Cyprus-Forum.com

[Bananiot]

Democracy is not just about majority rule, especially when it comes to a society deeply divided by conflict. It is a form of fetish to "believe" in majoritism in such societies. It always leads to the hegemony of one group over the other(s) and in Greece, due perhaps to historical fears, it has led to the appearance of the so called Muslim minority. Nationalist GC's would be happy to bestow the same title to TC's and in effect create a second Greek state as the second best solution after enosis (the real thing).

A society such as ours which was fatally divided because of conflict (along ethnic and religious lines), can only move forward with some form of power sharing. This is called concosiationalism and it is all about group representation in government that will provide stability, democracy and peace.

As to my question, one can see the causes of the conflict in the answers of our nationalist forum friends. The idea of power sharing makes their hair stand on end, even if this is the only way to make inroads towards ending foreign occupation and division. Hence they are calling for the impossible (desirable) which they dress with patriotic rhetoric in order to hide their deep nationalist nature that is solely responsible for our predicament. It is too late for this and this is not difficult to see.

[B25]

Bananiot seems to believe that the way TCs reacted to the perfectly legitimate (as Bananiot admited) demand for enosis, was a natural one and that anybody in their place would do the same. This is not the case. Rhodes, which also has a Muslim/Turkish minority, united with Greece a few years earlier, and not a single nose broke over this.

The reason the TCs reacted in such a violent way, contrary to their Rhodian counterparts, was because the UK and Turkey used them as the means and the excuse to deny to Cypriots their self-determination, so that the Imperialists could keep troops and control over our island. The Imperialists used the TCs as their pawns, by enticing them with offers of gains of land and power on the expense of the majority. This is what they continue doing today. This is why there is a Cyprus Problem and not a Rhodes Problem.

Amen! Re Pirati. Gamwto.

[wyoming cowboy]

GR, you say you would leave if such a hypothetical situation came to pass. You would presumably be happy then to live in a 'foreign' country as a member of a minority community there? I should say 'again' I suppose.

Which country would you choose? Obviously not the UK, where so many other GCs have chosen, as you have made it clear how miserable your life was living there as a 'bubble' and how you rejoiced in surrendering your British passport.

I doubt it would be the US considering your deep hatred of the country.

Australia?

right now i live as a minority in the usa, blacks, hispanics are also a minority. they enjoy the same rights as anyone else in the country. there have been problems in the past, both the majority and the minority realized that neither one's rights can be violated. the tc' minority continually ask to violate the rights of the gc majority, this happenned in 1964 and its happening today. violating a majority's rights is just as bad as a violation of the minority's rights.

[wyoming cowboy]

So your saying it would be fine for the TCs being the majority to demand enosis with Turkey knowing that you would be in danger? You GCs are not being very honest here nor are you giving clear answers leads me to believe you would do everything in your power to stop such a union with Turkey.

after the 1960 agreement was signed there was no call for enosis by the government of the ROC. there has been though a call of partition by the tc leaders.

[boomerang]

Democracy is not just about majority rule, especially when it comes to a society deeply divided by conflict. It is a form of fetish to "believe" in majoritism in such societies. It always leads to the hegemony of one group over the other(s) and in Greece, due perhaps to historical fears, it has led to the appearance of the so called Muslim minority. Nationalist GC's would be happy to bestow the same title to TC's and in effect create a second Greek state as the second best solution after enosis (the real thing).

A society such as ours which was fatally divided because of conflict (along ethnic and religious lines), can only move forward with some form of power sharing. This is called concosiationalism and it is all about group representation in government that will provide stability, democracy and peace.

As to my question, one can see the causes of the conflict in the answers of our nationalist forum friends. The idea of power sharing makes their hair stand on end, even if this is the only way to make inroads towards ending foreign occupation and division. Hence they are calling for the impossible (desirable) which they dress with patriotic rhetoric in order to hide their deep nationalist nature that is solely responsible for our predicament. It is too late for this and this is not difficult to see.

but...but...there is a black man running the US today...care to explain how this was possible?...

but...but...there is a black man running SA today...care to explain this as well?...

what do you think these 2 cases have in common today bananiot?

or maybe you are of the opinion the tcs suffered more than the black men?...not long ago the black men were segregated bananiot and treated like garbage...

bare in mind the kkk is able to demonstrate today along the US nazis?...

you can't base history on actions of a few years ago as collective punishment today....

[wyoming cowboy]

Democracy is not just about majority rule, especially when it comes to a society deeply divided by conflict. It is a form of fetish to "believe" in majoritism in such societies. It always leads to the hegemony of one group over the other(s) and in Greece, due perhaps to historical fears, it has led to the appearance of the so called Muslim minority. Nationalist GC's would be happy to bestow the same title to TC's and in effect create a second Greek state as the second best solution after enosis (the real thing).

A society such as ours which was fatally divided because of conflict (along ethnic and religious lines), can only move forward with some form of power sharing. This is called concosiationalism and it is all about group representation in government that will provide stability, democracy and peace.

As to my question, one can see the causes of the conflict in the answers of our nationalist forum friends. The idea of power sharing makes their hair stand on end, even if this is the only way to make inroads towards ending foreign occupation and division. Hence they are calling for the impossible (desirable) which they dress with patriotic rhetoric in order to hide their deep nationalist nature that is solely responsible for our predicament. It is too late for this and this is not difficult to see.

I disagree with many of your points Bananoit, first of all the conflict in Cyprus was not because of ethnic division or religious differences...First of all the when there is an external factor ie nato british cia etc...durng the height of the cold war organizing militias from both sides to create chaos on cyprus..it could also be stated that these militia groups were not supported by the ethnic groups eoka b and tmt were not supported by the ethnic groups they claimed to represent. second the religious factor was third of forth on the list. how could there be a major religious factor when the tc accepted a christian archbishop to be their president in 1960. show me examples of religious strife between the tc and gc prior to 74.


In a democracy the majority rules, in a modern democracy majority rules with respect of civil and human rights to its minority. thats it. as a matter of fact when did the gc majority during the early years of the republic infringe on the civil rights of any of its minorities? I ask you this question point blank....I know your answer will be makarios's 13 points but where in those 13 points was there a violation of the minorities civil rights.?

[Kikapu]

Democracy is not just about majority rule, especially when it comes to a society deeply divided by conflict. It is a form of fetish to "believe" in majoritism in such societies. It always leads to the hegemony of one group over the other(s) and in Greece, due perhaps to historical fears, it has led to the appearance of the so called Muslim minority. Nationalist GC's would be happy to bestow the same title to TC's and in effect create a second Greek state as the second best solution after enosis (the real thing).

A society such as ours which was fatally divided because of conflict (along ethnic and religious lines), can only move forward with some form of power sharing. This is called concosiationalism and it is all about group representation in government that will provide stability, democracy and peace.

As to my question, one can see the causes of the conflict in the answers of our nationalist forum friends. The idea of power sharing makes their hair stand on end, even if this is the only way to make inroads towards ending foreign occupation and division. Hence they are calling for the impossible (desirable) which they dress with patriotic rhetoric in order to hide their deep nationalist nature that is solely responsible for our predicament. It is too late for this and this is not difficult to see.

Bananiot, the term "majority rule" is a political one and is not meant to be one ethnic majority in numbers group ruling over another ethnic minority in numbers group. This is not how True Democracy works and is the exact reasons why it does not work in Turkey with the Turks over the Kurds, just because Turkey does not practice True Democracy.

Western True Democracies are based on one political party or combination of political parties in the form of coalition having the majority votes over the other political party/parties to be in power to rule the country. What Cyprus needs is the same system where power is in the hands of the political party/parties who has the most votes from the people and not have a system based on ethnic communities/groups to share power based on ethnicity. In order for any ethnic minority group to be part of majority power, can only come from them being part of that political party with the majority votes from the people, all of the people, from all walks of life.

This is what you should be promoting and not equal power given ONLY to 2 of the ethnic communities in Cyprus and not equal power given to the rest of the ethnic groups in Cyprus. This only promotes racism and an undemocratic system with violation of others Human and Democratic Rights. How can any ethnic minority group being part of any political party group can be denied any of their rights, even if they are not in power.? People can choose to be in which ever political party they want to be in based on their own political ideology. This is what Cyprus needs to prevent any ethnic group ruling over another. This is what should be promoted and not political groups based on ethnicity and ethnic divisions.

[BirKibrisli]

Bananiot asked a very specific question,and he deserves a very specific answer...So far only GR attempted to gi ve a specific answer...The rest of our right wing GC friends are clouding the issue,avoiding the question...

Come on,we are waiting Piratis et al...

Since when democracy, human rights, and equality of all citizens without racist discriminations and without segregation is classifieds as "right wing"?

Right Wing is what you are. You support the violation of the human rights of innocent people and ethnic cleansing and you call such things a "solution". You want to divide and segregate people based on their ethnicity, and impose an undemocratic system so you can have gains on the expense of others. Hitler would be proud of you! Yes, thats the same Hitler who invade Czechoslovakia to "protect" his minority. You have so much in common with him!

Sorry,Piratis,I should've said 'fascist,supremist Hellenic Nationalists'...

You know,the ones who are very selective about history...The ones who pick and chose the times,dates and events to base their arguments...The ones who believe that once a place or era has been touched by Hellenism,it should be forever Greek,by order of the Almighty...The ones who freeze history at a point it suits them...The ones who deny the pain and suffering of others and only concentrate on their own...The ones who acccuse anyone who wants to correct their historical misinformation as being supporters of human rights violations and ethnic cleansing etc...

Yep,I should've said Fascist ,Supremist,Hellenic Nationalists of this forum...
I made a mistake...

[Piratis]

the ones who are very selective about history
The ones who pick and chose the times,dates and events to base their arguments
The ones who freeze history at a point it suits them

The above accusations actually describe you, not me. I base my position on the whole history. On the other hand you selectively choose just a tiny part of that history (63-74) and even from that part you only remember your own suffering and not the suffering and problems you caused to us. For you everything before 63 is "too old" and everything after 74 is "excused". You really couldn't be any more selective than that!

The ones who acccuse anyone who wants to correct their historical misinformation as being supporters of human rights violations and ethnic cleansing etc

You are a supporter of human rights violations and ethnic cleansing because that is exactly what you support. How is "correcting historical misinformation" even if we assumed this was true (and it is not), have anything to do with your support for a "solution" based on ethnic cleansing and the human rights violations of 100s of thousands of innocent people? Or maybe it is a "historical misinformation" that 100s of thousands of Greek Cypriots have been ethnically cleansed in your attempt to create some "Turkish State" on land that belongs by over 80% to us?

The ones who believe that once a place or era has been touched by Hellenism,it should be forever Greek,by order of the Almighty

"Touched"? "Once"? We have been the majority of this whole island continually for 1000s of years. What about you? On what do you base the demand that north Cyprus should be Turkish? On your "right" to invade, oppress, murder and ethnically cleanse?

[Piratis]

Democracy is not just about majority rule, especially when it comes to a society deeply divided by conflict. It is a form of fetish to "believe" in majoritism in such societies. It always leads to the hegemony of one group over the other(s) and in Greece, due perhaps to historical fears, it has led to the appearance of the so called Muslim minority. Nationalist GC's would be happy to bestow the same title to TC's and in effect create a second Greek state as the second best solution after enosis (the real thing).

A society such as ours which was fatally divided because of conflict (along ethnic and religious lines), can only move forward with some form of power sharing. This is called concosiationalism and it is all about group representation in government that will provide stability, democracy and peace.

As to my question, one can see the causes of the conflict in the answers of our nationalist forum friends. The idea of power sharing makes their hair stand on end, even if this is the only way to make inroads towards ending foreign occupation and division. Hence they are calling for the impossible (desirable) which they dress with patriotic rhetoric in order to hide their deep nationalist nature that is solely responsible for our predicament. It is too late for this and this is not difficult to see.

Majority rule is an essential element of democracy. You can not have democracy in a country without majority rule. And democracy is an essential element for the prosperity and stability of our country.

Most societies have been deeply divided once, many of them even had a class of slaves (usually black). The solution in all cases was democracy where all citizens are equal.

Democracy might not be perfect but it is the best system that exists. People have tried Monarchy, Communism, Apartheid and several other systems but none of them was as good as democracy is. So forget about it if you think we are going to plunge Cyprus into the middle ages with some anachronistic apartheid kind of system just to satisfy the racist demands of some of your friends who refuse to be equal citizens like everybody else.

Just like the Greeks can live in an Asia Minor which is now called Turkey, so can the TCs live in a Cyprus which is Greek (and Cyprus is Greek far more than Asia Minor is Turkish). It is not "nationalism" to respect the history and identity of this island and its people. Nationalism is the attempt to forcefully change this identity, and this is exactly what the Turks (with the help of some of you) are trying to do.