Yugoslavia - Tito and Kardelj

[startrooper91]

Hi everyone. What are your thoughts on the following question...

Whos death was more significant for the future of Yugoslavia, Kardelj or Tito? Any reference to the Slovene solution..?

Thanks

[Omsk]

A death of one man [a single man] is not an crucial factor in the existance of a country,for an example,Yugoslavia didnt brake apart because Tito,or Kardelj,or Rankovic died,but because it was a rotten country,a system that could not function,it was destined to fall,and the Civil War was something that happened because of the borders that were poorly set up after WW2,and later.

Tito could have died in 79',80',81' it would have been the same.

But to answer your question: Tito's death certainly caused a bigger shake in Yugoslavia,and had a bigger effect.

[Fennec]

Hi everyone. What are your thoughts on the following question...

Whos death was more significant for the future of Yugoslavia, Kardelj or Tito? Any reference to the Slovene solution..?

Thanks

I recommend you this text http ://bit.ly/yOezP2 (in Serbo-Croatian) on Kardelj. He de facto ruled the country since at least 1974. That being said, I think his death was more significant.