Talk:Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization

Splitting the IMRO/VMRO article in two separate articles 1) Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO/VMRO) and 2) Bulgarian Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (BIMRO/BVMRO)

If someone is reading this article he or she might think that the people from IMRO/VMRO were a bit confused if they were Bulgarian IMRO or just IMRO. That was not the case. It was two separate antagonist organizations (federalist/socialist/center left versus fascist/far right). Both wings had and have a very strong pro-Macedonian or pro-Bulgarian standpoints. We can see a historical development of two streams that are ideologically completely different, but having the same name. Maybe it is good to clear a bit in this article by splitting it in two.

1) IMRO/VMRO is a revolutionary organization for liberation of Macedonia and autonomy within the Ottoman empire (or federation of Balkan states). It became leftist and socialist before WW2 and organized the Macedonian Liberation War against fascist Bulgaria and Germany (it dissolved because Republic of Macedonia became an autonomous part of Yugoslavia, a partial federation of Balkan states). VMRO-DPMNE came out in the stage in the 1990s taking the name of a dissolved organization. Despite its proclamation as a "right" party, VMRO-DPMNE is still center-leftist in its politics of subsidies, populism, etc. For the ethnic Macedonians, the socialism and nationalism went hand in hand. The Macedonian nationalism was historically and is non xenophobic, but cosmopolitan (ethnic Macedonian living jointly with other ethnicities) as written in the Krushevo Maniphesto.

2) BIMRO/BVMRO is a wing of IMRO/VMRO that fought for liberation of Macedonia as part of San Stefano's Bulgaria. It was led by Macedonian intelligentsia in Bulgaria and fought for national Bulgarian interests. This wing became fascist before WW2 and kept its far right position until today. Today's IMRO-SMD or IMRO-BNM are Bulgarian nationalist far right party like the Party of the Swedes or Golden Dawn in Greece. These parties are often considered as xenophobic.

Toci (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

First name of the organisation

"After Hristo Tatarchev's "Memoirs" its first name since 1894 was Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (MRO). Ivan Hadzhinikolov in his memoirs underlines the five basic principles of the MRO's foundation ..."

In fact, Tatarchev did not point out that this has been the first name - he wrote why and how a Macedonian revolutionary organization has been established but the name itself is not explicitly indicated in his memories. The only reliable source regarding the initial name is the Statute of the Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees, where the organisation is clearly named. The first registered name is therefore BMARC, rather than MRO! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.73.146.73 (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Keep calm and read more. Regs! Jingby (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

The name of IMRO in Macedonian

Please, provide reference or source that the name of the organisation was written in Macedonian language since it was established in 1893 to its ban in 1934. If no I will remove this later transcription as inappropriate. Thanks. Jingby (talk) 18:34, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

You know well that the modern Macedonian language standards were setup later, but it is not a reason for removal of the Macedonian transcription. IMRO was an organization that fought under the slogan "Macedonia for Macedonians" and the organization has importance for both modern Macedonia and Bulgaria, so the name of the organization written in Macedonian language is relevant and appropriate. If we follow your logic, what would be the next step, removing Macedonian transcription in Goce Delcev and Gjorche Petrov articles?MatriX (talk) 19:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

"Macedonia for the Macedonians"- that's right but we shouldn't miss the part "all Macedonians regardless nationality and religion". The original IM(A)RO used Bulgarian as only official language in the documentation because the leaders were Macedonian Bulgarians which is shown in the article and could be found in detail in their memoirs. The organisation which could be renamed in accordance to the Macedonian spelling is IMRO-United. The original I. Mac.-Adr. R. O. operated not only on the territory of Macedonia but in Thrace too. Therefore using the Macedonian spelling is quite inaccurate because even not all Macedonians from that time have Macedonian identity today, especially the diaspora in Bulgaria. --Ivo (talk) 21:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said, the Macedonian naming is appropriate and it cannot be excluded because we are talking here about an organization that was fighting for Macedonian autonomy or independence in the Balkan region and it this organization played a key importance for the ethnic Macedonian struggle for independence and national awakening, therefore I'll reinsert the Macedonian transcription (I'm wondering why it is so irritating to a few Bulgarian editors).MatriX (talk) 13:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

This is only your POV. We need scietific proofs. Show them. Jingby (talk) 13:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

The Organisation was indisputably fighting for autonomous Macedonia but being classified as important for the ethnic Macedonian struggle is preposterously. Nobody from the leadership of IMARO had ethnic Macedonian identity and the autonomy was seen by many as the first step towards unification with Bulgaria(words of IMARO's founder, dr. Hristo Tatarchev). --Ivo (talk) 22:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The organization and its activities inspired and accelerated the movement to build (or strengthen) a separate Macedonian identity and state and from the current perspective it is significant to have the name of the organization written in Macedonian language. MatriX (talk) 09:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Krste Misirkov, a highly controversial writer who alternated between pan-Bulgarian and pan-Macedonian nationalism throughout his lifetime described the IMARO in his pro-Macedonian publication On Macedonian Matters written in the wake of the Ilinden-Preobrazhenie uprising as Bulgarian officials working for Bulgarian interests and linked in name, and in church and school matters, to the people of Bulgaria, their country and their interests. Misirkov wrote:

We can call the Uprising whatever we like, but in fact it was only a partial movement. It was, and still is, an affair of the Exarchists: that is, a Bulgarian ploy to settle the Macedonian question to its own advantage by creating a Bulgarian Macedonia... If the autonomy of Macedonia should result from the present Uprising, the Macedonian question will be settled not to the advantage of the Macedonians but of the Bulgarians, for the Committee, as we have seen earlier, is working behind a Bulgarian front... Thus the reason why the Uprising failed is perfectly clear: from the very outset it was established on the wrong basis instead of being a general Macedonian Uprising it was a partial insurrection with Bulgarian overtones. The only Macedonian Slavs who played a leading part in the Uprising were those who called themselves Bulgarians.

Jingby (talk) 10:22, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Bulgarian awakener, publicist and poet Petko Slaveikov in February 1874 reported from Salonika:

Even in the language of communication of the Macedonian activists there is a talk of a Macedonian movement, which should be understood as independent national and religious emancipation... the separatism is spreading from a religious to wider national foundation".

MatriX (talk) 10:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Dimitar Vlahov, another extremely controvercial politician and revolutionary, who also alternated between pan-Bulgarian and pan-Macedonian nationalism, member of the left wing of the Macedonian-Adrianople revolutionary movement, later Bulgarian deputy in Ottoman Parliament, afterwards one of the main leaders of IMRO (United) - de facto extension of the Bulgarian Communist Party, but in 1946 elected as vice-president of the Praesidium of Communist Yugoslavia Parliament, wrote in his book "The strugles of Macedonian people for freedom", published in Vienna in 1925:

Firstly the revolutionary organization began to work among the Bulgarian population, even not among the whole of it, but only among this part, which participated in the Bulgarian Exarchate. IMRO treated suspiciously to the Bulgarians, which participated in other churches, as the Greek Church and the Catholic. As to the revolutionary activity among the other nationalities as Turcs, Albanians, Greeks and Vlahs, such question did not exist for the founders of the organization. This other nationalities were for IMRO foreign people.

— “Борбите на македонския народ за освобождение”. Библиотека Балканска Федерация, № 1, Виена, 1925, стр. 11.

This article is about Bulgarian organization IMRO. For macedonists, see: Macedonism. You can edit the second article. Jingby (talk) 11:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Please, annonimous IP, i.e. sock of Kubura, stop vandalising the article. Read the source bevore POV-ing your Yugoslav propaganda. It clearly says: ...In addition, the long arc of IMRO’s 40-year evolution—from a Christian national liberation movement in the Ottoman Empire, to a transnational terror network seeking to change state frontiers—offers lessons of wider relevance for understanding terrorist violence and ways to combat it.... I f you do not provide reference about your statements I am going to revert you. Jingby (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I am removing the Macedonian name because it is not in accordance with Wikipedia's rules and principles(objectivity, neutrality etc). The inclusion of Macedonian name implies a certain political view, adopted in former Yugoslavia after WW2, without being accepted by the independent international historiography. IMRO wasn't a multinational Medieval settlement with different names but a political organisation that had various aims and rules. All of them are mentioned in its Statute which is exclusively in Bulgarian- the only language used by the members of the Organisation. Unless a reliable source, indisputably showing that another language was used alongside Bulgarian, is provided, the attempts for 'Macedonisation' of the name remain pure politization of the article. I will keep an eye on the article because my sixth Wikipedian sense whispers me that the chances of being vandalized in the next 60 minutes are fairly high. This time I'm really not going to wage an edit war and my reaction will be to report the situation(in full details). Ivo (talk) 22:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

VMRO meant only one thing - Вътрешна македонска революционна организация (ВМРО) Vatreshna makedonska revoliutsionna organizatsia (VMRO)). When you find anthentic documents using the (neo)-Macedonian spelling you will add it. Until then we will stick to history. --Ivo (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Semiprotected

Semiprotected for one month due to edit-warring. The article is being rapidly reverted by IPs with few edits who have never commented on the Talk page. I take note that User:Laveol, though he's an experienced editor, ought to participate on the talk page as well. People seem to be very concerned about which tags should go on the article, but I see no discussion about tags here. Two things usually go together: an article tag plus the explanation (on the talk page) of what problem ought to be fixed. EdJohnston (talk) 02:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ummm, but there is not a number of editors concerned with this, instead just one vandal with a floating IP address who was already blocked for spamming the same tags on at least a hundred articles. Of course when he got blocked he just changed his IP and continued to do the same. his edits and block log. There has not been a line dropped on the talkpage on this and since I know this annon for quite a time, he will not try to write here. I've tried to contact him at least a dozen times before, but he just refuses to take part in any discussion. As for the language: that's the stable version of the article with the names in Bulgarian and Macedonian. It's been here forever and their usage makes sense. The annon (that's why I called him a vandal) just ges around and removes the Bulgarian name. Again, no explanations (not that there could be any). --Laveol ^T 09:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Great, now we have the attention of a sock-puppet as well. User 8MA8 is a sockpuppet of a single-purpose account User:Micoapostolov. I'm not sure why the case was closed without a resulting block, but it was more than clear. If anyone has any objections to the removal of the tags, please, post them here. If not, I'll consider it as disruptive behaviour (which it actually is since we got two sockpuppeteers involved). --Laveol ^T 16:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Coming to think more about it, I do suppose that the sockpuppet that was last to edit is actually a sock of the same person that does the annon edits. I'll be filling a checkuser request once I dig up all the clues. --Laveol ^T 16:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's the case. --Laveol ^T 16:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ed, is it legit to use check user in this case? The guy editing has already used sockpuppets. I also noticed that the IP and the registered user edit those pages in almost the same time (with only two minutes between them - just the time to log off and load the other page). --Laveol ^T 19:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Treaty of Niš (1923)

I think that Treaty of Niš is obviously very important for activities of IMRO and should have its place in the article. I propose to add below sentence after "IMRO began sending armed bands called cheti into Greek and Yugoslav Macedonia and Thrace to assassinate officials and stir up the spirit of the oppressed population.":

Оn March 23, 1923 Aleksandar Stamboliyski signed the Treaty of Niš with the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and undertook the obligation to suppress the operations of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO) carried out from Bulgarian territory.<ref>{{cite book |title= World War One|last=Roberts |first=Priscilla Mary |authorlink= |coauthors=|quote=On 23 March 1923 Stamboliyski signed the convention of Nish with the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (Yugoslavia). With this agreement, Stamboliyski promised to suppress the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (IMRO), which was then carrying out operations against Yugoslavia from Bulgarian territory. |year=2005 |publisher= ABC-CLIO |location= |isbn=1851098798 |page=1721 |pages= |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=TogXVHTlxG4C&pg=PA1721&dq=Stamboliyski+14.+june+farm+hand&hl=en&ei=82Z9TIz5Msmj4QaF572BBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=Stamboliyski%20%20farm&f=false |accessdate=}}</ref> --Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. Jingby (talk) 12:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

This article needs to be semi-protected

This article needs again semi-protection to prevents edits from unregistered user, as well as edits from accounts that are not autoconfirmed. A sock of a banned Mico Apostolov (talk · contribs) who is a spam-tags puser is here again under 31.11.73.31 (talk · contribs). Before that he was active here under multiple IP-s and nick-names as 8MA8 (talk · contribs) 80.180.167.225 (talk · contribs) 9.126.224.188 (talk · contribs) and others and has been trying to insert different tags as a spam. Jingby (talk) 11:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Please, stop reverting the following text: Initially its aim was to gain autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions in Ottoman Empire, but later it became an agent serving Bulgarian interests in Balkan politics. It is taken from Encyclopedia Britannica and objectively reflects the real facts at the time in brief. Thank you. Jingby (talk) 06:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

The photo of the statute of the organization says that the organization is Bulgarian and its aim is to revive the Bulgarian self-consciousness of the population in the regions of Macedonia and Adrianople - regions with dominating Bulgarian population at the time. Also, as said in Chapter 2, membership in the organization is open only to Bulgarians. So, it's not a Macedonian organization fighting for Macedonian independence, but rather a Bulgarian one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicksss93 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Which from the seven statutes? If I know, despite its pro-Bulgarian character, every one from the Organization's seven statutes aimed authonomy or even independence for Macedonia (Southern Thrace). Wikipedia does not check as reliable primary sources, i.e. Britannica is much more reliable, then one statute. You can look on W:RS. Jingby (talk) 14:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Hristo Tatarchev, one of the founders of the organization, wrote in his memoirs:

"We talked a long time about the goal of this organization and at last we fixed it on autonomy of Macedonia with the priority of the Bulgarian element. We couldn't accept the position for "direct joining to Bulgaria" because we saw that it would meet big difficulties by reason of confrontation of the Great powers and the aspirations of the neighbouring small countries and Turkey. It passed through our thoughts that one autonomous Macedonia could easier unite with Bulgaria subsequently and if the worst comes to the worst, that it could play a role as a unificating link of a federation of Balkan people. The region of Adrianople, as far as I remember, didn't take part in our program, and I think the idea to add it to the autonomous Macedonia came later."

This is another proof that the organization aimed at unification with Bulgaria since the very beginning. Nicksss93 (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

This is the personal opinion of one of the founders of IMARO cited in his memoires, but anywhere and in anytime, in any official document, such formulation appeared. Only the autonomy was proclaimed officially as aim of the organization in its statutes, later the independence. Jingby (talk) 13:39, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

So - membership in the organization is open only to Bulgarians, the organization operates in regions with significant Bulgarian population. And these Bulgarians fight for Macedonian independence - does it make sense? Everything in this organization - from its creation to its members, is associated entirely with Bulgaria. And everything Tatarchev says is from the name of all the founders - "We couldn't accept that..", not "I couldn't...", so it's not personal opinion. Nicksss93 (talk) 20:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

And now the referenced dangerous sentence you have deleted several times without any reason: Initially its aim was to gain autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople regions in Ottoman Empire, but later it became an agent serving Bulgarian interests in Balkan politics. Lol! Jingby (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia Britannica is usually accepted as a reliable source. Editors who can locate good work by historians may be able to expand the article to supply a better-balanced picture. EdJohnston (talk) 18:15, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Statues bar

I suggest that the long vertical sidebar be transformed into a horizontal gallery. They would take less space that way, and most readers of the enwiki can't read Bulgarian anyway, so a clickable thumbnail with English under it should suffice. See for example Siege of Rhodes (1522)#Gallery; I chose this particular example to show that you can have plenty of text under each photo. Have mörser, will travel (talk) 16:15, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

No thanks. 17:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Blatant POV

Please, stop reverting this page and adding incorrecrt info. Neither Macedonian language, nor Macedonian nation existed at the time of the IMRO (1893-1934). Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 11:23, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Where are the sources regarding "troops being greeted as liberators" in 1941? This is a blatantly biased statement implying a widespread support for the organization in particular, and Bulgarian occupation of parts of Yugoslavia in general. Are there any non-nationalist sources available? In general, sources which are quoted tend to be from a Bulgarian nationalist point of view. If there are no "neutral" points of view (i.e. focused on facts) shouldnt there be other nationalist sources, for the sake of balance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.116.165.85 (talk) 11:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Foreign office record 78/4951

This record is supposedly mentioned in Документи за борбата на македонскиот народ за самостојност и за национална држава (Skopje, 1981) in relation to the naming controversy, but it doesn't seem to exist (see [1]). It could be that someone copied the wrong record number from the book (Документи за борбата...). If anyone has access to it, it would be nice to verify. Tropcho (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Internal

What does "internal" mean in this case? --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 02:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111006202334/http://www.macedoniainfo.com/Independent_Macedonia.htm to http://www.macedoniainfo.com/Independent_Macedonia.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.angelfire.com/super2/vmro-istorija/Knigi/spomht03.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://library.ferris.edu/~cochranr/stone/stone2c3.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040210185155/http://www.vmro-dpmne.org.mk/index.asp to http://www.vmro-dpmne.org.mk/index.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061022043326/http://www.makedonskaistorija.com/media/1/20050517-UstavBMORKw.jpg to http://www.makedonskaistorija.com/media/1/20050517-UstavBMORKw.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050210165854/http://www.bulgaria.com/VMRO/bmork.htm to http://www.bulgaria.com/VMRO/bmork.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Bulgarian Organization

It is a Bulgarian organization, why isn't that written in the introduction?

Short description

The first name of the IMRO was "Bulgarian Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Committees", which was later changed several times. Initially its membership was restricted only for Bulgarians. It was active not only in Macedonia but also in Thrace (the Vilayet of Adrianople). Since its early name emphasized the Bulgarian nature of the organisation by linking the inhabitants of Thrace and Macedonia to Bulgaria, these facts are still difficult to be explained from the Macedonian historiography. They suggest that IMRO revolutionaries in the Ottoman period did not differentiate between ‘Macedonians’ and ‘Bulgarians’. Moreover, as their own writings attest, they often saw themselves and their compatriots as ‘Bulgarians’ and wrote in Bulgarian standard language. After the WWI the organization split in Macedonian and Thracian parts. For more see: Brunnbauer, Ulf (2004) Historiography, Myths and the Nation in the Republic of Macedonia. In: Brunnbauer, Ulf, (ed.) (Re)Writing History. Historiography in Southeast Europe after Socialism. Studies on South East Europe, vol. 4. LIT, Münster, pp. 165-200 ISBN 382587365X. Jingiby (talk) 12:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2022

The official language was Macedonian. 46.164.24.198 (talk) 12:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2022

Wrong flag colours and Macedonia was also a large speaking language within the IMRO members 92.53.35.232 (talk) 18:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:50, 31 July 2022 (UTC)