www.talkcyprus.org

[polis]

StelC wrote: I do not know why but a couple of weeks ago I had the desire to go to my university’s library and look for Greek books just to see the collection they have there. I was surprised to see such a big collection since it is a Canadian university. I picked a Greek book called “Αρματωλοί και Κλέφτες”. It is an old book describing the years right before 1821, which I never had the chance to read during school. I read the book within a couple of days, constantly feeling proud of the characters described in the book as I was reading it. As I was returning the book to the library the following day I couldn’t helped wondering. How could I, a person so proud of his Greek descend, ever agree to never fighting back to take what was once “ours” if a solution is ever agreed upon.

I learnt history through my schoolbooks and what people had told me. I knew Turkey and Turkish Cypriots through the fear and hate of those close to me. I came to hate the Turkish and Turkish Cypriots while in the army. I avoided contact with Turkish people at university.

I feel proud of my history, of my people, of my national anthem and flag.

The next book I borrowed had to do with the recent negotiations (prior to 2003). I came to understand both sides-the unreliability and inconsistency of Denktash being a negative factor nonetheless. I now have two more books, a historical one written by Christofis Oikonomides and another describing the sources of nationalism in Cyprus.

Through these books and many more to come, I am slowly getting a grasp of the real facts. Gradually understanding what happened. I always knew that my side had a big share in the troubles which broke out in the 1960s. However, like most of my people, I always thought that Britain was to be blamed for giving too much power to the Turkish Cypriots. For giving them the “right” of having unreasonable demands.

It had never crossed my mind that they had the right of making demands as well. If you think about it, how selfish were the Greek Cypriots asking for a union with Greece if 15-20% of the population did not want that?
We had the chance to settle the problem so many times but we always asked for too much. Which has lead us up to this point, a point where we now know that what we are negotiating for is less than anything else ever been offered to us.

My point isn’t that however. The way I feel about Turkish people, and perhaps Turkish people, arises from whatever I have been taught so far. As I self educate myself on the real facts, the hate is fading away and turning into compassion.

Who is going to educate my side, and your side on what really happened? A solution is nothing if the foundations are not there to support it. The way we feel about our history needs to change. Nationalism needs to dwindle. How is that going to happen though, if we both feel so proud of who we are? If we both feel the urge to pass it on to our children?


Ill try and keep an eye on these forums, for the first time feeling content in engaging in conversations with people from the other side.

Yes, Stelio mou, that's what happens when you go to a library trying to get your facts straight and all you can lay your hands on is Economodis, Mavratsas and Kizilyurek [or Rebecca Bryant for that matter]. Basically, we have two main ideological streams in Cyprus, that of pride, dignity and self respect on the one hand personified in the sacrifice of Matsis, Afxentiou and Pallikaridis (yeap, Pallikaridis: did you read anywhere in your books that 18 year old Pallikaridis, convicted to death and hanged for moving a disassembled machine gun, refused to ask for a pardon?) and that of submission and defeat on the other. Now, try look at your history books of other peoples and nations and try to see how many of those who preached the latter are commemorated or admired for their service to their people by future generations.

[Bananiot]

You are on the right track Stelio, do not let the sirens of nationalism and chauvinism affect you in any way.

Dying for a cause isn't always the litmus test regarding the correctness or not of the cause. All causes have their martyrs and one can find martyrs that have sacrificed their lives for a seemingly lesser cause, like for the peaceful coexistence and fraternity of Greek and Turkish Cypriots, but these martyrs are a shining example of people with a vision that transcends the boundaries of nations, race or religion.

Thus, it is futile to play with peoples’ emotions and sentiments. A recourse to the hard realities of life is always so much more beneficial.

[polis]

Bananiot wrote: You are on the right track Stelio, do not let the sirens of nationalism and chauvinism affect you in any way.

Dying for a cause isn't always the litmus test regarding the correctness or not of the cause. All causes have their martyrs and one can find martyrs that have sacrificed their lives for a seemingly lesser cause, like for the peaceful coexistence and fraternity of Greek and Turkish Cypriots, but these martyrs are a shining example of people with a vision that transcends the boundaries of nations, race or religion.

Thus, it is futile to play with peoples’ emotions and sentiments. A recourse to the hard realities of life is always so much more beneficial.

All causes have 'martyrs' (which in the context of these discussions is mainly Turkish speak for heroes - nice going Bananiot), so I suppose Stelios' idle of a 'martyr' should most likely have been Petain. Pity his death sentence for treason was commuted to life.

[cypezokyli]

polis wrote:
Yes, Stelio mou, that's what happens when you go to a library trying to get your facts straight and all you can lay your hands on is Economodis, Mavratsas and Kizilyurek [or Rebecca Bryant for that matter]. Basically, we have two main ideological streams in Cyprus, that of pride, dignity and self respect personified in the sacrifice of Matsis, Afxentiou and Pallikaridis (yeap, Pallikaridis: did you read anywhere in your books that 18 year old Pallikaridis, convicted to death and hanged for moving a disassembled machine gun, refused to ask for a pardon?) on the one hand and that of submission and defeat on the other. Now, try look at your history books of other peoples and nations and try to see how many of those who preached the latter are commemorated or admired for their service to their people by future generations.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

isnt it so evident, that it is makes absolutely no sense to compare people who lived in the 60s and where idealistic enough to die for their dreams ( lets not talk about those who didnot die ) and profesors of sociology etc in 2007!!!

you are talking about two different things. not even babys dont make such rediculous comparisons.
you cannot compare mavratsas work with matsis.
you can compare mavratas work on nationalism with other scientific work. problem is you cannot do that, simply bc no serious scientist of sociology or politics will take you seriously.

and you can compare matsis decision not to surrender and consequently die, with all those ex-eoka fighters who later on attacked each other bc of the posts they didnot get.

[polis]

cypezokyli wrote: polis wrote:
Yes, Stelio mou, that's what happens when you go to a library trying to get your facts straight and all you can lay your hands on is Economodis, Mavratsas and Kizilyurek [or Rebecca Bryant for that matter]. Basically, we have two main ideological streams in Cyprus, that of pride, dignity and self respect personified in the sacrifice of Matsis, Afxentiou and Pallikaridis (yeap, Pallikaridis: did you read anywhere in your books that 18 year old Pallikaridis, convicted to death and hanged for moving a disassembled machine gun, refused to ask for a pardon?) on the one hand and that of submission and defeat on the other. Now, try look at your history books of other peoples and nations and try to see how many of those who preached the latter are commemorated or admired for their service to their people by future generations.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

isnt it so evident, that it is makes absolutely no sense to compare people who lived in the 60s and where idealistic enough to die for their dreams ( lets not talk about those who didnot die ) and profesors of sociology etc in 2007!!!

you are talking about two different things. not even babys dont make such rediculous comparisons.
you cannot compare mavratsas work with matsis.
you can compare mavratas work on nationalism with other scientific work. problem is you cannot do that, simply bc no serious scientist of sociology or politics will take you seriously.

and you can compare matsis decision not to surrender and consequently die, with all those ex-eoka fighters who later on attacked each other bc of the posts they didnot get.

No really, do you actually believe that what you have written above makes the slightest bit of sense?

[cypezokyli]

for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

[polis]

cypezokyli wrote: for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah, well, to the extend that what you are trying to say is that, to me at least, you are completely incoherent, you are right. There, we finally ended up in - partial - agreement.

[pg]

polis wrote: cypezokyli wrote: for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah, well, to the extend that what you are trying to say is that, to me at least, you are completely incoherent, you are right. There, we finally ended up in - partial - agreement.

Are you saying that the acts of the 'heroes' can not be questioned at all?

[polis]

pg wrote: polis wrote: cypezokyli wrote: for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah, well, to the extend that what you are trying to say is that, to me at least, you are completely incoherent, you are right. There, we finally ended up in - partial - agreement.

Are you saying that the acts of the 'heroes' can not be questioned at all?

I think what I said was that for some the idea of a hero is Petain.

[pg]

polis wrote: pg wrote: polis wrote: cypezokyli wrote: for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah, well, to the extend that what you are trying to say is that, to me at least, you are completely incoherent, you are right. There, we finally ended up in - partial - agreement.

Are you saying that the acts of the 'heroes' can not be questioned at all?

I think what I said was that for some the idea of a hero is Petain.

"In modern France, the word pétainisme suggests an authoritarian and reactionary ideology, driven by the nostalgia of a rural, agricultural, traditionalist, Catholic society."; from Wikipedia...

Anyway, I do not think that anyone questions what the heroes you mention (we would call them 'kids' today) fought for. However, the political leaders of the struggle could afford some questioning. In that aspect we can perhaps treat Grivas as responsible for the violence the movement chose to use - and Makarios for the political use of it.

It is not my impression that Grivas was a person reliable enough to be left with handling such responsibility. In addition, I would also question Makarios wisdom as a political leader and 'statesman'. I wish there had been better leaders, but I assume it is the Ottoman background of our society that brought forward these two instead of leaders more in time with Enlightenment and Modernity.

[Bananiot]

No you didn't, Polis. You simply created a daemon and you started fighting it.

Had you read what I wrote more carefully and had you been capable of shedding your nationalism, you would have realised that the martyrs I referred to died for the cause of Cyprus. Kavazoglu was a Turkish Cypriot and with him tens of Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots were assasinated (by Turks and Greeks) because they were aspiring for a Cyprus for its people and only its people.

[polis]

pg wrote: polis wrote: pg wrote: polis wrote: cypezokyli wrote: for people who call science "defeatist" ?.....ofcource it doesnt make any sense.

Yeah, well, to the extend that what you are trying to say is that, to me at least, you are completely incoherent, you are right. There, we finally ended up in - partial - agreement.

Are you saying that the acts of the 'heroes' can not be questioned at all?

I think what I said was that for some the idea of a hero is Petain.

"In modern France, the word pétainisme suggests an authoritarian and reactionary ideology, driven by the nostalgia of a rural, agricultural, traditionalist, Catholic society."; from Wikipedia...

Anyway, I do not think that anyone questions what the heroes you mention (we would call them 'kids' today) fought for. However, the political leaders of the struggle could afford some questioning. In that aspect we can perhaps treat Grivas as responsible for the violence the movement chose to use - and Makarios for the political use of it.

It is not my impression that Grivas was a person reliable enough to be left with handling such responsibility. In addition, I would also question Makarios wisdom as a political leader and 'statesman'. I wish there had been better leaders, but I assume it is the Ottoman background of our society that brought forward these two instead of leaders more in time with Enlightenment and Modernity.

PG, let's try to limit the discussions to one main theme at a time. You want to criticize the decision for an armed struggle in Cyprus or the conduct of the struggle that's fine with me, but it's better if you do it in a new thread.

BTW, am I the only one who thinks that quoting from the "Free Encyclopedia anyone can edit" is not really good form?

[pg]

I think this thread is a discussion between the result of ill directed nationalism and the virtues of our heroes actions. In that context I do not think my post is that irrelevant.

With regards to quoting sources I think the the purpose of doing so is for all of us to be able to judge the reliability of information. When I quote from Wikipedia I hope people take it for what it is. For example, the quotation of Makarios that erolz was caught out with can be found also on the British Parliament web site. In short, we can not trust any source 100% - that is why we want to know 'the source' of information.

[repulsewarrior]

hakkinen wrote: hey
i ve just joined the forum and i have to say that all the posts that i have read so far are really good and i look foward in talking and readind what everyone has to say.
my 'real discovery' of cyprus started last year when i started a master in peace studies, trying to avoid i have to admit in the beggining anything that had to do with cyprus. but during the course i realized that all i learnt (nationalism, conflict resolution, UN) led me to Cyprus. so i started to read whatever i could find and realized my real lack of knowledge. i was shocked when i realized the propaganda in the education system and the media. what we had accused the 'other side' to do we had mastered ourseleves! even though i was brought up in a moderate house were i didnt learn to hate the turks or the turkish cypriots i didnt learn the whole story....

Hi hakkinen, welcome; can I call you hak?

[hakkinen]

thank you:)
yeah sure!i dont think anybody ever called mika like that :shock: