INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

#1

Qellimi i kesaj teme eshte mbledhja e te gjithe artikujve te shkruar nga intelektuale, historiane apo gazetar grek qe sfidojne mitologjine e ideologjine e tyre zyrtare...

#2

Greeks and Albanians in Greece

AIM Athens, December 7, 2000

Recently an event took place in a Greek school which is characteristic of the overall Greek attitude towards the Albanians from Albania residing in Greece. The Greeks, for the most part, have shown a marked intolerance towards the Albanian migrant workers and their families, an attitude which smacks of ethnic discrimination bordering on racism. Ironically this was precisely the attitude of the host countries and their people towards Greek migrants in the United States in the first part of the 20th century and towards Greek migrant workers in Germany in the 1950s and 1960s.

In the case in question, a young Albanian pupil happened to excel in his class having earned the highest grades, an achievement which by reigning Greek school rules entitled him to bear the Greek flag during the school's parade in Greece's national holidays, something which is regarded a great honor. The Greeks at the local level were apparently appalled at the prospect of an Albanian bearing the Greek flag and ended up not permitting the youngster to carry the flag. Not being ethnically Greek, he was not deemed worthy of such an honor. Greeks at governmental level, including the Greek President, where mortified and took to upholding the young Albanian's right to bear the Greek flag. However the grounds for this more correct view are, it seems to me, suspect. They imply paternalism and a subtle attempt at ethnic assimilation.

What is beyond doubt is that in the last ten years, the Albanians rank last according to the Greek images regarding other nations and ethnic groups, even below the Roma and the Turks who are also held in very low esteem. Why this downgrading? We will try to offer some possible reasons for this despicable state of affairs.

Well before the upsurge of Greece ultra-nationalism, which manifested itself during the first part of the 1990s with the Greek-Macedonian dispute over "the name of Macedonia" and more recently with the hysterical fundamentalist nationalism of the Orthodox Church of Greece, nationalist sentiments were instilled in Greece by way of the most traditional and effective method: namely primary and secondary education (and in some cases even at university level). Education, as it is well known, has been used as a vehicle of political socialization, the process whereby young individuals learn to become enthusiastic patriots and loyal citizens of their country and state. The Greek educational system is of course not unique in pursuing such aims and hardly the inventor of such forms of socialization to the nation. Similar processes are more than obvious in all the countries of Southeastern Europe and beyond. Even a student in, say, Denmark is taught somewhat differently a historical event regarding inter-Nordic relations than a Swede or a Norwegian, though these countries have not gone to war between themselves for centuries. One is made to love his country and feel a sense of utmost devotion to his nation and by the same token to despise and hate his/her nation's historical enemies, who are regarded uncivilized, untrustworthy, immoral, hostile, aggressive, expansionist, devious and so one. The key is of course to convince one's fellow citizens of the supremacy of one's nation (a) by bestowing the nation with all the merits imaginable and (b) downgrading all foreign nations and groups, the enemies the more so. The national myth is part and parcel of the national narrative and national project.

In the Greek case, the pupils are thought to be intolerant of other nations and ethnic groups (outside and within Greece). The Greek educational system teaches them and makes them believe that the Greeks are superior to all others; that the Greeks are the direct descendent of the illustrious ancient Greeks, who are said to be the greatest civilization of ancient times and the point of departure of Western civilization; and that the Greeks (presumably the ancient Greeks) are the creators of all major human values with an incomparable contribution to world culture. Greek students are also taught that their nation is more than 3000 years old. They do not recognize the well-known fact that nationhood is a very recent phenomenon in human history and that hardly any Greek nation or people existed in the classical ancient Greek cultural-linguistic milieu of antagonistic city-states. Again the attempt at historical depth is characteristic of most national historical narratives, but the Greek case is one of the most extreme, comparable only to the Israeli or Ethiopian cases. Furthermore it is deeply held and provides the Greeks of today with one of the most glorious myths ever conceived. It gives rise to self-esteem but also to arrogance and haughtiness towards all others.

Another masterful stoke of the Greek national historical narrative is the fusion of two directly opposed movements and belief systems, namely the spirit of ancient Greek philosophy and culture (which remained alive in some peripheral intellectual and elite quarters of the Byzantine Empire) with its prime historical enemy, Christianity (notably Orthodox Christianity) and the theocratic Byzantium (which regarded itself as the state of the Christian world in its entirety) which was virulently anti-Greek (Greek being defined as heathen and infidel). In addition young Greeks are taught something even more far-fetched: that they have no relation or intermingling and cross-fertilization whatsoever with any other culture, nation or ethnic group in their vicinity. They end up regarding themselves as standing stand alone, unique, aloof, apart and well above all the rest!

All this is deeply ingrained and remains valid for most adult Greek individuals (e.g. schoolteachers, administrators, politicians, diplomats even several academics which should have known better) who do not bother to check whether the information handed over to them in school bears correspondence to historical reality. After all it is such a soothing collective identity for Greeks, so why bother to question it?

But let us focus on the Albanians and how they feature in the Greek national narrative. Throughout the 19th century with the Greek War of Independence ("Greek Revolution" as it is known in Greece) as the point of departure, the Albanian-speakers, notably the Orthodox Christian Albanian-speakers known as "Arvanites" were largely regarded as Greeks by the Greeks and Greeks-speakers, as Greeks in substance, "Greeks and Arvanites: two races, one nation" as some had put it at the time. And indeed this was to a considerable extent the self-definition of the Arvanites themselves at least in the southern part of the Balkan peninsula at a time when no sense of Albanian national self-consciousness had emerged. Albanian nationhood began in the last quarter of the 19th century in Kosovo, particularly as a reaction to the Serbian and Greek threats to those parts of the Ottoman Empire where the bulk of the Albanians lived for centuries. Prior to that the Orthodox Albanians in the Southern Balkans were among the most active and renown "Greek" guerrilla leaders on land and sea during the Greek War of Independence and with the advent of Greek independence and until today, fully assimilated and very prominent in politics, diplomacy, the army, etc.

This leads us to another possible interpretation of the outrageous Greek stance towards the modern-day Albanians from Albania who have the misfortune to live in Greece. The fact that the two ethnic groups have been so intricately interwoven for centuries (well before the advent of nationalism) may have prompted them to erect fences between in-group and out-group, to solidify ethnic boundaries between them when none existed before (particularly as far as Orthodox Albanians and Greeks were concerned). What we are implying is the antithesis of the largely erroneous Samuel Huntington thesis of clash civilizations, namely the fissures which inexorably lead to endless conflicts. Nearness, being very close and intermingled as cultures to the extent of being indistinguishable in the course of the 19th century may have given rise to this trend for clear-cut boundaries on both sides (as seen on the Albanian side in Albania among nationalists and right-wingers such as Berisha and other like-minded Albanians). Boundaries almost by definition create a sense of shrill ethnocentrism and hate for the Other, the closer he is culturally and physically the more hysterical and ridiculous the downgrading, but also very real and explosive in inter-ethnic and inter-state relations, as in the case of Greece today. _____________________

(i) Alexis Heraclides is Associate Professor of International Relations at the Panteion University in Athens

Alexis Heraclides (i)
http://www.aimpress.ch/dyn/trae/archive ... ae-ath.htm

#3

GREECE A LAND OF HEROES - AND DISTORTIONS

The controversy over Macedonia owes much to the Greek mind
set, writes ALEXANDER ZAHAROPOULOS
("Sydney Morning Herald", Australia, Wednesday, March 23,
1994)

Although the Australian media have overwhelmingly supported
the embattled Macedonians, and although most Australians would
do so instinctively, it is unlikely that more than a handful
of people are able to fully comprehend the Greek position. It
is far from trivial to say that that is because they have not
experienced a Greek education.
In retrospect it is clear to me that my 12 years of Greek
schooling, mainly in the 70's, conspired to instil in me
precisely one attitude and almost unshakeable belief in the
purity and unity of the Greek people, language and culture (to
which three, I would add "orthodoxy" if my parents, who once
had to bribe a priest to allow my Anglican great-grandmother
to baptise my brother, had not thought the religion irrelevant
and in bad taste).
The attitude I am referring to was taught to us at school in
images. Each year, at the school parade to commemorate the
uprising against "the Turk", the story was wheeled out of the
Greek general who had killed so many infidels in a single day
that his sword had to be prised out of his locked hand. Our
textbooks exalted those Byzantine kings who had managed to
keep the Eastern riff-raff out of the empire. All epochs
contributed Great Cleansers to our list of heroes.
Belief in the continuity of Greece against all odds was
enabled also by a method of withholding information and
sealing off interpretative paths. We had, as children, neither
the capacity nor the inclination to explore disunities and
"impurities" in the history of the Greek people, language and
culture. The Pelloponesian War of antiquity was never more
than a family squabble. We could not have savoured the thought
that Sparta might have had more in common culturally with
Persia (with which it formed alliances) than with Athens. The
long history of the land in which we lived had been reduced
for us to the opposition of Greek and non-Greek.
One carried such views to maturity. Melina Mercouri (in 1981 I
worked as assistant to her senior adviser, Vassilis
Fotopoulos) used to tell me that the importance of the Elgin
marbles rests in the fact that they are the heart of a body of
Greek culture inherited from the ancient past. Until her
recent death she believed that modern Greece, as the sole
inheritor, had a duty to preserve the organic coherence of
that body. When the bishop of Florina (a town just south of
the Macedonian border) said that the very stones he stood on
testified to their Greekness, he was, sadly, echoing the
opening lines of a popular epic revered modern Greek poet
Giannis Ritsos.
It was not until I left Greece that I understood that our
education resulted only in intellectual arrogance and moral
poverty. I came to know of the strong African and Asiatic
influence that operated upon early Aegean culture. I
understand that Alexander spread eastward not Greek
civilisation but terror and misfortune. I learnt that Salonika
had a Jewish culture to rival Vienna's before local Greeks
collaborated in its extermination. I was ashamed to discover
that in the Greek provinces of Macedonian and Thrace live
communities who in this day and age are treated as outcasts
because Greek is not their first language. I was horrified to
realise that for decades they had resisted policies of forced
"hellenisation".
Away from the country I quickly learnt not to use the words
"gyfots" (gypsy), "vlachos" (Romanian) and "Arvanitis"
(Albanian) for the common swear-words that they are in today's
Greece. When the Greek Government used "Skoupa" ("broom" or
"broomsweap") as the code name for the massive drive to remove
destitute Albanians from Greece in 1993 I seriously considered
changing my surname.
Needless to say, it has not been my intention to suggest that
the stifling, chauvinistic education we received cannot be
overcome. Not that Greeks are presently incapable of
accommodating difference. When the grave of Karolos Kuhn, the
genius of the modern Greek theatre, was covered with anti-
Semitic slogans in 1992, the Athenian press was swift to
condemn the action. Yet even as Greeks are expunging old
racisms, in respect of the Macedonian issue there has been
precious little dissent from the official government line, and
none that I have heard of among Greek Australians.
One would like to believe that dissenters are keeping low out
of fear. The rest must realise that the conventional method of
perpetuating their identity as Greeks -- a method never of
their own choosing -- has no place in a modern, tolerant,
culturally diffuse world.

Note: Dr Alexander Zaharopoulos left Greece after completing
his secondary education, but returned frequently while
studying at University College, London. He settled in
Australia in 1992.

#4

http://www.ndimou.gr/anti_en.asp

Know Thyself

Greeks' contemporary self-image is built upon a series of myths. The myth of continuity. The myth of the racial and cultural superiority of our ancestors (and, thanks to continuity, our own). The myth of being special. The myth of racial and religious purity. The myth of the genius of the Greek race.

The existence of these myths provokes certain predictable reactions. Thus, my typical compatriot, while proud to be Greek (95 percent, according to polls) will abuse and censure his countrymen at the slightest provocation. And this, naturally, because they fail to live up to the expectations and the demands created by the myths.

This explains why we're simultaneously the greatest eulogizers and the worst critics of ourselves. Depending on our point of view (and on the moment), we either denigrate Greeks or sing their praises. (In the former case we usually refer to them as "Romious"). Naturally, both attitudes are wrong. Instead of applauding or cursing, it would be better to stop, and think. Calmly, and rationally. (But I forget myself. Rationality is also a Western, imported Evil for our Helleno-centric intelligentsia. So much for Aristotle!)

The "Evil" West

Manichaism (i.e. the contrast between black and white) is one of the ills that corrupts us. There is no such thing as pure evil or pure good, and what's called for isn't antithesis, setting one against the other, but synthesis. Yet we've become so used to this game of tug-of-war, that when we don't have enemies, we invent them. Thus, for example, we have the "evil" West, or our "bad" neighbors.

It's amazing how much we oversimplify and distort certain things, in order to transform them into enemies. We have a distorted image of Europe. But Europe contains everything, including us. It contains rationalists as well as anti-rationalists, nationalists, cosmopolitans, and romantics. There is no tendency in Greek thought today that doesn't have its European counterpart-maybe even its progenitor. The West today includes the East, which has had such a profound influence on the art and thought of this century. It encompasses the whole range of schools of thought, from rationalism to non-rationalism, from Descartes to Derrida. Even Dostoyevsky-the anti-Westerner, the slavophile-is a fundamental part of the Western tradition.

Actually, its a mistake to speak of Western culture. What the West represents now is a world culture, one that has integrated all the cultures that came before it. It's the first culture in history that has kept and still cultivates all tendencies and traditions. Older cultures, on the other hand, always began by uprooting those that came before them, or those that were different (as the Christians, for example, destroyed the monuments and writings of the ancients).

Of course, as soon as we hear talk of a world culture, we're gripped by the anxiety of integration, of losing our identity. It's an understandable reaction for a small nation. But there really isn't anything to fear. Centuries of coexistence within the same national bounds didn't turn the Sicilians into Milanese, the Bavarians into Prussians, the Welsh into English, the Proven?ales into Normans. So why will our culture be swamped? The spread of Coca-Cola and blue jeans doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with the spread of cultural values. (Most anti-Americans I know wear jeans). Concurrent with the internationalization of culture is the opposite tendency, an obsession with difference, which, as witnessed in the former Yugoslavia, can be defended with far too much zeal. At no other time in history has humanity been so sensitive to the rights of minorities-and at no other time have local traditions been so respected and nurtured. The new international culture can ensure both unity and difference.

I don't know how bad the West is for us. I do know that we owe it a lot. From our independence (no one ever mentions Navarino in 1827, when Western navies helped salvage our battle for independence) to our love of ourselves.

If any Western import has harmed Greece, it's been neither rationalism, nor the political system, nor technology. It's been the idea of the continuity of Hellenic civilization.

Oddly, this idea, which today is waved about like a banner by anti-Westerners, is an entirely Western notion. Foreign "Philhellenes" uncovered our ancient monuments, and it was they who taught us to believe that we were the immediate successors to the ancients, responsible for the continuation of their traditions. The Romioi of the 18th century didn't feel Greek-much less of the ancient variety. They were a Balkan nation, originating from the admixture of many races and cultural traditions, with their own attitudes and ways of thinking. Out of the blue, the Western "Philhellenes" (and their mimics, our own "scholars") stuck a helmet on their head, dubbed them keepers of the ancient flame, and injected them with a passion for purity.

Pure race, ergo, pure language. How this nation has suffered in the name of purity! It was a first in the history of linguistics: the creation of an artificial language, a retro-dialect. All impurities were rooted out, place names were changed, history was distorted-for the sake of proving...what? That Greece was not a Balkan nation like the others, but a racially pure aristocracy, not only of the region but of the whole world. Like certain pseudo-bluebloods who fake their family trees to prove their superiority.

But you don't become worthy on the strength of your lineage, but on the basis of your achievements. The son of a Nobel prizewinner has no birthright to a Nobel prize. The ancient Greeks belong to the whole world, especially to those who study them. An English classicist at Oxford is nearer to the ancients than an ignorant Greek.

Yet even today our intellectuals call the Greeks "the aristocracy of nations." Even today many (most) Greeks believe in their hearts that we are a chosen people. This is why we're always complaining about the way we're treated. Like spoiled children, we demand of everyone their unconditional support-even when we're wrong. And we insist on believing that we're always being cheated, ignoring the fact that we happen to be the only country in the region to have doubled its size in the last 150 years. We've woven endless conspiracy theories so as to absolve ourselves of responsibility, and to cast the blame on others instead. Our belief in our superiority shows up clearly in our racist attitudes. What Greek doesn't consider himself better than the Turk, the Albanian, or the "Gypsy-Skopjan"? Go ask an Greek educated audience about Turkish civilization-they're certain to chuckle.

Well, this Greek, this Greek who asks the world "Do you know who I am?", who shouts at demonstrations, who denies the Other his basic human rights, who has conducted pogroms against his Jewish (in the past) and Muslim (today) compatriots, who ends up shooting (by mistake) the Albanian and the gypsy; this Greek, I don't like. And on this point I remain, incurably, an anti-Hellene.

History as a Western

Not a day goes by without the papers ranting about some anti-Hellenic threat. The Turk coughed, the American scratched himself-woe to us! Since my childhood, Greece's history has seemed like a (cheap) Western movie, one in which the Greeks were, always and unequivocally, the Good Guys. The Bad Guys were always changing. There was "the threat from the North," then from the East, then it was the North again, and back to the East. When I was a child, the word "Bulgarian" was a curse, more so than "Turk." It was forbidden for Greeks in northern Greece to design themselves as "Macedonian." "Albanian" then had a neutral tone; today it's become a threat.

Sooner or later we need to free ourselves from this Balkan mindset. That in which, in the words of the writer Fred Reed, "one man's national martyr is another's war criminal, where one country's founding myth is another's tale of woe and usurpation." Here, the ideological exploitation of history has become state-of-the-art. I was amazed to realize, on reading the history books of West European nations, that there are histories that aren't based on competition and enmity, that don't indulge in nationalism and hate. Where neighbors are even regarded with sympathy.

But do you dare compare Greeks with other nations? Well, yes, I do, and we would do well to forget our uniqueness in misfortune as well. History isn't a comforting mother who you can run to when things go badly-who will pet you and show you special favor. All the nations on earth have been through bad times-there's no sense in competing to see who can feel the most sorry for themselves. It's time we grew up!

And above all we have to stop living history as Western. Every morning the papers scream (like the little kid in the movies), "Look out! He's right behind you!" Every day the same fear: What are the Bad Guys up to? (As if they do nothing else from morning till night but conspire against us.) When will we realize that in history, as in life, people can't be divided up into the purely good and the purely bad. That the greatness of nations isn't measured in myths or fears, but primarily by their capacity to overcome problems of the present (and of the past, when it becomes present). Consider what it took for the French and the Germans to reconcile their differences-differences reinforced by centuries of bloody warfare. Each time I read about the European Community's French-German axis, I remember my first French teacher, and how she used to curse the "Boches" with rabid fury.

The One & Only "National" Issue

I don't consider the Aegean or the Macedonian issues "national issues." Nor even the economy and public administration problems.

For me, the one and only national issue is the one posited by poet Dionysios Solomos: The nation must equate the national with the true. If this isn't done (and it can't be achieved from one day to the next-it requires years of effort, mainly in education) then we won't be able to stand up in today's world. We'll always be in a limbo between whining and belligerence. We'll spend billions-in blood and sweat-on useless armaments. We'll continually be quarreling with our neighbors, and with the whole world. We'll see paranoid schemes and conspiracies everywhere. Like a sick, maladjusted person, we'll spend our lives wavering between hysteria and depression.

Who will dare to teach Greeks the truth about their history? (Including, for example, the aforementioned pogroms...). About the history, and culture, of their neighbors? Who will dare to teach them the truth about certain "national issues" (like the FIR Athinon, our irrational airspace)? When will Greeks succeed in seeing themselves as they really are: a nation like all the others, with abilities and weaknesses, with talent (often more than this land can hold), and insecurities, capable of both generosity and meanspiritedness.

Beyond the overhaul of the economy, I preach the revamping of our attitudes. Am I really an anti-Hellene? Or do I love Greece? The future will decide.

#5

Ilias Petropoulos on Macedonian and Greek Issues

Q. Mr. Petropoulos, why are you exiled?

My answer would be for freedom. The freedom to write without being afraid. The freedom to publish my works without fear of persecution. I have been jailed several times in the past. I always wanted to leave Greece so that I can write. I managed to do that in 1975 and since then I have never returned.

My writing is about ideas that are not appreciated by the so-called "intellectuals" in that country. In fact they hate what I write so I am forced to work without a bibliography which means I have to strictly rely on my own memory which is like a vault full of data.

(...)

Q. Obviously you were negatively influenced by your experience in Greece and you feel a need to write and expose its chauvinism. What can you tell us about that?

The Greek racism and chauvinism we are witnessing today is mainly due to the educational indoctrination or the kind of education we have all received in Greek schools. From youth children are taught to be paranoid and confrontational towards their neighbours and towards the Balkan reality. Racism in Greece comes in various forms and wears many different masks. I believe the best remedy for eliminating this sort of behaviour is to expose people to the truth and recognize all people for who they truly are. This reminds me of the time I sent a letter to Melina Merkouri, then Greek Minister of Culture, to let her know that a certain group of archeologists were planning to remove Bogomil graves from the territory of Macedonia to prove that Slavs never set foot in this Greek territory. I saw this with my own eyes and even took photographs which I later sent to Athens and Paris. Unfortunately, the Minister never answered my letter nor did she make any comment to the articles I wrote about that, which only proves that she not only knew about it, she was part of the conspiracy to cover up the existence of Slav graves in Macedonia. And by doing that did she really prove that Slavs never laid a foot in this "holy land of Greece"?

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/93654

#6

Dimitris Litoksou* (Ksilokastro, Greece)

NATIONALISM AND THE NATIONAL MYTH

All national ideologies are based on a single fundamental idea, a single ideological
burden, which creates the nucleus of the national myth. This idea, in reference to the
Greek national myth, is “the tribal invincibility of the genus” or “the continuance of the
nation from ancient times to this day”. In a nutshell - it is the idea of the existence of a
common language, culture and genus of the Greek people living and breeding in Greece,
but also in the wider region of the Eastern Mediterranean, at least from the Bronze Age to
this day.

Providing proof for this assumption as the principle element of the Greek national myth
yields as its product an associating procedure which was completed by the middle of XIX
Century.

The existence of three elements had a decisive influence on this development: firstly, the
excitement in European intellectual circles over the classical antique, in the midst of
which was the movement of Greek enlightenment. Secondly, the authority of the Greek
over Orthodox Balkan worshipers, thanks to the Greek-speaking individuals1 at the
Universe Archbishopric in (Constantinople) Istanbul and thirdly, the financial power and
social blossoming of a coastal, very wealthy trade class of Greek merchants.

Accepting a national myth with no factual foundation is going to have two major
consequences in the future. The first one in the field of thought and science, and the
second one in the field of politics.

Recruiting educated Greeks, in an effort to establish the foundations of national thought,
certainly with the financial assistance of the Greek government, turned into a mandatory
service. The three branches of science - history, linguistics and the study of folklore -
which are essential to the shaping up of national ideology, have lost their character and
have grown to be in its service, mostly to meet internal needs and government
propaganda.

Greek historians, up until the last two decades when individual exceptions started to
emerge, have ignoring or counterfeiting sources and have produced works of a purely
ideological character. Greek linguists put on “blinkers” to prevent them from meeting a
different language abundant in language dialects, while Greek folklore experts cut off
completely certain geographical regions in their research so that they don’t come across
the customs, the dances and the songs of the “barbarians”.

* Author Dimitris Litoksou was born in 1954 in Athens. He now lives in Ksilokastro - Korinth. In his work
as a publicist, an author and a human rights fighter so far, his achievements greatly surpassed the work of
his peers, judging by the hard time he has been given for his activities by institutions and individuals in the
Republic of Greece. EAZ newsroom was given this text by the author, prior to the promotion of his latest
book “Mixed Nation” held in Skopje in early 2005.
1
Greek-speaking people.

They all worked together in commissions for renaming the toponyms in the country. The
Geographic Military Service put the final touch on their work by renaming the
microtoponyms on headquarters’ maps.

Political consequences were far worse because they had an impact on people. Language
or ethnic minorities had to go through dark times when they gradually gathered together
with the Greek state, and they (the Greeks) expanded through military clashes.

Their language was doomed to persecution and it was reduced to a whisper, not a single
song could be heard outside closed windows. The Greek teacher, with his national
mission in mind, would teach them Greek Katharevousa2 by slapping their faces and by
using a ruler. The priest, drawing power from heaven, would endeavour to teach them
popular Greek language through the Gospel. Local tycoons would Hellenize their names
arbitrarily. The local traitor would sneak up on them, the police would terrorise them, the
judge would convict them. And when all these failed to eradicate their mother tongue and
to change their conscience, the military, under arms, took over to bring order and to
create an image, forcing the perpetrators to exile.

My book “Mixed Nation”3 was dedicated to those speaking a different language. And
also to the memory of my grandparents: the Albanians, my mother’s parents, the
collectors of the consequences of the Greek grand idealism, as well as the refugees from
40 churches, my father’s parents.

The book’s title (“Mixed Nation”), suggested by a suitable excerpt from the
Monemvasija Chronicle, ascertains the existence of the population of the state and at the
same time underscores the strength and the beauty of its colourfulness.

As far as the subheading “short notes”4 is concerned, in addition to the shortness of the
texts, they reflected the reasons for which they had been written and the author’s spiritual
suffering regarding these issues.

II
The central fundament for national ideology is the idea of the existence of one eternal
generality - the nation.

To the national idea nation is not just contemporary existence and an organised
community of language, culture, civilization and economic life, but also the unity of the
state or the merging of different state forms. Nationalism (c.f. earlier - that’s why this
sentence here sounds stupid) of the nation survives the longest. There is a “historic

2

Former official style of the new Greek language that is now obsolete.
Dimitris Litoksou, Mixed Nation: or About the Greeks and the Ruined Different-language-speaking
People, “Az-Buki”, Skopje 2005
4
Untranslatable into Macedonian: sparagmata are short notes, brief comments, but the corresponding
meaning in Greek is something which is ripped off, rooted up, and the like.

3

stretch” where this survival is taking place and whose borders are considered flexible and
expanded.

Nation is considered a living organism. The life of the individual finite cells - its
members - is insignificant. Nations’ traces are lost into the past and, after another reading
(unless that is impossible) into deep antique. Regardless of the way it was produced and
of wealth distribution, regardless of the forms of rule and the alternation with cultures, a
nation’s being and “its soul” remain unchanged.

The national myth emerges from this idea. The materials of the national myth are to be
found or researched in history. The structure must be as robust as possible. Willful or
unreasonable interpretations of facts certainly have to be preferred before the
conjuncture of circumstances, because they offer higher resistance to the ideological
attacks of nationalism’s opponents.

The pieces of this mythical mosaic come together in the time vortex of nationalistic
intellectuals. They are great writers, inspirational story tellers and virtuosos.

Each nation has its own Paparigopuloses. Next come the most capable craftsmen, the best
experts, linguists, folklorists, anthropologists, archaeologists, historians: Hadzidakis,
Politis, Kugeas, Andriotis, Kirjakidis, Kumaris, Zakitinos, Trijandafilidis…

Then come the fanatics, mostly semi-educated “learned patriots” dilettantes and
bureaucratic figures of mental provincialism: an army of teachers, priests, lawyers,
officers, politicians and reporters.

Each nation has its own public servants, professional re-designers and supporters of the
national myth, the same ones who nourish and thrive on nationalism: the Papatemelids,
the Martids, the Merdzuks, the Kargaks, the Vakalopuls, the Hristoduls.

History written in this way is one gigantic myth. It depicts heroic deeds of grand-
grandfathers and their victories against the enemy. The existence of enemy countries,
which surround our nation and are concocting a conspiracy against “our” nation is the
central foundation of the myth.

National history is the foundation for the school books in the educational system and it
comprises nearly all bibliography on history. It serves to educate the young generations
and to make peace with their parents. Ancient respect for ancestors in modern societies
is being transformed into national history, in other words into a national myth, which is
touching, enchanting, educational and encouraging. The burden of national heritage thus
places contemporary society (I would prefer the word community everywhere) before
new responsibilities. Much like each of its members, by adopting national history it
fulfills an obligation towards the deceased. It is an honourable act to stand worthy before
this heritage and to step towards self-sacrifice.

National conscience is a purely ideological issue. As proof of its robustness, let’s
remember that most of the victims of the Greek state, whose neither one or both parents
are indigenous or refugees of Greek origin, after having completed their mandatory ninth-
grade education, feel proud to be the descendants of ancient Hellenes in any possible
relationship (marriages with Albanians, Macedonians, Vlachs, Orthodox Christian
Turkish-speaking individuals, Armenians or less frequently Gypsies or Jews).

Nationalism shapes up an ideology of generality which results in collective equality. As
an ideology, it is recent in human history and it first emerged at the end of the XVIII
Century. Ideology was created by the bourgeois class following the fall of the empire, an
ideology of modern bourgeois states.

Education and the emphasis, through state mechanisms, on a dialect or on any feature of
an official language has become a necessity, both for effective market operation and for
political union.

Social differences are considered a mistake, digressions or temporary limitations.
Members of rural municipalities leave, but the spirit of collectivity remains. The victims
gain significance in the sense that through them the nation turns modern and stands
up to other nations who are better positioned. Political dispute is considered a national
imperfection, which usually leads to disaster. A united nation is capable of creating grand
deeds.

Greek history identifies with the Greek myth. Greek citizens nowadays consider
themselves the descendants of the citizens of ancient Greek cities. Orthodox Byzantine -
Hellenism’s gravedigger - represented itself as the continuance of the ancient Greek
spirit, and the modern Greek state as the heir to the properties of the deceased.

Should there be anything that is in no way linked with official Greek history, then it is the
events that took place in this geographic territory in the past.

Indeed whatever is going on in Greece can definitely be observed happening in all Balkan
countries. An identical picture, an identical ideology: dwelling on the past, aspirations for
historical space, counterfeiting of title deeds, fighting over the heritage of the deceased.
Similar national myths are being recorded in neighbours’ school books. Grand ideas,
cries for freedom, government propagandas.

The image of nationalism is, ultimately, the same everywhere. This can be seen clearly if
we look at the method with which it keeps the enemy off its property. In other words, it is
the liaisons of the governing state nationalism with the minorities within its borders.

Incorporating the individual into society is not the result of his or her own free will, but a
procedure which was imposed on them the day they were born. Personal choices are far
too determined and independent of his or her desires. Material life conditions render the
picture complete.

In spite of rhetorical definitions, national awareness is not entirely a matter of self-
determination, but rather another inevitable determination in regards to a society liable
to marginalising.

State borders in the Balkan Peninsula today are the product of two Balkan Wars and two
World Wars. The desires of the local population were never taken into consideration. Not
a single referendum was conducted about the demands of those speaking another
language. Each stronger state took some territory away from its defeated neighbours, who
were stalking for revenge.

Minorities have been fostering the apple of discord among nationalisms here for decades.
The proposal which Balkan states had to offer to minorities was the same everywhere: the
rule of military regimes until complete assimilation or forced migration. Minority rights
protection was considered national treason.

Nationalism is characterised by lies and hypocrisy. Or else, it has two faces and it
nourishes the spirit of hypocrisy. Habitual criticism of nationalism and the injury inflicted
upon its spirit, i.e. upon the national myth, creates the assumptions that the proposal for
expanded borders and for the creation of United Europe does not seem like Utopia.

http://www.iea.pmf.ukim.edu.mk/EAZ/E...Z_2005_Eng.pdf

#7

Autori i ketyre radheve s'eshte grek, ama jep nje pershkrim te sakte te barbarise se tyre shtazarake:

David Howarth ! ......Greek barbarity as depicted in his book called the "Greek Adventure"

The truth which lies behind Greece's slanders against Turkey in the presence of the world is that they aim to plunder Aegean, Cypriot and Turkish lands. Yes! In the year 2000, Greece is still living with the "Megali Idea" dream.

Now let us take a look at GREEK BARBARITY.

The Greeks cannot endure books that show them in a bad light. One of the books that make them furious is the "Greek Adventure" written by the English author David Howarth. Howarth examined the 1821 revolution on the scene of the event and wrote this book after examining one by one the books, articles and journals written by British, Italian, French and German officers and journalists after returning to their respective countries.

The true events recorded in David Howarth's book "Greek Adventure" are disgraceful and loathsome.

Those who read below the several paragraphs extracted from the book in question, which divulges Greek barbarity to the world in the clearest terms, will acquire ample knowledge about what the Greeks are.

"In the summer of 1821, rebellion against the Turks erupted against the Turks. The conflagration spread so rapidly that no one can say where, why and by whom the first Turks were killed. According to official records, the rebellion was first led by the Church. The first cause of the war could be described as a religious and sacred war.

Bishop Germanos of Patras called the populace to arms by raising his cross. In those days, Patras was a prosperous and beautiful city. It was open to the outside world and a large number of Turks lived there along with the Greeks. On hearing that a crowd of people from the mountains was approaching, they withdrew to the city castle to defend themselves. Even before Bishop Germanos and the insurgents arrived in the city, Muslims and Greeks had begun killing each other in the streets. The Greeks welcomed Germanos as a saviour. The new arrivals had already begun looting the homes of the Turks. The insurgents erected a cross in the main square of the city with a ceremony. The words uttered by their leaders were: "Peace to Christians, respect to consuls and death to Turks!"

Events followed the same course in the Peloponnese. The Greeks had risen all over the peninsula and murdered their neighbours the Turks. They had done this perhaps in the name of Christianity or freedom, but above all else they had done it to despoil the Turks, to take revenge and because of the Church's jealousy and personal vengeance.

Once the massacres had begun they did not need to search for a reason. They were all thirsty for blood, that was why they were murdering. It was known that in the month of March of that year, 25 thousand Muslim families were living outside the cities in the Peloponnese and were occupied in farming. In April, as the Easter celebrations were continuing, not a single individual of these people was left alive. The corpses were left among the flowers in the fields, on soil warmed by the Spring sun. With the arrival of Summer heat, they rotted away.

This frenzied genocide perpetrated by Germanos and the other Church leaders had caused horror. Throughout the war, other leaders joined Germanos and were madly applauded.

Kolokotronis was also a leader sought by the peasants and the nobles. He had made his wealth selling horses to the British army. In return for his services, the British had awarded him the rank of major. When Kolokotronis joined the uprising he was fifty years old. He commanded a 6,000-strong special unit. His first battle ended in fiasco. His troops were routed by a Turkish cavalry force of 500. Kolokotronis ran along with his men, and he ran so fast that he left his weapons behind.

It was a tradition of the Greeks to run when the course of battle turned against them. The Greeks neither adopted a battle order like the European armies nor fought face to face with their enemy. The first thing they sought in order fight was someplace behind which they could defend themselves; this would generally be a boulder. And if they couldn't find one, they would build themselves a small wall of rocks, behind which they would seek safety, and then start firing. As they fought, they shouted obscenities at their enemy, uttered words of contempt at them and derided them. As they fired, they held their weapons at the hip and as they pulled the trigger they closed their eyes and averted their faces. They could therefore kill only a few of their enemies and when a random bullet killed someone, they forgot they were in a battle and ran to the dead person to rob him, emptied his pockets and then severed his head from his body. The economic resources of the revolutionaries were the robberies and plunders carried out by their chiefs.

The city of Monenvasia fell five months after the outbreak of the rebellion. This city and its castle were built on sharps cliffs rising from the sea. The Turks living in the city; the soldiers, state officials and traders and their families, and the other Turks from the nearby villages, had sought refuge in the castle. There was terrible starvation. Their only food was sea moss and plants. They even sallied forth desperately from the castle at night to capture and bring back a corpse. They knew the tragedy awaiting them if they surrendered to the Greeks. The Greek bandits were waiting patiently to slaughter and rape the Turks and plunder their properties. The Greeks declared to the Turks besieged in the castle that if they surrendered their lives would be spared. The priests even promised them that if they surrendered they would be put on boats and sent to the Turkish coast. Only 500 Turks were put on the boats. These 500 Turks never set foot on any land and nothing has been heard of their fate. As for the thousands of Turks left in the castle, as soon as the gate was opened, they were set on by the Greeks, were slaughtered and their possessions plundered.

This is the truth about the victory announced in Europe as "The Greek Miracle." It was not the triumph of Greek arms and Christianity in the sense understood by the Europeans.

The second fortress to fall was that of Navarone. The Turks had been promised that if they surrendered they would be taken to the North African coast and set free. The Greek who made the agreement boasted to an English colonel that: "The agreement had a single copy and I have torn it up. No one can claim any rights now." The Turks opened the castle gates, either because they believed this promise or because they had no other way out.

The Greeks immediately rushed in and massacred all the inhabitants of the city numbering some two thousand. A priest who witnessed the event later recounted how the women were undressed, taken to the seashore where they were raped then drowned; how children were beaten to death or killed by knocking them against rocks. Greeks greatly enjoyed cutting off the arms and legs of their victims. Foreigners who visited Navarone months later found it hard to endure the stench of corpses that permeated the whole city and saw dogs, rats and crows feed on corpses along the castle walls whose arms and legs had been cut off. As for the Greeks, in order to demonstrate their power to the visiting foreigners, they told them the numbers of the Turks they had killed and how they had killed them; they also presented the visitors with the Turkish boys and girls they were keeping in the ruins. They had spared the lives of these children, naked and mad with fear, to satisfy their sexual appetites.

Some twenty Europeans witnessed the barbarity of the Greeks as they attacked the fortress of Tripolitsa. One of them was Colonel Thomas Gordon from Scotland. The Colonel was a sensible, experienced and honest soldier and knew Greek well. He found the events he witnessed at Tripolitsa so horrifying that he wanted these disgraceful events to be remembered to eternity. Even today, it would be better if the stories the witnesses have recounted were not repeated. I think saying this much should be sufficient. Within two days not a soul was left alive in the city where ten thousand Turks had been living. Most of them had been murdered by cutting off their heads, arms and legs. Following this massacre, thousands of Greeks returned to their villages to hide the plunder which had by their standards made them rich. The price of slaves had dropped so low that no one wanted to own them. Because no one had buried the dead, an unbearable stench permeated the whole city, the drinking water was contaminated and a cholera epidemic broke out.

"PHILOTIMO" is a Greek word. It means "Honourable" and it is an ethnic title for the Greeks. The Greeks have, until the recent past in any event, conducted their lives on two levels: one of them being the normal world where we all live, and the other the dream world of ideals they themselves created. The first of them is the life of reality they lived in, the other the world of dreams created by themselves. A Greek may reject the facts and events known, seen and believed by everyone and may insist that they had never been or occurred. For example, it is this characteristic of the Greeks which make them exalt and praise bandits and raise them to the level of courageous knights, the defenders of noble Greek traditions. In fact, they all know by experience that the bandits and pirates they have presented as national heroes were in reality mangy, filthy, insatiable and hardened thieves. But the fact is that for the Greek, these two aspects are of equal value.

When a Greek's "Philotimo" is in question, he can never accept the facts as they are. As Lord Byron has said, "The Greeks lack the capacity to comprehend reality. Every Greek has an exaggerated opinion about Greeks."

A traveller like me who has an open mind cannot help but feel admiration for them. This may be a result of sensitivity. In the face of their amenability I felt myself indebted to the Greeks. I thought about what the cause might have been that had all of a sudden turned their ancestors into monsters one hundred and fifty years ago. The general explanation for this was the hatred they felt for the Turks after living for centuries under Turkish oppression. They had avenged themselves. But I think something else lies behind the event. Turkish rule, as is known, was not bad. Hatred cannot be an excuse for turning into monsters. I think the cause is just the opposite of what it is thought to be. Once the Greeks loved the Turks very much. They had been under the influence of the Turks for 350 years. The only thing that separated them from the Turks was the Church. In spite of being Christians, the Greeks had remained more oriental than western in their traditions and behaviour . I don't think that even today they have rid themselves of the influence of the Turks.

Only a handful of foreigners lived in Greece at the time of the 1821 revolution. Therefore Europe did not know what was happening in Greece. Because the reports sent outside Greece were written by enlightened romantics who had not taken part in the war, they were penned to reflect the Greeks' ideals. Therefore as the Europeans condemned the Turks, they were unaware that it was the Greeks who were perpetrating barbarities and had started the slaughter. While all foreign countries recognised the Greeks as citizens of the Ottoman Empire, the European public applauded them as Christians heroically waging war against Muslims.

The reason for the European's siding with the Greeks was not only their being Christian; it was also their history. In those days, education was classically orientated. Language, philosophy and ancient Greek arts were the foundation of this education. Meanwhile, a group of people known as the "Philhellenes" was guiding the Europeans' beliefs about Greeks onto a wrong path. These Philhellenes comprised scholars of classical literature, idealists, poets and conservative and romantic politicians who had spread all over Europe. They were spreading all around them a new ethnic concept the Greeks had never even thought of. According to them, the Greeks were the progeny of ancient Greeks and maintained invisibly the intelligence and heroism of the ancients.

For five whole years, the Philhellenes not only died for this delusion, they also spent vast amounts of money. This idea championed by the Philhellenes has never been correct. The present day Greeks are as close to the ancient Greeks as are the present day English to the Saxons. The blood of both nations has been mixed and adulterated by migrations and invasions over thousands of years. The ancestors of the modern Greeks, even if we discount the Turks, were the Romans, Albanians, Goths, Venetians and Slavs.

There is no doubt that the genius of ancient Greek forms the foundation of European culture, but this genius was virtually forgotten in Greece. The Greeks did not want to remember it. When they looked back, they only saw the Byzantine Empire and prided themselves on that.

The Greek revolutionaries' capture of the Turkish garrison in Corinth is also a black stain on Greek history. The fortress rose on the hills behind the city. The siege of the fortress lasted a long time. The Turkish families who had gathered in the castle were suffering horribly from hunger and thirst. As in Navarone and Tripolitsa, the Greeks had promised the Turks that if they surrendered the fortress, they would be ferried across to the Anatolian coast. The Turks, having no other option, accepted the offer and when they left the castle to go to the coast, a new chapter was added to the book of horrors. The Greeks, setting upon the defenceless people, slaughtered everyone except the young boys and girls. They did not harm the young ones because of their evil lust and their intention of selling them.

This cruel, bloodthirsty genocide by the Greeks was also extremely idiotic. As an Italian by the name of Brengeri wrote in his memoirs, "One incident is sufficient to make one understand a lot of things..." On his way to Corinth, Brengeri comes across a murdered Turk. A little further on are the man's wife and baby in a wretched condition. To help the starving woman and her baby Brengeri collects a few pennies from his companions and hands them to the woman. Brengeri leaves the woman and he has not gone a hundred meters along the road when he hears two gunshots. When he looks back, he sees that Greek rowdies who had seen him hand the money to the woman have murdered the woman and her baby to rob her of the money.

Brengeri is one of several foreigners who witnessed the genocide in Corinth. Brengeri watched with disgust as a Turkish family of a man, his wife, two children and their servants, who had been cornered, were murdered by the Greeks in his presence. Before killing the children's mother, the Greeks tore the veil off the woman's face to see what she looked like. When Brengeri pled with the Greeks to release the woman, he was told: "Give us fifty piastres and we'll release her." Leaving his companions with the Greeks and the woman, Brengeri went to a grocer he knew and borrowed the fifty piastres to give to the Greeks. Then the Greeks said: "We'll hand her to you but naked," and stripped the woman naked before releasing her. Hundreds more Turkish women were thus sold to foreigners by the Greek bandits.

The Acropolis in Athens was the most renowned of the citadels in Greece. For more than a year, 1150 Turks had been forgotten and left to their fate among the ruins of this sacred temple. No one bothered these wretched people but for the "Greek Admirers" force set up by Europeans who admired the Greeks. The "Philhellenes", who wanted to capture the Temple of Acropolis, the treasure house of Greek civilisation, from the Turks and hand it to the Greeks, attacked the citadel one night but were routed. When the Turks looked below from the Acropolis, they could see people prepared to cut their throats with pleasure.

It was lack of water that defeated this handful of Turks whom no siege or orderly assault had been able to vanquish. The winter of 1821 had been unusually dry. The cisterns cut out of rocks had dried up. By June, the Turks did not have a drop of water to drink. Taking advantage of this, the Greeks set down their conditions for the capitulation of the citadel. What they demanded was that the Turks leave their arms and half of their money to the Greeks; in return they would be allowed to board ships and go to Turkey.

When on 22 June 1822 the gates of castle opened, those who came out were not warriors but wretched people begging, "A drop of water...a drop of water.." and trying to crawl. Only 180 of them were men of an arms-bearing age. The rest were made up of the elderly, the crippled and women and children from neighbouring villages who had sought refuge in the castle. There were no ships waiting to take them away. The Turkish captives were put in the courtyard of Hadrian's Temple on the slope of the Acropolis. No one bothered them there for two days. Then the attack of Greek rowdies began. They threw the Turks out of the places where they had hidden and began to chase them in the streets. 400 people, most of them made up of ill and weak women, were murdered. Those who survived were taken under protection by the foreign consuls in Athens.

In the ten-year period from 1821 to 1832, events continued to occur at the same speed. Much Turkish blood was shed on the Greek peninsula. The events might have been viewed from a different perspective if the blood shed was the blood of only the Turkish soldier. A soldier fights and he either kills or dies, that is his duty. But if the shed blood belongs to helpless people such as women, children and the elderly, then it is called a "massacre" or "butchery" We learn from foreign sources that the Greeks carried out not just butcheries but mass butcheries. And again the same sources write how the Greeks deceived world public opinion into swallowing their butcheries as a triumph of Greece and Christianity.

As Greece accuses the Macedonians, Albanians, Bulgarians and Turks of barbarity, it should not forget that it owes them a debt of blood.

The Greeks ruthlessly murdered tens of thousands of Turks, Bulgarians, Albanians and Macedonians with the aim of adding the Balkans and Anatolia to their borders. They may have forgotten these murders that they committed, but cannot delete the fact from the pages of history.

If we were to turn these pages and transfer Hellenism's mass murders to our pages, we would have to write volumes of books.

All the same, let us recall a few of them:

On 4th July 1913 during the 2nd Balkan War, the Greeks attacked Kilkish. The city was defenceless with only women, children and the elderly present. The first targets attacked by the Greek artillery were the orphanage and the hospital. The greater part of the children and patients in these two buildings died in the shelling. Meanwhile, the Greek troops who had occupied the city looted and burned the houses and murdered their occupants, just like they did in Anatolia, Macedonia, Albania and Cyprus.

During this occupation, they raided forty villages, burned down 4,725 houses and bayoneted to death 74 people, eleven of them babies and most of the rest women and elderly people.

In the village of Akangeli they had occupied, the Greeks told some 400 villagers that they would transport them to some other place, took them to the forest where they murdered them and then stole their money and other valuables.

In the Bulgarian villages they attacked, Greek troops not only murdered anyone they came across but also raped the women and stole their money. According to official records, in three days Greek troops slaughtered 365 Bulgarians and Muslim Turks.

In the presence of a group of foreign journalists, Greek troops gathered two hundred Bulgarians of Macedonian origin in a square where they murdered them, they then loaded the corpses onto lorries and carried them to the forest where they buried them in a mass.

Also included in the report prepared by the "Carnegie Foundation Research Centre" on these mass murders committed by the Greeks are also excerpts from letters sent to their families by the Greek soldiers who had committed these murders.

Here are a few of them:

· "Here in the villages we occupy, we kill all the Bulgarians, not caring whether they are women or children."

· "Under the orders we have been given, we kill every Bulgarian we come across and burn their houses."

· "The orders are to the effect that we should kill them by cutting their throats and burn their houses. We obey these orders."

· "We bayoneted every Bulgarian we captured and cut off his head."

· "Of the 1200 Bulgarians we captured in Negrita, only 41 who were in prison stayed alive."

· "We did not leave a single Bulgarian alive in every place we passed through; we exterminated them."

· "We gouged out the eyes of five Bulgarians we had captured, and they still would not die."

The following excerpts, taken from books written by Greek officers who in 1919 attempted to occupy Turkish lands, reveal in very clear terms what the Greeks are in their own words.

Excerpts from Nikos Vasilikos's book "The War Diary":

· "Akcakoy is surrendering. A dreadful scene." P.72

· "The Turkish villages on our route are being subjected to real disasters." P.74

· "All the Turkish villages on the plain are being burned by Greek troops. With the passage of Greek forces through these places, all sides are being illuminated with the light of civilisation (flames)" p.108

· "All the villages are burning furiously. In order not to get roasted, the occupants of the villages are running out of their homes like rats." P.113

· "Afyon is being abandoned to the flames." P. 175

· "We are rapidly advancing to the village of Burnaz. The village was set on fire amid the maledictions of the Turkish ladies running about naked in the gardens to escape the fire."

· "We arrive at a town burning from one end to the other." P.187

· "Large numbers of Turks are being killed along the route. One of us advancing in the van put the muzzle of his weapon against the Turk's neck and when he fired, the Turk's head flew fifteen meters away." P.181

N.VASILIKOS, "Dairy", p.57

"We are given the task of guards in the transportation of 150 Turkish captives. All along the route, the cavalry troops are tormenting the captives; some of them are striking the captives with rifle butts and whips. The captives' attempts to protect themselves by hiding in each other's arms present a dreadful picture. It is as if they are trying to turn into a single body. Many of them pass out as we advance and we make the others carry the ones that faint."

P.APOSTOLIDES: We read the following lines in pages 20-21 of his book "MY Recollections 1900-1969".

"The elderly, the women and children had hidden in the mosque. Some of our soldiers became aware of this. Because they lacked courage like all worthless people, they were afraid of the crowd and therefore did not dare force the door of the mosque to rape the women. They started a fire by throwing dry grass they had collected from here and there through the windows. The people inside began to come out, choking with the smoke. It was then that those worthless wretches aimed at the women, the children and the elderly and murdered them. Some others related to me how they had seen the application of another method of infernal torture. Very large nails were driven into the ground. The plaited hair of the women were passed around these nails, so that the women, unable to move, were raped in groups.

An instance of Greek barbarity witnessed by historian Arnold Toynbee is told on page 298 of his book "The Western Problem".

"At 13.00 on Friday, the 24th of June 1921, three days before the Greeks evacuated Izmit, the men of two Turkish quarters called Bahcecesme and Tepekhane were taken to the cemetery and shot in groups. I was present when on 29th June two of the graves were opened. I saw that the arms of the corpses were tied behind them. Some 60 corpses were estimated to be in those graves. A total of around 300 people were missing."

The Greek has shown his barbarity everywhere he has gone, as it happened in Cyprus in 1974...

According to an official report published in the British "The Guardian" newspaper on 2nd April 1988, 25 Turks in hospital went missing from their hospital beds during the July 1974 events. According to the report prepared on the findings of British intelligence officer Lieutenant Martin Packard, the Turkish patients had their throats cut by the Greek Cypriot nurses, their corpses were loaded onto a lorry and taken to a farm in the north of the city, where their flesh was separated from their bones, ground in a mincing machine and thrown into the sewers.

Another instance is the horrifying event Salahi Hilal, who is still alive today, went through. This is how Salahi Hilal, whose flesh was cut with a knife and his blood sucked, relates Greek cruelty:

"The Greeks and Greek Cypriots who had captured me began to cut my arms and the fleshy parts of my shoulders with the daggers they had pulled from their belts. Meanwhile a Greek officer approached them and asked the Greek Cypriots, "Is there anyone among you who hasn't drunk Turkish blood?" Some of them shouted, "We haven't," whereupon ten to fifteen people along with the Greek officer began licking the blood oozing from the cuts on my arms and shoulders. I was about to pass out when I was taken outside, I saw a friend of mine captive in their hands. His legs and arms were tied. Then a Greek Cypriot pulled the safety pin from the grenade he had taken from his belt and threw the bomb at the Turkish soldier. My poor friend was blown to pieces. I didn't want to live any more."

The Tsamourian Albanians whose lands were occupied by Greeks should not be forgotten either.

The genocide movement whose aim was the ethnic cleansing of the Tsamourian Albanians began on 27th June 1944. 2900 young and elderly men, 214 women and 96 children were murdered by the EDES bands commanded by General Napoleon ZERVAS; 745 women were raped, 76 women abducted, 32 children under the age of three put to the sword, 68 villages razed to the ground and 5800 houses and places of worship destroyed.

The Greek has always kept low in the presence of the powerful but put on a show of strength only in the presence of the weak.

This is the true blood-smeared face of the Greeks who think that they will gain something by deceiving the world with lies in order to present the Turks as "Barbarians".

#8

Modern Greece, Founded on a Myth

George Zarkadakis | November 10, 2011
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/ ... yth/477413

Greece is the cradle of democracy, but, as the world has seen recently, a financial crisis is no time to put important questions to the people. Prime Minister George Papandreou’s proposed referendum on the country’s loan deal with the European Union, called off quickly after intense international opposition, illustrated that perfectly.

Plato and Aristotle would have approved of dropping the referendum. They did not like democracy of the direct kind. Neither trusted the people that much.

When the Greek crisis began two years ago, the cover of a popular German magazine showed an image of Aphrodite of Milo gesturing crudely with the headline: “The fraudster in the euro family.” In the article, modern Greeks were described as indolent sloths, cheats and liars, masters of corruption, unworthy descendents of their glorious Hellenic past. The irony was that modern Greece has little in common with Pericles or Plato. If anything, it is a failed German project.

In 1832, Greece had just won its independence from the Ottoman Empire. The “big powers” of the time, Britain, France and Russia, appointed a Bavarian prince, Otto, as Greece’s first king. Otto arrived with German architects, engineers, doctors and soldiers and set out to reconfigure the country to the romantic ideal of the times.

The 19th century had seen a resurgence of Europeans’ interest in ancient Greece. Goethe, Shelley, Byron, Delacroix and other artists, poets and musicians sought inspiration in classical beauty. They longed for a lost purity in thought, aesthetics and warm-blooded passion. Revisiting the sensual Greece of Orpheus and Sappho was ballast to the detached coolness of science or the dehumanizing onslaught of the Industrial Revolution.

Otto ensured that modern Greece lived up to that romantic image. Athens, then a small hamlet, was inaugurated as the capital. The architects from Munich designed and built a royal palace, an academy, a library and beautiful neoclassical edifices. Modern Greece was thus invented as a backdrop to contemporary European art and imagination, a historical precursor of many Disneylands to come.

Otto was eventually expelled by a coup. But the foundations of historical misunderstanding had been laid, to haunt Greece and its relations with itself and other European nations forever.

No matter what Otto may have imagined, the truth was that my forefathers, the brave people who started fighting for their freedom against the Turks in 1821, had not been in suspended animation for 2,000 years. Although their bonds with the land, the ruined temples and the myths were strong, they were not walking around in white cloaks with laurel wreaths. They were Christian orthodox, conservative and fiercely antagonistic toward their governing institutions. In other words, they were an embarrassment to all those folks in Berlin, Paris and London who expected resurrected philosophers sacrificing to Zeus.

The profound gap between the ancient and the modern had to be bridged, to satisfy Europe’s romantic expectations of Greece. So a historical narrative was put together claiming uninterrupted continuity with the ancient past, which became the central dogma of Greek national policy and identity.

Growing up in Greece in the 1970s, I had to learn not one but three Greek languages. First was the demotic parlance of everyday life. But at school, we were taught something different: katharevousa (“cleansed”), a language designed by 19th-century intellectuals to purify demotic from the cornucopia of borrowed Turkish, Slavic and Latin words. Finally, we had to study ancient Greek, the language of our classical ancestors, the heroes of Marathon and Thermopylae. Most of us managed to learn none of the three.

Greek society suffers from an equal number of divisions. First is the political class that for almost two centuries now has shown subservience to foreign masters. The geopolitical position of Greece, controlling shipping routes from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, helps procure loans and diplomatic sympathies. No wonder that modern Greece never became truly independent. It has always been much too easy to be dependent on foreign power and capital. Becoming a member of the European Union and of the euro zone, only to amass a titanic debt, has been the latest chapter in this modern odyssey.

Second, the intellectuals dream of a truly westernized Greece through some miracle of economic and social science. When the loan referendum was announced, most of them opposed it. Greece had to show that it belonged to the European family of nations, whatever that may mean. Rebellion was not to be tolerated, lest the country was kicked out of the euro, the symbol of Greek westernization. Ultimately the intellectuals and politicians, with persuasion from angry European leaders and technocrats, had the referendum quashed. Besides, the invention of fantastical modern Greece demanded that its people, the third division of society, also remained imaginary.

Naturally, they are real as anything. They despise the loss of their sovereignty as well as the bitter medicine prescribed by their European brethren for their “rescue.” Austerity enforced by unelected officials from the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank is perceived as not remedy but punishment, a distasteful concept to the orthodox Greeks whose core value is mercy.

Burdened with the improbable weight of forefathers who supposedly laid the foundations of Western civilization, driven by strong cultural undercurrents that undermine the state’s authority, they long for the realization of a dream promised by their political class: that Greece can somehow be something different than the rest of the world, a utopia where mortals can live like Olympians.

The Greek financial crisis is a crisis of identity as much as anything else. Unless the people redefine themselves, this could become the perfect catastrophe: a country designed as a romantic theme park two centuries ago, propped up with loans ever since and unable to adjust to the crude realities of 21st-century globalization.

The Washington Post

George Zarkadakis is the author of the novel “The Island Survival Guide” and the play “The Imitation Game.”

#9

#10

#11

“Fushat e Grurit, Kodrat e Gjakut”

..ajo mori një numër të madh kërcënimesh me vdekje nga ana e një organizate të krahut të djathtë. Në të njëjtën kohë gazeta greke, “Stohos”, e përshkroi si një “armike të popullit grek”..
Aleksandri i Madh i Maqedonise tek shqiptaret eshte nje figure mjaft e qarte, ndersa tek banoret e sotem te viseve aleksandrine, te cilet jane dhe lende shqyrtimore e Karakasidit duket se eshte nje konvencion i mesuar permendsh dhe i diktuar keqas nga faktore te tjere jashte kujteses trashegimore.

Titulli: “Fushat e grurit, kodrat e Gjakut”
Autori: Anastasia N. Karakasidi
Botues: “Plejad”

“Fushat e Grurit, Kodrat e Gjakut”, një punim shkencor, të cilin autorja Anastasia N. Karakasidi e konsideron një punim shkencor, por që në thelb përbën më shumë se aq. Një peizazh nga formimi i kombit në Maqedoninë Greke, një libër mbushur plotë me fakte e detaje, që demonstron se në kundërshti me retorikën zyrtare, popullsia e sotme e Maqedonisë greke ka një bazë etnike dhe një sfond kulturor krejtësisht të ndryshëm nga ai grek. Duke zhvilluar proceset komplekse sociale, politike dhe ekonomike, përmes të cilave ka kaluar kjo popullsi përgjatë helenizmit dhe amalgamimit kulturalisht brenda një identiteti nacional grek. Ky punim shkencor sjell kështu një korrigjim të rëndësishëm të vërtetësisë mbi identitetin e trevës së maqedonase dhe ofron një analizë mendjemprehtë mbi etnicitetet dhe nacionalizmit ballkanikë të shekullit XX-të. Gjatë viteve në kapërcyell të mijëvjeçarëve, Ballkani është thyer në një dualitet tendencash që në pamje të parë të krijojnë përshtypjen e një kundërshtie të papajtueshme mes tyre. Në këtë ajër dualiteti si pjesë organike dhe mekanizëm manipulator i shoqërive kanë marrë pjesë përveç politikanëve e grupeve të interesit edhe studiuesit historianë, etnografë gjuhëtarë etj.. Ky libër vjen në dritë pikërisht në kohën e debateve dhe aksioneve politike e diplomatike në lidhje me një entitet aq të diskutueshëm gjeografik, historik, etnografik dhe gjuhësor, siç është Maqedonia. Ndoshta një qëndrim dhe një natyrë e tillë mendjehapur, qenë arsyeja pse botimi i këtij libri kaloi përmes një kalvari të tërë problemesh, ose ndoshta ky ishte edhe motivacioni kryesor pse ekstremistët grek, të cilët e akuzuan atë për “tradhti kombëtare”. Madje që, në vitin 1993 kur ajo botoi disa pjesë të studimit të saj në periodiken “Studime moderne greke”, ajo mori një numër të madh kërcënimesh me vdekje nga ana e një organizate të krahut të djathtë. Në të njëjtën kohë gazeta greke, “Stohos”, e përshkroi si një “armike të popullit grek”, duke botuar edhe adresën e saj në Selanik si dhe numrin e targës të automjetit të saj.

Identiteti maqedon

Gjate analizes qe Karakasidi i ben kujteses historike popullore te banoreve te marre ne shqyrtim, ne lidhje me trashegimine maqedone te lashtesise dhe evokimin e simboleve e personazheve te shquar te saj, del e qarte se madheshtia e Maqedonise dhe Aleksandri i Madh jane nje lende teper e turbullt dhe pa shtrat ne vetedijen e tyre. Ata ngaterrojne kohet historike, perziejne elementin aziatik (turk, asiras, pers) me elementin ballkanik, nderfusin sentimentin nenvetedijesor ne lenden propagandistike qe i ka trysnuar, dhe krijojne nje mishmash kujtesor per trashegimine.

Pra, tek ata Aleksandri dhe Maqedonia e lashte nuk thone asgje. Ne te kundert me vetedijen popullore nder shqiptare, ku koncepti eshte mjaft i paster dhe shembelltyra e Lekes se Madh vjen ne nje vizion te qarte dhe te pandotur me elemente te tjere absurde. Ai vjen natyrshem si nje evokim i brendshem shpirteror e vetedijesor dhe pa asnje lloj ndikimi arsimor, edukativ apo propagandistik. Madje, duhet thene se keta elemente te fundit qe nderfuten prej institucioneve kane qene kryesisht perkunder kesaj vetedijeje trashegimore.

Aleksandri i Madh i Maqedonise tek shqiptaret eshte nje figure mjaft e qarte, ndersa tek banoret e sotem te viseve aleksandrine, te cilet jane dhe lende shqyrtimore e Karakasidit duket se eshte nje konvencion i mesuar permendsh dhe i diktuar keqas nga faktore te tjere jashte kujteses trashegimore.
Paradoksalisht, gje qe edhe Karakasidi pergjate punimit te saj e pasqyron, per nje trashegimi maqedone dhe aleksandrine grinden disa pale etnike dhe disa shtete qe s’kane te bejne aspak me to. Te flitet per nje trashegimi te Maqedonise se lashte nga sllavet apo sllavofolesit e atyre trevave perben nje absurd qe nuk kerkon argumenta te tjere, pasi mjafton vetem fakti i mirenjohur historik se dyndjet nistore sllave datojne rreth dhjete shekuj mbas Aleksandrit dhe Perandorise Maqedone te lashtesise.

Dhe nese realisht gjendet ndonje gjurme maqedone ne grupet etnike sllavofolese kjo i dedikohet ose elementit autokton te sllavizuar ne kohe te hershme apo te vone, ose ndikimit te institucioneve politike. E njejta gje mund te thuhet per bullgaret qe ne te vertete jane fise avare te sllavizuar qe jane perzier me mbetjet e popullsise autoktone dako trake. Ndersa per greket, pavaresisht manipulimit te madh qe eshte bere ne historiografi, argumentat mbeten perseri te vobekte.

Kjo qofte duke iu referuar autoreve te lashtesise, qofte dhe autoreve moderne, te cilet ne te gjitha format e shprehura te cojne ne te vetmin perfundim: Raca e vetme qe mund te pretendoje ne menyre te perligjur trashegimine maqedone dhe Aleksandrin e Madh jane vete pasardhesit e asaj popullsie qe mbizoteronte Gadishullin Ilirik, pra shqiptaret.

Ne kete hulli, pa dashur te dalim nga caqet e nje fjale hyrese per librin e Karakasidit, po sjellim vetem disa pasazhe ne funksion te ketij argumenti. Ne Gjeografine e tij, Straboni shkruan se “Popullsia e Epirit, Ilirise dhe Maqedonise flasin te njejten gjuhe, bile dhe floket i presin ne te njejten menyre. Kane te njejtat zakone, dhe qeverisen nga kuvendi i pleqve te cilin e quajne Plakonia. Te vjeterve u thone Plaixh kurse plakave Plaixhe”. Nga Justini mesojme se maqedonasit ishin nje race pellazgjike. Ndersa tek Kuin Kyrsi dhe Plutarku shohim se midis greqishtes dhe maqedonishtes ekziston nje ndryshim i tille saqe, duke kuptuar njeren prej dy gjuheve, nuk mund te kuptoje edhe gjuhen tjeter. Trog Pompei shprehet: “...albanet (arberit), nje pjese e te cileve sot ka zene vend ne Peloponez, nje pjese ne Maqedoni, Iliri dhe ne Epir...”.

Puarso dhe Kajks thone se “Mbreteria e Maqedonise ia detyron origjinen e saj nje kolonie pellazgesh te debuar nga Histiokotida prej kadmeneve rreth vitit 1302 p.e.s. Ata u vendosen ne Pind nen emrin maqedonas dhe u shtrine deri ne Ematia”. Po ashtu fon Hahni ne Albanesische Studien, nder te tjera, pohon se “Shqiptaret jane autoktone sepse zbresin drejtperdrejte nga Iliret, qe ashtu si dhe popullsite e Maqedonise dhe Epirit, rrjedhin te gjithe nga parahistoriket Pellazge”. E. Mashi ne Annales des Voyages shprehet se “eshte e drejte te besohet se gjuha moderne e Shqiptareve eshte ajo qe flisnin ne lashtesi Maqedonet, Iliret dhe Epirotet”.

Petrota shkruan “...te gjithe ata qe kane pranuar tezen e origjines pellazgjike te Shqiptareve te sotem, te pranojne dhe te quajne si nje te vertete historike te padiskutueshme njejtesimin me ata te Ilireve, Maqedoneve dhe Epiroteve, dhe te ketyre me Pellazget e lashte.” Biondeli pranon se origjina e shqiptareve eshte pellazgjike dhe se “pa dyshim jane te nje gjaku me Maqedonasit e lashte, Traket, Daket dhe Iliret”.

Ndersa per dallimin midis grekeve dhe maqedoneve te kohes se Aleksandrit, Vajgali veren “Per botekuptimin grek ishte dicka e vetekuptueshme qe nje njeri te ishte edhe perendi. Por per maqedonasit, me perjashtim te fisnikerise se helenizuar, ky mendim ishte po aq i huaj, sa c’eshte per ne sot”, duke dalluar nje ndryshim thelbesor ne sistemin konceptual te grekeve dhe popullsive te tjera rrenjese si maqedonasit, iliret e epirotet qe kishin te njejten rrenje pellazgjike.

Ne Quarante Secoli, E. Bidera shkruan: “...qyteterimi pellazg nuk u nal vecse ne Epir. As nuk humbi, sic besohet, eshte ky popull fisnik, qe per tu kujtuar qendroi ende me gjuhen e tij teper te lashte ne Shqiperi, Thesali, Maqedoni, ne pjesen me te madhe te Dalmacise, te Serbise, etj...”. Dhe prof. M. Markiano shprehet: “populli shqiptar eshte, nese jo pellazgjik, me origjine pellazgjike, ose nje familje e asaj race shume te lashte qe populloi brigjet e Azise se Vogel, Greqine, Trakine, Maqedonine, Epirin, Mizine dhe Dakine...”.

Me shume : http://books.google.mk/books?id=H4WotF- ... &q&f=false

#12

AgrianShigjetari wrote:

Betrüger don te thote ne gjuhen shqipe "MASHTRUES" ne familjen Europjane "
Kjo gazete del njehere ne jave , dhe eshte me e lexuara ne Gjermani !

#13

Nje tjeter shkrim interesant:

THE SOCIO-CULTURAL ROOTS OF THE GREEK ECONOMIC CRISIS

Dimitris Epikouris
© ΕΛΕΥΘΕΡΗ ΕΡΕΥΝΑ

The economic crisis in Greece which threatens to act as a locomotive power that will force most of the countries in the european south to exit the Eurozone, has triggered many discussions and predictions concerning the future of Europe as an entity. Numerous analyses find their way to the media on a daily basis, all attempting to explain the repercussions of Greece’s inability to reform and lead itself to an economic growth that will eventually free the country from the constantly increasing need of borrowing money to satisfy its basic needs.

However, all those reports and economic analyses have something in common. They fail to deeply examine the socio-cultural roots of the greek crisis. If one does not take into account the idiosyncrasy and the psycho-synthesis of the modern greek people, will just miss the point.

Modern Greece is by no means related either genetically or culturally to the ancient cosmos and the people who once occupied this land. The modern greeks are just an intermixture of balkan tribes (albanians/arvanites, slavs, wlachs) which in the process of time mingled with northern africans, armenians and other tribes of Anatolia, not to mention the francs and the venetians who were also dominantly present in this land.

Those groups were mainly involved in agriculture and animal breeding. A significant number of them had been employed by the ottomans to serve in the army because the local inhabitants were hard natured and warlike.

During the byzantium era, those tribes were christianized while the few remaining descendants of the ancient greeks who refused to convert to christianity were either persecuted and killed by the christian emperors or died of several plague waves that occurred quite frequently back in those days. Another factor that contributed to the reduction of the population was piracy. It is a well known fact that the city of Sparta had been almost abandoned and unoccupied for 400 years while Athens and especially the area around the Acropolis was a place for pasturing sheep.

The attempts to “hellenize” those intermixed tribes were mainly made by european sovereign states which needed a protectorate to promote their interests. The geographic location of Greece is still considered as the connecting doorway between East and West. The european romantics who dreamed of reviving the ancient hellenic cosmos through the mountain savages also bear a degree of responsibility for the false identity that was given to the modern greeks.

The superfluous and simultaneously disastrous decision to name as “hellenes” (greeks) that intermixture of tribes eventually placed a very heavy burden upon them simply because they lacked the proper educational background that would enable them to develop the necessary awareness that would help them identify themselves with the ancient inhabitants of this land.

These mountainous hard natured shepherds were made to believe that they were not only the offsprings of the ancient greeks but also the christian God's blessed people. Everyone can observe that there is no comparison between these people and the ancient greeks. No resemblance whatsoever physically, aesthetically and mentally.

The Eastern Church was forcefully against any kind of education as it wanted its subservient believers not to read anything but the Bible. The role that the Church played during the years of the ottoman presence was catastrophic for the majority of the people because it was the main and the most effective collaborator of the sultan either through collecting taxes or contributing to the suppression of every revolt against the ottoman authority. The Church was surely rewarded by the Divan with a humongous amount of land enough to rank it as the biggest landowner of the country.

The confusing identity of being a hellene and a christian at the same time still haunts most of the people in this land. Most of the people in Greece have been made to believe that they are the pure descendants of Pericles, Socrates, Leonidas and Alexander the Great while they consider it quite natural to be christian orthodox as well. Two completely conflicting worlds co-exist abnormally in the socio-cultural background of modern greeks.

The revolution of 1821 against the ottomans that eventually led to the formation of the modern greek state couldn’t have been achieved without the contribution of the european superpowers of that era. The seabattle of Navarino that marked the creation of modern Greece reflects the need of the europeans to use this land as their protectorate governed by regimes that were either appointed or imposed by the european financial interests. Modern Greece has always been victimized and exploited by the superpowers while its role in the sociopolitical arena has never been autonomous.

The modern greek citizens who had never experienced the gifts of Renaissance, Enlightment and Industrialization remain culturally underdeveloped even today. Greece has been governed by the offsprings of the family clans that ruled the land right after the collapse of the byzantine empire and although it is true that democracy was born in this part of the world, it is not true that the ancestors of modern greeks are the ones who first created it.

The Church continues to dominate the politics in this land. Greece is the last theocratic state in Europe. If someone wishes to have a career in politics, he had better "bow" to the local Church bosses first.

In the 50’s and 60’s thousands of modern greeks were forced to abandon their villages and either migrate abroad or seek employment in the big city centers where factories were built and needed cheap labor. The countryside was abandoned and the cities experienced an unprecedented overpopulation that led to severe demographic and environmental problems since there was no urban planning (there isn’t one even today).

The rural depopulation, however, created another great problem that few politicians have dared to tackle: The disease of urbanism. The constant flow of villagers showed that the motives to abandon their villages were not only based on their need for employment but also on their desire to experience the “urban style” of living with a sense of hedonistic lust. Contrary to the US southerners who take pride in their heritage and their land, the greek villagers preferred to come to big city centers and work as industrial workers or clerks instead of remaining in their land and cultivating it. They believed that “easy living” can only be found in the big cities.

The military junta in 1967 encouraged the “love for urbanism” of the villagers even more.

Two main political parties emerged after the fall of the military junta. The “New Democracy” party and the “Panhellenic Socialist Party” also known as “PASOK”. The first one had a conservative approach and the second one a supposedly socialist one. Both of them, however, had one thing in common: They made sure that everything should be directly or indirectly controlled by the state. In order to achieve their goal which was no other than to remain in power as long as possible, they found a destructive way of doing that. Thus, the state was transformed into an enormous employment agency.

Those two political parties hired thousands of unqualified individuals to work in the public sector. The regimes borrowed money from the European Union to finance the fat salaries and the special privileges of their public servant armies. Prosperity in the private sector came only if it interweaved with the public one. No matter what somebody did, no matter what public service he wished to have, he simply couldn’t have it unless he bribed. Bureaucracy and corruption have always been interwoven.

The degree of corruption in modern Greece is by far higher than the one in many Asian, South American and African countries. The country stopped producing anything since ¼ of its workforce was employed by the state. Finding a job in the public sector became every young person’s dream. It was no longer important what academic credentials one had. What mattered was what kind of political connections he had so as to be placed somewhere in the public sector where he would be handsomely paid without doing anything! The populist rhetoric applied by both those political parties created a new kind of roman-like ethics among the people. Undoubtedly, this grotesque political system is a unique modern greek invention. Having conservative (right wing, anti-communist) regimes with a stalinistic approach of implementing the authority of the state is something that can only be found in the country of Greece.

The modern greeks are noted for having mastered the art of creating conspiracy theories. The whole world is supposedly plotting against them because of their racial "superiority".

John Maynard Keynes’ suggestion of “first stabilize and then reform” cannot find any application here because the greek economy can never be stabilized as it overflows with useless and counterproductive public servants.

All the above mentioned facts may sound a bit surprising to someone from another western state. Well, nothing should be surprising, nothing at all.

It is impossible for the descendants of chicken and sheep thieves, who lived on top of mountains and inside caves, rarely took a shower, kidnapped their hick wives from their parents and robbed villages, to understand how civilized nations function not to mention to feel europeans. It is also impossible for a nation that never experienced the gifts of Enlightment, Democracy and the Industrial Revolution to be able to adapt to the constantly evolving international economy.

If someone wonders why the rest European Union countries are so stiff against Greece, it is perhaps because they are ignorant of the real situation here. They lack the necessary knowledge to fully comprehend the socio-cultural roots of the modern greek state.

Greece will never be a purely european country. It can’t be. It doesn’t want to be.

http://www.freeinquiry.gr/pro.php?id=23 ... e31fec8977

ARBERIAONLINE

INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES

Re: INTELEKTUALET GREK TE SE VERTETES