Itnderscoring the depth of his support,rnSoros declared that he would personallyrntravel to Macedonia and take to the hustingsrnfor Gligorov if the president’s victoryrnat the polls seemed in doubt. As itrnturned out, Soros need not have worried;rnGligorov’s neocommunist ruling partyrnkeeps a tight rein on the media, andrnGligorov is widely suspected of havingrnrigged the election.rnGligorov is in the middle of a tensernstandoff among Serbs, Albanians, Magyars,rnGreeks, and a half-dozen Balkanrnsubnationalities that could trigger a regionalrnwar. The 500 American troopsrnstationed in Macedonia, under U.N.rncommand, are a tripwire planted byrnGeorge Bush. With the full backing ofrnSoros, Gligorov seems determined to setrnit off. The Gligorov regime has publishedrntextbooks which show a map of arnMacedonia many times larger than thernpresent one; the Macedonian constitutionrnis explicitly committed to the defensernof the entire Macedonian people,rnnot just the nation-state. The director ofrnthe Soros Foundation of Macedonia,rnVladimir Milcin, is a militant Macedonianrnnationalist, whose belligerent statementsrndirected at neighboring Greecernhave suggested the possibility of war. Arnmajor point of contention with Greecernis over the name: Macedonia is alsornthe name of Greece’s northernmostrnprovince. The Greeks have suggestedrnNova Macedonia, but Milcin declaresrnthat he will “go into the hills with thernguerrillas if they change the name.”rnHow is it that Soros, who bitteriy attacksrnnationalism, has become the chiefrnbacker of the Macedonian variety? Thernreason is that this nationalism is completelyrnersatz; except as an administrativernunit of Tito’s Yugoslavia, Macedonia hasrnnot existed as a nation since the era ofrnAlexander the Great. Tito’s elevationrnof Macedonia to the status of an autonomousrnrepublic within the Yugoslavrnfederation, coequal with Serbia, Croatia,rnand Slovenia, was a propaganda ployrnaimed at aiding the communist side inrnthe Greek civil war. The make-believernnation of Macedonia, like its Bosnianrnneighbor to the northwest, has no historical,rnlegal, literary, or cultural tradition: itrnis a creature born of the imagination ofrnpoliticians and ideologues, a “multiethnic”rnentity with no anchor in history. Asrnsuch, it makes perfect sense that Soros isrnits chief backer and advocate.rnIt would be a mistake to dismiss Sorosrnas just another wacky multibillionairernwho can afford to enact his psychopoliticalrnfantasies on a grand scale, a kind ofrnanti-Ross Perot. His money and his messagernhave gained him an audience inrnWashington at the highest levels. Nornone thinks Strobe Talbott was jokingrnwhen he characterized Soros as “a friendly,rnallied, independent entity” and explainedrnhow “we try to synchronize ourrnapproach to the former Communistrncountries with Germany, France, GreatrnBritain—and with George Soros.”rnThe Soros network of foundations isrnnot the only or even the major factor inrnhis growing influence in Eastern Europernand the former Soviet Union. Throughrnhis vast financial holdings, Soros is a farrnweightier factor in the regional economyrnthan, say, France or even Great Britain.rnThis is especially true in Bosnia, wherernthe Open Society Foundation in Sarajevornhas served as a conduit for major projectsrnundertaken by the government ofrnMuslim President Alija Izetbegovic andrnhis Iranian-inspired Party of DemocraticrnAction. Schoolrooms in which the Muslimrnfundamentalist doctrines of Iranianrnmullahs are transmitted to a new generationrnof fanatics were built with Soros’s financialrnand political support. Under thernguise of “humanitarian” aid, Soros financedrnmajor reconstruction projectsrnthat enabled the Bosnian Muslims torncontinue the war.rnWhile Soros’s main interest is foreignrnpolicy, conservatives are more familiarrnwith his views on such subjects as immigrationrnand drug legalization. Bill Bennettrnand the Weekly Standard crowd havernworked themselves into a lather of selfrighteousnessrnover the fact that Sorosrndealt both them and the Clinton administrationrna humiliating blow on ElectionrnDay, 1996. In Arizona and California,rnreferenda decriminalizing medical use ofrnmarijuana passed overwhelmingly: Sorosrnwas a major contributor to both initiatives.rnThe neoconservative line is thatrnthe war-on-drugs was voted down in twornmajor Western states because, for once,rnthe other side had money. The reality isrnthat Soros merely balanced out the virtuallyrnlimitless resources of various governmentrnagencies that actively campaignedrnagainst both initiatives.rnWhile not many conservatives arernworried about the prospect of the statesrndeciding their own drug policies, farrnmore troubling is Soros’s response to arnwelfare bill that cut off $4 billion in aidrnto legal immigrants. In announcing hisrn$50 million gift to various immigrants’rnrights organizations, Soros declared thatrnthe provisions of the welfare bill cuttingrnoff immigrants is “a clear-cut case of injustice.”rnThe pattern of Sorosian philanthropyrnin the Balkans is being repeated inrnthis country; under the guise of multiculturalismrnand diversity, the idea is to funnelrnfunding to one particular group ofrnethnic separatists (Bosnian Muslims,rnMacedonians, Latino nationalists of thernAmerican Southwest) then stand backrnand watch the explosion—and don’t forgetrnto sell short.rnBemoaning the fact that Gorbachevrnwas defeated, denouncing the antieommunistrnrevolution of the 1990’s for notrnbeing “orderly,” Soros complains thatrn”after the dissolution of the Evil Empirernwe seem to have lost our bearings.”rnWhat changed? In a statement unusualrnfor its clarity, brevity, and directness, hernanswers: “I believe our concept of freedomrnchanged. It was replaced by a narrowerrnconcept—the pursuit of self-interest.rnIt found expression in the rise ofrngeopolitical realism in foreign policy andrna belief in laissez-faire in economics.”rnAlways careful to veil his own agenda behindrnverbal obfuscation, Soros is quiternclear on the subject of just who are hisrnenemies.rnLet them be forewarned.rnJustin Raimondo is a senior fellow at thernCenter for Libertarian Studies and thernauthor of Reclaiming the AmericanrnRight: The Lost Legacy of the ConservativernMovement (1993).rnA Burial Shroudrnby David D. ButlerrnMonday was a good day, typical ofrngood days in its variety. I was onrnthe phone with another lawyer trying tornsettle a whiplash. His unlicensed truckrndriver ran into the rear of my man’s earrnwith a 50,000-pound cement truck. Thisrncase will settle.rnAnother client called. She was osten-rnAUGUST 1997/43rnrnrn