Cyprus-Forum.com

[Diogenes]

Dear friends

you are all right on the sometimes "fuzzy boundaries" of the issue of nationality, but it is also what ultimately survived and what the people accepted and embraced. In the case of Cyprus, it is not difficault. There are two nationalities, Greek (majority) and Turks (minority), who live in a state called Cyprus. Cypriot indicates a political identity, NOT a national one.

As Greeks from Cyprus, we should be proud of our Greek identity and heritage. We are above all Greeks, with its "goods" and "bads". It is not an issue of choosing NOT to be because your state became independent. I am a Greek that lives in a state called Cyprus, that's all. If tomorrow a Cretan becomes politically independent, will he stop being Greek because he is politically independent? Obviously NOT.

Historically, Greeks from Cyprus are among the most ancient Greeks. Recall that the Mycenaeans settled Cyprus around 1600 BC, and Teucrus who fought in the Trojan War was the founder of the city Salamis on Cyprus. All these were, even before many major Greek cities even existed.

There is, nevertheless, a small dislike from some Greeks in Cyprus towards the Greeks in Greece. The reason, i believe, are historical. Here are a few:

- Britain offered Cyprus back to Greece in exchange for Greece entering the war on the side of the Allies, and Greece refused (entering the war anyway)
- Greece "encouraged" mainly for independence of Cyprus rather than re-unification in 1960, although we were fighting for re-unification. But, to be honest with you, i believe it was completely "our" fault we signed the independence. But, that's what happens when you have a priest for president.
- Greece didn't quite help in the 1974 invasion by the Turks.

Greeks from Greece, and Greeks from Cyprus, shouldn't nevertheless FORGET that Greeks from Cyprus are Greeks. Both, unfortunately, tend to forget that, even though Greeks from Cyprus fought along the rest of the Greeks in all major wars of Greece, from the Persian Wars to the WWII.
Also, they fought against Britain in order to re-unite with Greece in 1960.

The reason why they FORGET, i believe, is cultural and sociological. I explain: Most of the Greeks in general (from Cyprus, Greece, etc) are among the most culturally corrupted people in the world. Unfortunately, they lost connection with their TRUE history, heritage and identity. A fake, foreign, given religion (Christianity), was imposed on them, and changed their mentality and character.
Just think of this: Most Greeks celebrate the Three Hierarchs Day on Jan. 30th (who, by the way they were all Anti-Greek), but don't celebrate, honor the Thermopylae Day in Sept. 18th. Most of them have NO clue when it occurred. That's a shame...Keep in mind, that that's the same Church that officially condemned the Revolution against the Turks in the 1821 !!

[bigOz]

I respect a man who speaks his mind and beliefs in such a manner (albeit many flawed points in the essay). At least he is not devious or twisting his words to hide his true intentions or purpose - again to be respected...

After reading that, all I can say is "I REST MY CASE"! Arif olan anlar!. Funny how there has been no reaction or reply from any of the GCs in this forum - hmmmm

[Diogenes]

Dear bigOz,

thank you for your kind comments. Greek Cypriots (GC's) are as confused as Turkish Cypriots (TC's) on those issues of nationality, citizenship, co-existence, etc.

Pretending we are one and the same (nationally or otherwise) has led us nowhere, because obviously we are not the same. Other sensitivities has a GC (in terms of history, religion, etc) and others a TC. Not even GC's are the same among themselves (religion is one example), let alone with TC's.

Instead of enforcing "sameness", how about they try understand those differences and push for more realistic solutions. For example, i do not believe that re-unification is a realistic solution, since re-unification will necessarily enforce "sameness" and that is unrealistic. Unless, it is some kind of re-unification solution which respects nationalities, majorities, etc.

For example, what kind of history in schools will be taught by those who want to pretend we are the same people? On the other hand, a division solution looks more realistic to me, although i have to admit there 1-2 problems there too. Most important for me is that the TC's took a bit more land percentage-wise (37%) than what they should (they were 18% in 1974). So, if the TC's gave back Famagusta, logically speaking the GC's should have pushed for a division. That way, they at least both get to preserve their true idendities, govern themselves, etc. If the GC's wanted to unite the new Greek state with Greece, fine. If not, fine. Same for the TC's. And i know, that many will object when i say "logically speaking", for instance, but again, we have to be realistic. Unless the GC's are willing to get up and fight, in order to re-gain what they lost, i don't see Turkey giving back anything politically.

And any re-unification would imply compromises in nationalities, which perhaps neither side is willing to make. Now, someone from the GC side could object and say: This is unfair, what if the 15% Mexicans in the USA wanted to create their own state, would and should the Americans let them?. Well, if Mexico was stronger than the USA, and they were going to invade and get half of the USA instead of 15%, then maybe it's logical to let them keep the 15% in the first place. And the fact of the matter now is that Turkey is stronger than Greece, and worse, Greeks are not willing to fight, even though we won many wars being the weakest. So, if both sides want a solution now, then they should consider the realistic ones. There is NO justice in politics. The strongest dictates the laws, whether we like it or not. Otherwise, at least for the Greeks, we should wait until the interests, or powers, change and do our thing. But, don't think that this way could be certainly advantageous to any side though. The GC's have a disadvantage because of the waiting, but the TC's could have a disadvantage too because of the possibility of the odds turning in favor of the GC's later.

It's just there are certain "taboo" words than no one likes to use, such as "division", etc, that we have to go beyond finally. We also have politicians in both sides that they are making careers out of the Cyprus problem, and they don't really care for a solution. And let me not forget the Church too, who also made the Cyprus problem into a bussiness.

[Viewpoint]

Dear bigOz,

thank you for your kind comments. Greek Cypriots (GC's) are as confused as Turkish Cypriots (TC's) on those issues of nationality, citizenship, co-existence, etc.

Pretending we are one and the same (nationally or otherwise) has led us nowhere, because obviously we are not the same. Other sensitivities has a GC (in terms of history, religion, etc) and others a TC. Not even GC's are the same among themselves (religion is one example), let alone with TC's.

Instead of enforcing "sameness", how about they try understand those differences and push for more realistic solutions. For example, i do not believe that re-unification is a realistic solution, since re-unification will necessarily enforce "sameness" and that is unrealistic. Unless, it is some kind of re-unification solution which respects nationalities, majorities, etc.

For example, what kind of history in schools will be taught by those who want to pretend we are the same people? On the other hand, a division solution looks more realistic to me, although i have to admit there 1-2 problems there too. Most important for me is that the TC's took a bit more land percentage-wise (37%) than what they should (they were 18% in 1974). So, if the TC's gave back Famagusta, logically speaking the GC's should have pushed for a division. That way, they at least both get to preserve their true idendities, govern themselves, etc. If the GC's wanted to unite the new Greek state with Greece, fine. If not, fine. Same for the TC's. And i know, that many will object when i say "logically speaking", for instance, but again, we have to be realistic. Unless the GC's are willing to get up and fight, in order to re-gain what they lost, i don't see Turkey giving back anything politically.

And any re-unification would imply compromises in nationalities, which perhaps neither side is willing to make. Now, someone from the GC side could object and say: This is unfair, what if the 15% Mexicans in the USA wanted to create their own state, would and should the Americans let them?. Well, if Mexico was stronger than the USA, and they were going to invade and get half of the USA instead of 15%, then maybe it's logical to let them keep the 15% in the first place. And the fact of the matter now is that Turkey is stronger than Greece, and worse, Greeks are not willing to fight, even though we won many wars being the weakest. So, if both sides want a solution now, then they should consider the realistic ones. There is NO justice in politics. The strongest dictates the laws, whether we like it or not. Otherwise, at least for the Greeks, we should wait until the interests, or powers, change and do our thing. But, don't think that this way could be certainly advantageous to any side though. The GC's have a disadvantage because of the waiting, but the TC's could have a disadvantage too because of the possibility of the odds turning in favor of the GC's later.

It's just there are certain "taboo" words than no one likes to use, such as "division", etc, that we have to go beyond finally. We also have politicians in both sides that they are making careers out of the Cyprus problem, and they don't really care for a solution. And let me not forget the Church too, who also made the Cyprus problem into a bussiness.

Excellent post..well done you are one of the few that can see the reality of the situation and deal with it, very refreshing post.

[alexISS]

Most of the Greeks in general (from Cyprus, Greece, etc) are among the most culturally corrupted people in the world. Unfortunately, they lost connection with their TRUE history, heritage and identity. A fake, foreign, given religion (Christianity), was imposed on them, and changed their mentality and character.

I agree with your post except for the above.

There can be no cultural corruption, only cultural evolution. The fact that Greeks do not worship the Olympian Gods anymore does not make them "corrupt"! That's just absurd! I am by no means a religious person but Christianity is much more "believable" in the 21st century than the notion of 12 gods that live in Olympus. Besides, Christianity was not "imposed" or foreign, Greeks' role in the shaping of what is now known as Christianity was as important as the Apostles'. The evangelia (New Testament) were originally written in Greek and the Christian dogma and liturgy were shaped in their final form many centuries later.

[Diogenes]

Dear AlexiSS,

even if you call it "evolution", you can still qualitatively compare the cultural "evolutionary" state of the Greeks then, and the state they are now.
The question/point is simple, and everybody seems to act blindly towards it, here it is:

- The Greeks 2000 years ago, with those Gods, with that mentality,
with those traditions, with that way of life, etc, achieved all those
things they achieved, and produced all those people they produced.
The Greeks 2000 after that, or better, it's been 2000 after that, with
their new God and religion (Christianity), new mentality, new way of
life, etc, WHAT HAVE THEY ACHIEVED ???

The answer is pretty much NOTHING, and most of the others (Germans, British, French, etc) who achieved something and moved on, and we stayed behind, they achieved it relying heavily on those ancient sources, material, and knowledge, that we (actually they) the "enlightened", Greek-Cristians (if such a thing could ever make sense) rejected....

Anyway, who said to go back worshiping the Olympian Gods etc? But, nevertheless, thee is NO doubt the Ancient Olypmian religion was way more sophisticated, and "healthy", than Christianity. Do not confuse that true Olympian religion with the mockery the Christians did to it, and misrepresented it, etc.

You say the New Testament was written by Greeks (in Greek, etc), as if the New Testament is any great intellectual achievement or something. It is a ridiculus text, nowhere even near to the intelectual value of other ancient geek texts. It is (the New Testament) perhaps the best example of the intellectual, and cultural, corruption i was describing.

[gizzy]

I am not exactly sure of my exact ancestry but these are the infos I got from my grandparents and the archieve.
My mums mum side is half Albenian-half Slav
My mums father side is Ottoman and they also suspect they have arab blood
My fathers father side is all mixed up and we have relatives in egypt somehow :S
My fathers mum side refuse to accept but everybody knows his grandma was Maria who became Fatima. Other than that she claims she is "pure turk" but couldnt find the record on archieve
Who am I?
I stopped thinking about this a while ago coz I used to get really confused. I am simply a turkish speaking cypriot...

[LENA]

I am not exactly sure of my exact ancestry but these are the infos I got from my grandparents and the archieve.
My mums mum side is half Albenian-half Slav
My mums father side is Ottoman and they also suspect they have arab blood
My fathers father side is all mixed up and we have relatives in egypt somehow :S
My fathers mum side refuse to accept but everybody knows his grandma was Maria who became Fatima. Other than that she claims she is "pure turk" but couldnt find the record on archieve
Who am I?
I stopped thinking about this a while ago coz I used to get really confused. I am simply a turkish speaking cypriot...

Just stay with your last statement...is better!!! I think!!

[halil]

Dare u eat dolmades , mousakka , kokoretsi, kadaifi from now on..
Dare u dance tsiftetelli...

karma his problem is that he eat those stuff he is not eating shieftalies...he is from Greece and he want all of us to be Greek as well...he doesnt respect our nationality!!!

shieftalies has anything to do with sheftali?? sheftali means peach in turkish?? can u check it for me??

Sorry Karma...I have no idea...why they name them like that but...NO sieftalies has nothing to do with peaches

Hi Lena,
from my research i found out that Sheftali came out from SHEF ALi.from time to time word is change to Sheftali. like Cyprus grape VERİGO.
when the english man ate the grape he said VERYGOOD.but some how word spread araund the island as a VERİGO.

[LENA]

Dare u eat dolmades , mousakka , kokoretsi, kadaifi from now on..
Dare u dance tsiftetelli...

karma his problem is that he eat those stuff he is not eating shieftalies...he is from Greece and he want all of us to be Greek as well...he doesnt respect our nationality!!!

shieftalies has anything to do with sheftali?? sheftali means peach in turkish?? can u check it for me??

Sorry Karma...I have no idea...why they name them like that but...NO sieftalies has nothing to do with peaches

Hi Lena,
from my research i found out that Sheftali came out from SHEF ALi.from time to time word is change to Sheftali. like Cyprus grape VERİGO.
when the english man ate the grape he said VERYGOOD.but some how word spread araund the island as a VERİGO.

Good morning Halil... That was really funny but really informative. Thanks for the information! But do you know who Ali was? I do know one Ali but I dont think that he was the chef that you are talking about!