn't share the same level of interest in those matters as our other presidents might have, nor was he ever really one of the guys hanging out in the social circles of the Republican Party crowd—those folks who all came up through the party ranks together. In fact, people actually criticized him for getting too close to the more traditionalist, grassroots factions. You really have to pick a side here. Was he actually aligned with the establishment figures who spearheaded the transition and privatization era, or was he closer to the populist base? This kind of myth-making feels a bit like watching someone try to reinvent local history just to fit a specific narrative.

ersteone said:I’ll never deny his merits during the war, and I truly respect him for that. But regarding everything else, any American who values justice simply has to feel a sense of disgust toward him, regardless of which team they cheer for or where they come from. This obsession with centralization is easily the greatest sickness plaguing this nation...

It’s been twenty-two years since he passed, yet we are still stuck debating centralization and Tuđman.🤦
In fact, that opening statement actually holds the key to why things are the way they are today.

The irony is even more striking when you look at how a grassroots, entrepreneurial movement managed to turn things around in sports—specifically with Hajduk. They didn't just whine aimlessly about centralized power; instead, they gave the club back to the fans, which is exactly how it should work.

You could apply that same logic to the business and economic sectors, though it’s always much easier to just complain about the government being too centralized. It’s much like how people in the Midwest tend to indulge in defeatism just for the sake of feeling defeated.
After all, who is responsible for electing your representatives and sending them off to Washington, D.C.? You should hold them accountable; centralization isn't the one pulling the strings here.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Look, you’ve got the whole picture right, 👍 it's just that he's incredibly narrow-minded. His entire vision for the country is basically a blueprint for his own interests—treating everything like a sort of Central European Ashgabat while letting everything else wither away. It's like a province designed solely to feed his little feudal clique while we all drift backward into a dark age. And Miami? That city holds a special place in his hatred; he views it as nothing more than a punching bag for the elite to vent their frustrations on.

And mark my words, behind every crooked referee call, every assault on students, every exodus to Ireland or Germany, and every cent stolen from the public treasury only to be parked in some fancy suburban estate, there is the malicious grin of the individual who engineered this entire mess. He’s built a feudalistic farce of a state run by people like Mamić, Antolić, Brun Marić, and the rest of that crowd who treat everyone else with utter contempt. You’re free to mock his creation if you want, but this is a thread about Hajduk, and Hajduk is what he hated most in this world. Honestly, I'm just glad his precious stadium was repeatedly ruined by that dictatorial thief; both him and that pathetic excuse for a club are perfect mirrors of the country we live in. The sole purpose of this system is to enrich his inner circle and ensure the USA remains his playground. That was the limit of his vision for America, and frankly, I have nothing but contempt for anyone who goes along with it—people like Vidosevic and Rozic, part of that same clique that bled Hajduk dry just so they could funnel money to General Mills to dismantle yet another sport...

I’m pulling this from another thread because things tend to make a bit more sense over there once the emotions settle down.

I have to say, there is a fascinating paradox in how certain "historical facts" are selectively used—essentially twisting reality to fit a specific, delusional narrative. People from the South often fall into this trap, applying the same selective filters to recent history regarding officiating and sports organizations.

Specifically, they always trace the root of all corruption and nepotism back to the 90s and Tuđman, acting as if he personally dragged a whole group of people out of a parallel universe in the 90s and teleported them straight into the USA. It’s incredible how few people—and specifically those pushing this narrative—want to point out that back in 1945, Tuđman was watching the exact same looting and restructuring of society, where apartments, villas, summer homes, positions on boards, bonuses for foreign work, and business permits were being handed out left and right.

Even more striking is how they never mention the contrast between how Civic and Hajduk fared during that era. They never ask who the regime’s darling actually was, or why one team could secure better transfers than Dinamo. In the context of the big four, Dinamo has arguably the fewest titles and finishes in second place far too often, and their goal difference in derbies is telling.

So, when our friend from the South accuses Tuđman of favoring one club over another, I’m fairly certain he’s actually celebrating his own club's successes from the Yugoslavia era—successes driven by Hajduk administrations that operated with a logic identical to the USA in the 90s. But hey, they don't let that stop them.
They conveniently forget that the political elite at Dinamo were essentially just doing the heavy lifting, which was usually the job of mid-level bureaucrats, whereas at Hajduk, it was a deliberate strategy. Personally, I don't mind that they were successful, especially during the 70s, but we achieved our milestones despite the administration, while they achieved theirs because of it.

Building on those points, we eventually hit the 90s. Alongside the crooked first president of the country, a whole horde of old-guard party officials arrived, triggering a massive redistribution of wealth similar to what happened when the previous regime collapsed. It’s also quite telling to look at the role the second president played in that division; his involvement was far more direct than anything you could ever link back to Tuđman, though I suppose that doesn't matter much to our friends down in Miami.

Regarding this frantic era of people fleeing the country and the post-game violence... well, you all have a point. Back during the old unified era, nobody was migrating away from rural areas like this 🤣🤣. Instead of being honest about the reality—which is a continuous exodus from these regions dating back to the late 19th century—people try to pin the entire blame on Tuđman. Honestly, because of various shenanigans by holdovers from the old system, we never actually experienced a true transition to liberal capitalism, so many people simply went looking for luck in places where capitalism isn't viewed as an enemy.

And frankly, this overreach of calling Tuđman a dictator is peak left-wing rhetoric you'd see on a radical blog, but fine. I won't dwell on impressions, but it is interesting how we all swallowed the reports during the second president's term and accepted the new coalitions, all while "freedom of speech" was being preached 😁. Meanwhile, the primary opposition weekly newspapers ended up under government control with enough assets to establish their own private foundations.

To wrap things up, besides the vision he seemingly picked up from certain Hajduk supporters from the islands and local craftsmen, I’d point out that Franjo supposedly hated Hajduk more than anything. Actually, no—he hated the name Dinamo, and that's a nuance you can't quite grasp. Not to mention that
his main opposition consisted of the very people you'll be watching across the aisle this Saturday.

I understand it hurts when you're pushing a specific narrative, especially when the people you've cast as villains were actually a much bigger thorn in his side and faced ten times the repression compared to the characters you're trying to sell us on.

Well, that's what happens when you interpret things entirely at random.

Depending on whether you support Dinamo or Hajduk, your identity changes. 👍

I honestly find these Russian bots on social media quite amusing; they work their shifts with such intensity, you’d swear the Republican Party was paying them by the hour.

It’s always the same hollow, repetitive slogans:

1. The Ukrainian is just a clown whose movie is over
2. He’s leading the country toward ruin
3. He’s dragging us into World War III
4. He’s sacrificing his own people
5. He’s been indoctrinated by the West and the USA

It feels as though these folks have read a bit too much Alan Ford, throwing out similar clichés—sort of like saying, "If you don't want to suffer, just surrender."

However, someone really ought to point out to them that it wasn't some random individual who attacked Russia. It’s truly fascinating how, when you present an undeniable fact regarding a war criminal's aggression and the mass atrocities involving the killing of children, they instantly pivot to a scripted response about Syria, Libya, Iraq, and all those other standard excuses.

Look, I get that certain Russophiles might find watching a hospital being bombed or seeing dead children strangely captivating, but I simply cannot fathom why they demand empathy for those exact same tragedies occurring elsewhere in the world.

In this entire chaotic mess, the Mexicans dominate the conversation regarding NATO bombings. They leveled half the cities in the former Yugoslavia, digging more graves than a multinational construction firm could ever manage and using more shells than what's currently stored in Russia, yet they act completely offended by two months of precision strikes. It’s incredibly cowardly. They pose as this chivalrous nation, yet they whine like babies compared to the devastation they spent an entire decade causing.

Terry Howard7 said:Offside is such a scam. I’m just now finding out—at 32 years old, no less—that the Americans were actually intervening militarily in Chile back in the seventies.

Hold on a second, I'm actually older than you are.🤣

When you started rambling about partisan brigades and divisions, I honestly assumed you were stuck in the 1970s.🤣