Why is it that many view Tito as the 'Harsh Good Commie'?

>>894126
because he did what he saw necessary without ever bootlicking anyone

>>894126
Because in an era when all commies were either Moscow's bitch or Beijing's bitch, he had the balls to flip the bird to the Soviets and do shit his own way. The ability to be your own man and fight to pave your own destiny is one of the most universally admired traits across the political spectrum.

Technically he abused human rights, but in se cases for a reason. Example, if a Bosnian Serb was arrested for disseminating independence pamphlets, a Bosnian Croat and Bosniak would be arrested on similar but made up charges. Two innocents arrested, but no ethnicity is seen to be "singled out".

>>894126
Well for one thing the Yugoslavians economy used to be fairly efficient and productive, and they exported to the West and competed internationally in many sectors, notably shipbuilding.

My Albanian boss hates him, said he was a dumb cunt. Not on those exact words, but you get the idea.

>>894126
Harsh because he killed everyone who opposed him, good because he relaxed after all those who opposed him were gone and made yugoslavia a lazy prosperous state living off of denbt money

>>894126
>Harsh but good
Fixed that
>>895069
Only answer I can agree with

>>895069
>lazy prosperous state
What does that mean?

>>894126
Because after Stalin and Mao were exposed as mass murdering psychopaths, marxist academics had to choose a new hero to venerate. Tito was the obvious choice.

>less than 5 years of war, 1991 to 1995
>120,000 dead, conservative estimate

>almost 50 years from 1945 to 1991
>20,000 prisoners on goli otok, MAYBE 10,000 elsewhere, less than 1,000 died, liberal estimates

Now you see.

>>896376
Less bad is still unacceptable.

>>894423
>Example, if a Bosnian Serb was arrested for disseminating independence pamphlets, a Bosnian Croat and Bosniak would be arrested on similar but made up charges. Two innocents arrested, but no ethnicity is seen to be "singled out".
sounds ultra-PC

>>897663
He was just talking out of his ass. The government kept all suppression of nationalism/anti-communism on the down low. Why create/announce martyrs for or let people know about movements like that? It doesn't make sense.

>>897644
Ah yes ex-Yugoslavia is much more acceptable now :)))))))))

He was less shit than every other communist except that island cockroach and the last "leader" of yugoslavia before it broke up.

File: MTE1ODA0OTcxNjY3Nzg1MjI5.jpg (13KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x300px

>>894415
It's also considered to be 100% retarded if you lose.

>>898060
Worse is still unacceptable.

>>898073
You're not wrong.
But Tito didn't lose.

>>898068
You mean Ante Markovic? I've heard he was pretty great. And both he and Tito were way less shit than Castro, Tito had Yugoslavians driving new Yugos, VW's, and Volvos when there were practically no cars except for the super rich before WW2, and Castro got his country under a goods embargo for half a century.