Cyprus-Forum.com

[denizaksulu]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

I am sorry but it is not the same. Look at my reply to Insan about the 50s.

Bear in mind that every group even a minority group wants to secure as many rights as possible. It may not be totally democratic but that's how "democracy" works today.

To put it in simple terms the Tcs TODAY are in a position to claim rights that extend upto a BBF arrangement. It doesn't mean the BBF is undemocratic, but it certainly is much more than a minority status.

The differences and the clashing between groups get normalized with the passing of time. If there was no Enosis-Taksim in the 50s and the TCs have accepted a minority status to survive, they would today be a very happy and prosperus community.

Similar normalizing will happen over time if we work out a BBF agreement today.

The TCs have always been greedy claiming much more than what they deserved. The same they do now. BBF will never happen. Claiming something is one thing, getting it is another.

Some TCs wanted only half. You wanted all of it. Get it? Now tell me who is greedy. If you dont want to share, then..................

You are wrong. We wanted to share proportionally, something TCs always rejected. We are the 82% and we want our 82% share. On the other hand the TCs are 18%, and they want 50%, almost 3 times more than their population percentage. It is clear who are the greedy ones

Oh dear; early onset of..........you must have erased 'ENOSIS' out of your memory P.

[Piratis]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

I am sorry but it is not the same. Look at my reply to Insan about the 50s.

Bear in mind that every group even a minority group wants to secure as many rights as possible. It may not be totally democratic but that's how "democracy" works today.

To put it in simple terms the Tcs TODAY are in a position to claim rights that extend upto a BBF arrangement. It doesn't mean the BBF is undemocratic, but it certainly is much more than a minority status.

The differences and the clashing between groups get normalized with the passing of time. If there was no Enosis-Taksim in the 50s and the TCs have accepted a minority status to survive, they would today be a very happy and prosperus community.

Similar normalizing will happen over time if we work out a BBF agreement today.

The TCs have always been greedy claiming much more than what they deserved. The same they do now. BBF will never happen. Claiming something is one thing, getting it is another.

Some TCs wanted only half. You wanted all of it. Get it? Now tell me who is greedy. If you dont want to share, then..................

You are wrong. We wanted to share proportionally, something TCs always rejected. We are the 82% and we want our 82% share. On the other hand the TCs are 18%, and they want 50%, almost 3 times more than their population percentage. It is clear who are the greedy ones

Oh dear; early onset of..........you must have erased 'ENOSIS' out of your memory P.

Even in the case of Enosis both GCs and TCs would be equal citizens on the Greek state, each citizen with one vote, unlike how it was during Ottoman rule or with the 1960 constitution, where GCs were given less rights than TCs/Muslims.

[insan]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

I am sorry but it is not the same. Look at my reply to Insan about the 50s.

Bear in mind that every group even a minority group wants to secure as many rights as possible. It may not be totally democratic but that's how "democracy" works today.

To put it in simple terms the Tcs TODAY are in a position to claim rights that extend upto a BBF arrangement. It doesn't mean the BBF is undemocratic, but it certainly is much more than a minority status.

The differences and the clashing between groups get normalized with the passing of time. If there was no Enosis-Taksim in the 50s and the TCs have accepted a minority status to survive, they would today be a very happy and prosperus community.

Similar normalizing will happen over time if we work out a BBF agreement today.

The TCs have always been greedy claiming much more than what they deserved. The same they do now. BBF will never happen. Claiming something is one thing, getting it is another.

Some TCs wanted only half. You wanted all of it. Get it? Now tell me who is greedy. If you dont want to share, then..................

You are wrong. We wanted to share proportionally, something TCs always rejected. We are the 82% and we want our 82% share. On the other hand the TCs are 18%, and they want 50%, almost 3 times more than their population percentage. It is clear who are the greedy ones

Oh dear; early onset of..........you must have erased 'ENOSIS' out of your memory P.

Even in the case of Enosis both GCs and TCs would be equal citizens on the Greek state, each citizen with one vote, unlike how it was during Ottoman rule or with the 1960 constitution, where GCs were given less rights than TCs/Muslims.

Piratis has never heard about something called consociational democracy...

Consociationalism
Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate and stabilize a society comprised of diverse groups. In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.
Definition

Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate the sharing of power in a state that comprises diverse societies (distinct ethnic, religious, political, national or linguistic groups), by allocating these groups collective rights. The executive-power sharing is mainly characterized by proportional representation, veto rights and segmental autonomy for minority groups.

In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.

There are four characteristics of Consociationalism:2

Executive power-sharing - forming a 'grand coalition' with leaders representing all significant segments of society. The institutional expression of the 'grand coalition' is a multi-party cabinet.3

Mutual Veto - giving groups within a state the right to veto the government's decision-making. It will thus be necessary to reach mutual agreement among all parties in the executive.4

Proportional Representation - enabling groups to be a part of the state's decision-making and to have their voice heard in the highest instances of policy-making.

Segmental Autonomy - giving minority groups the possibility for self-rule within the boundaries of the state.

Rather than having a particular structure, Consociationalism could take different forms in different places,5 and the division of power between the central government and the autonomous political units varies.6

http://reut-institute.org/en/Publicatio ... ionId=3207

Lijphart, who identified four structural features shared by consociational systems – a grand coalition government (between parties from different segments of society), segmental autonomy (in the cultural sector), proportionality (in the voting system and in public sector employment) and minority veto (1977, pp. 25-52). Lijphart argued that these characteristics, more or less prominently, were exhibited by all the classic examples of consociationalism: Lebanon, Cyprus, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, Fiji and Malaysia.

http://www.stefanwolff.com/files/Electo ... Design.pdf

To be able to understand the merits of consociationalism, one has to be very knowledged but moreover very open minded and righteous...

[Kikapu]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

I am sorry but it is not the same. Look at my reply to Insan about the 50s.

Bear in mind that every group even a minority group wants to secure as many rights as possible. It may not be totally democratic but that's how "democracy" works today.

To put it in simple terms the Tcs TODAY are in a position to claim rights that extend upto a BBF arrangement. It doesn't mean the BBF is undemocratic, but it certainly is much more than a minority status.

The differences and the clashing between groups get normalized with the passing of time. If there was no Enosis-Taksim in the 50s and the TCs have accepted a minority status to survive, they would today be a very happy and prosperus community.

Similar normalizing will happen over time if we work out a BBF agreement today.

The TCs have always been greedy claiming much more than what they deserved. The same they do now. BBF will never happen. Claiming something is one thing, getting it is another.

Some TCs wanted only half. You wanted all of it. Get it? Now tell me who is greedy. If you dont want to share, then..................

You are wrong. We wanted to share proportionally, something TCs always rejected. We are the 82% and we want our 82% share. On the other hand the TCs are 18%, and they want 50%, almost 3 times more than their population percentage. It is clear who are the greedy ones

Oh dear; early onset of..........you must have erased 'ENOSIS' out of your memory P.

Even in the case of Enosis both GCs and TCs would be equal citizens on the Greek state, each citizen with one vote, unlike how it was during Ottoman rule or with the 1960 constitution, where GCs were given less rights than TCs/Muslims.

Piratis has never heard about something called consociational democracy...

Consociationalism
Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate and stabilize a society comprised of diverse groups. In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.
Definition

Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate the sharing of power in a state that comprises diverse societies (distinct ethnic, religious, political, national or linguistic groups), by allocating these groups collective rights. The executive-power sharing is mainly characterized by proportional representation, veto rights and segmental autonomy for minority groups.

In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.

There are four characteristics of Consociationalism:2

Executive power-sharing - forming a 'grand coalition' with leaders representing all significant segments of society. The institutional expression of the 'grand coalition' is a multi-party cabinet.3

Mutual Veto - giving groups within a state the right to veto the government's decision-making. It will thus be necessary to reach mutual agreement among all parties in the executive.4

Proportional Representation - enabling groups to be a part of the state's decision-making and to have their voice heard in the highest instances of policy-making.

Segmental Autonomy - giving minority groups the possibility for self-rule within the boundaries of the state.

Rather than having a particular structure, Consociationalism could take different forms in different places,5 and the division of power between the central government and the autonomous political units varies.6

http://reut-institute.org/en/Publicatio ... ionId=3207

Lijphart, who identified four structural features shared by consociational systems – a grand coalition government (between parties from different segments of society), segmental autonomy (in the cultural sector), proportionality (in the voting system and in public sector employment) and minority veto (1977, pp. 25-52). Lijphart argued that these characteristics, more or less prominently, were exhibited by all the classic examples of consociationalism: Lebanon, Cyprus, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, Fiji and Malaysia.

http://www.stefanwolff.com/files/Electo ... Design.pdf

To be able to understand the merits of consociationalism, one has to be very knowledged but moreover very open minded and righteous...

Consociationalism is a form of democracy

Which countries practice this "form of Democracy", Insan.??

[insan]

However; according to GC leadership and Hellenic ultra nationalists, "the invader Ottoman remnants" would either have to accept minority status or be harrased, killed, forced to leave "The Greek island" Cyprus...

And why should the TCs, who are less than a 5th of the population, have even more than minority rights? I remind you that minority rights are rights which are over and above the individual human rights that all citizens have.

Are you saying that the majorities of all countries which have ethnic/religious/linguistic minorities (practically all), and which are not based on the so called "consociational democracy" (practically none is) are "ultra nationalists"?

At least you admit that the TC would not have accepted a normal democracy in Cyprus and that they would seek to maintain the racist divisions imposed since Ottoman rule, regardless if our aim was enosis or an independent Cyprus with a real, one person one vote, democracy.

are you talking for what the situation should have been in the 50s or today?

I am talking about how the situation was in the 50s, but the same is true for today.

I am sorry but it is not the same. Look at my reply to Insan about the 50s.

Bear in mind that every group even a minority group wants to secure as many rights as possible. It may not be totally democratic but that's how "democracy" works today.

To put it in simple terms the Tcs TODAY are in a position to claim rights that extend upto a BBF arrangement. It doesn't mean the BBF is undemocratic, but it certainly is much more than a minority status.

The differences and the clashing between groups get normalized with the passing of time. If there was no Enosis-Taksim in the 50s and the TCs have accepted a minority status to survive, they would today be a very happy and prosperus community.

Similar normalizing will happen over time if we work out a BBF agreement today.

The TCs have always been greedy claiming much more than what they deserved. The same they do now. BBF will never happen. Claiming something is one thing, getting it is another.

Some TCs wanted only half. You wanted all of it. Get it? Now tell me who is greedy. If you dont want to share, then..................

You are wrong. We wanted to share proportionally, something TCs always rejected. We are the 82% and we want our 82% share. On the other hand the TCs are 18%, and they want 50%, almost 3 times more than their population percentage. It is clear who are the greedy ones

Oh dear; early onset of..........you must have erased 'ENOSIS' out of your memory P.

Even in the case of Enosis both GCs and TCs would be equal citizens on the Greek state, each citizen with one vote, unlike how it was during Ottoman rule or with the 1960 constitution, where GCs were given less rights than TCs/Muslims.

Piratis has never heard about something called consociational democracy...

Consociationalism
Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate and stabilize a society comprised of diverse groups. In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.
Definition

Consociationalism is a form of democracy which seeks to regulate the sharing of power in a state that comprises diverse societies (distinct ethnic, religious, political, national or linguistic groups), by allocating these groups collective rights. The executive-power sharing is mainly characterized by proportional representation, veto rights and segmental autonomy for minority groups.

In recent years, it has become a major demand of Israeli Arabs.

There are four characteristics of Consociationalism:2

Executive power-sharing - forming a 'grand coalition' with leaders representing all significant segments of society. The institutional expression of the 'grand coalition' is a multi-party cabinet.3

Mutual Veto - giving groups within a state the right to veto the government's decision-making. It will thus be necessary to reach mutual agreement among all parties in the executive.4

Proportional Representation - enabling groups to be a part of the state's decision-making and to have their voice heard in the highest instances of policy-making.

Segmental Autonomy - giving minority groups the possibility for self-rule within the boundaries of the state.

Rather than having a particular structure, Consociationalism could take different forms in different places,5 and the division of power between the central government and the autonomous political units varies.6

http://reut-institute.org/en/Publicatio ... ionId=3207

Lijphart, who identified four structural features shared by consociational systems – a grand coalition government (between parties from different segments of society), segmental autonomy (in the cultural sector), proportionality (in the voting system and in public sector employment) and minority veto (1977, pp. 25-52). Lijphart argued that these characteristics, more or less prominently, were exhibited by all the classic examples of consociationalism: Lebanon, Cyprus, Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands, Belgium, Fiji and Malaysia.

http://www.stefanwolff.com/files/Electo ... Design.pdf

To be able to understand the merits of consociationalism, one has to be very knowledged but moreover very open minded and righteous...

Consociationalism is a form of democracy

Which countries practice this "form of Democracy", Insan.??

Why don't you just google it Kikapu?

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=YC_ ... ia&f=false

I hope u read this book at least from page 1 to 32...

[Pyrpolizer]

When did we accept? The one and only proposal for a so called "BBF" was rejected by us in a referendum. Sure, a very different kind of "BBF" could be accepted by us (I gave examples of such "BBF" in the past), but it is obvious that the TCs will not accept the kind of "BBF" that we would accept and therefore BBF will never happen.

We accepted to negotiate for a BBF. I was referring to the very concept of the BBF in comparison to our one man one vote type of Democracy. I think my comparison was very clear. I never said the final type of the BBF has been agreed, nor did i say that it is certain we will ever agree on any type.

The same query was raised a few posts before by CBBB. A answered him, but it seems you haven't noticed.

[Pyrpolizer]

Consociationalism is a form of democracy

I must ask you the same question that I asked Piratis before: Are you proposing this as a solution for today or for what the solution should have been in the 50s?

[insan]

Consociationalism is a form of democracy

I must ask you the same question that I asked Piratis before: Are you proposing this as a solution for today or for what the solution should have been in the 50s?

both.

[Piratis]

insan, in which of those examples you mentioned the population was divided by means of ethnic cleansing in order to create separate ethnic based states?

Not only such thing happened in none of those countries, but what you demand for your 18% minority is far more than any community of an equivalent size would get in any other country.

Piratis has never heard about something called consociational democracy...

Did they heard of it in Turkey?

[insan]

insan, in which of those examples you mentioned the population was divided by means of ethnic cleansing in order to create separate ethnic based states?

What u call as "ethnic cleansing" is the consequence of never ending bloody Cyprus conflict... since 1974, at least there's no more bloodshed in Cyprus... maybe in the future we might again become ethnically mixed in Cyprus...