Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Viewpoint,
instead of rejecting all proposals presented to you, and accusing people that they try to "sell you" why don’t you make your own solution proposal for all of us to see?
You could of even take Kikapus proposal which by your own admition you initially liked, correct the points you want and present it to us.

At the moment you are just acting as if nothing else than 2 completely separate states would ever satisfy you.

We have done this before but Kikapu does not accept guaranteed equal representation.

Do you know what representation is VP?
It's representation of INTERESTS. Of MONEY.

How about giving you guaranteed equal representation and your 20% population pays guaranteed equal taxes to the FedGovernment like the other 80% of the population.

We are not talking expenditure but the right to say no in the upper house without having this right diluted or taken away.

Helooooooooo. That WAS GUARANTEED in kikapu's plan.
Your objections were for the lower house where you also wanted 50-50 representation

Hello back...

the lower house is not the problem here, its the upper house where we need to guarantee a balance and not leave the door wide open to manipulation therefore allowing a swing of just one seat that would have power to the GCs on a plate...this is the sell our clause in Kikapus plan.

[Pyrpolizer]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

[insan]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

If u r aware; we, a bunch of people just discuss here about some issues related to Cyprus problem. Our incompetent, self interested politicians and intelligentsia r not even aware of the existence of this forum... if even we discover the perfect solution and all agree upon it; woouldn't change the agenda of those incompetent politicians and intelligentsia... the only fact regarding my posts on this forum is; it makes me happy to share my knowledge and arguements with others...

[denizaksulu]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

If u r aware; we, a bunch of people just discuss here about some issues related to Cyprus problem. Our incompetent, self interested politicians and intelligentsia r not even aware of the existence of this forum... if even we discover the perfect solution and all agree upon it; woouldn't change the agenda of those incompetent politicians and intelligentsia... the only fact regarding my posts on this forum is; it makes me happy to share my knowledge and arguements with others...

Just when I was getting to prips with a possible political solution, we now find out that it hasn't worked.............oh well. Thats the end of politics for me. I tried and got cut off in my prime..........so to speak.

[Pyrpolizer]

Viewpoint,
instead of rejecting all proposals presented to you, and accusing people that they try to "sell you" why don’t you make your own solution proposal for all of us to see?
You could of even take Kikapus proposal which by your own admition you initially liked, correct the points you want and present it to us.

At the moment you are just acting as if nothing else than 2 completely separate states would ever satisfy you.

We have done this before but Kikapu does not accept guaranteed equal representation.

Do you know what representation is VP?
It's representation of INTERESTS. Of MONEY.

How about giving you guaranteed equal representation and your 20% population pays guaranteed equal taxes to the FedGovernment like the other 80% of the population.

We are not talking expenditure but the right to say no in the upper house without having this right diluted or taken away.

Helooooooooo. That WAS GUARANTEED in kikapu's plan.
Your objections were for the lower house where you also wanted 50-50 representation

Hello back...

the lower house is not the problem here, its the upper house where we need to guarantee a balance and not leave the door wide open to manipulation therefore allowing a swing of just one seat that would have power to the GCs on a plate...this is the sell our clause in Kikapus plan.

Yes sorry these were in fact your objections.
However Kikapu already gave you the answer from the very beginning.You have to limit the size of the TC consituent state so that it houses a vast majority of TCs, so a GC living in the north could never have a chance to make it to the senate.
In this way you guarantee YOURSELF. You don't get a quarantee by asking quotas that are against EU principles...

Secondly for important issues i am certain the fight will be to buy some senates, so in actual practice nobody can guarantee anything to anyone. It is just dreams.

[Pyrpolizer]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

If u r aware; we, a bunch of people just discuss here about some issues related to Cyprus problem. Our incompetent, self interested politicians and intelligentsia r not even aware of the existence of this forum... if even we discover the perfect solution and all agree upon it; woouldn't change the agenda of those incompetent politicians and intelligentsia... the only fact regarding my posts on this forum is; it makes me happy to share my knowledge and arguements with others...

Well I am glad it makes you happy, it makes me happy to think sometimes too.


But how about the "kavga" don't you like the "kavga" in this forum?

[Pyrpolizer]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

If u r aware; we, a bunch of people just discuss here about some issues related to Cyprus problem. Our incompetent, self interested politicians and intelligentsia r not even aware of the existence of this forum... if even we discover the perfect solution and all agree upon it; woouldn't change the agenda of those incompetent politicians and intelligentsia... the only fact regarding my posts on this forum is; it makes me happy to share my knowledge and arguements with others...

Just when I was getting to prips with a possible political solution, we now find out that it hasn't worked.............oh well. Thats the end of politics for me. I tried and got cut off in my prime..........so to speak.

It's all Insan's fault

Waking up people from their peaceful pension life, tsk tsk tsk

[insan]

Insan, we had a lengthy discussion on "your" Consociational Democracy couple of years ago which was very clear that it had already failed in Cyprus before. Consociational Democracy cannot function when one party wanted Enosis and the other wanted Taksim. Enosis dream has ended for the GCs but Taksim dream is an on going for the TCs, therefore, Consociational Democracy cannot work in Cyprus, not at least until TCs Taksim dream has also ended, and even then, I doubt it will ever work in Cyprus.


1. So excecutive power is only shared by "significant groups", which means the other groups are considered to be insignificant and therefore can be ignored and have their Democratic and Human Rights violated.!

2. There never was a segmented "significant groups", because all the groups mostly lived in mixed villages, therefore, there could not be "segmented autonomy" given to any group in 1960.

3. There never was a proportianal representation and allocation of positions, because more were given to the TC's at 30%, when they only represented 18% of the population, therefore once again, "consociationalism" failed in it's purpose.

4. Minority had a veto power on all issues.

It is time to bring True Democracy to Cyprus once and for all as it is practiced all over Europe and the west in general and stop playing games with failed experiments such as "consociationalism".!

First of all, Kikapu; consociationalism has nothing to do with Enosis, Taksim or other nonsense you suggested. Consociationalism is a necessity for every deeply divided, multi-etnic, multi-national, multi religious country...


1- Executive power is dhared by significant ethnic/national/religious groups because other groups much smaller in population size line up with either of the significant groups not because as u illogically and ill mindedly suggested they r insagnificant.

2- Segmental autonomy in case of Cyprus pre-1974 means that decision making authority is delegated to separate segments as much as possible... it doesn't have to be on territorial basis... Communal Chambers of 2 significant national groups of Cyprus was the product of segmental autonomy...

for the details please check the below link, page 29.

http://books.google.com.tr/books?id=at7 ... 22&f=false

3- 30% quota was allocated to TCs for proportional representation because when TCs began to struggle against the GC dominance at beginning of the British rule their population ratio was nearly 1/3 of the total population of Cyprus. During the British rule TCs were represented in the legislative assembly with the same quota; 1/3.... Most probably TC leadership hope and wished the return of TCs who fled or emigrated to other countries for various reasons... However, after 1960 there had never been such a peacefull environment that would encourage emigrated TCs to return...

Moreover, during the talks between the years 1968-1971; TC leadership accepted the reduction of TC quota to then TC population ratio but this issue was not the only problem of GC leadership... they would continue to struggle until they transform the RoC based on consociational democracy into a majoritarian regime then go to a referandum and annex Cyprus with Greece... after the fall of Junta of course because Enosis with Greece under the Junta was neither in the interest of Makarios nor the GC left who constituted 1/3 of GC population.

4- What's wrong with a legitimate veto based on legitimate Cyprus constitution and laws? Why don't u consider this veto right as a tool to protect the 2 significant national groups of Cyprus from each others tyranny and as a mechanism that would urge them to consociate, cooperate, negotiate to find out a common ground on issues that r vital to them?

Sorry Kikapu but u have a very ill minded personality... God save Cypriots from the persons like u...

Hold on for a minute Insan. How on earth are you going to APPLY a consciational type of democracy when the very element of consociation is missing? Your model is perfectly fine when there is good will. When there is no good will and when one of the two sides is actually looking how to pave a way for a legitimate taksim, neither your proposoal for a consiciational democracy nor Kikapu's solution plan have any chance to be accepted and PUT in practice. The same goes for a BBF solution of course.

I personally told you that I found merits in your proposal, but yet you seem so itchy that you shoot at EVERYBODY, what's wrong with you man?

And I dare say the system of governing for me is not very important. The most important are the details of the solution ITSELF on the matter of properties, settlers, security, human rights etc etc......

Put aside the not existing goodwill in minds of especially the right wingers of both sides; most importantly, both sides neither have competent, knowledged, mature and conscientious politicians nor intelligentsia to smoothly run a united Cyprus based on consociationalism... the nearest example is you...

Eh, my friend... easy come, easy go...

Have u ever read anything about consociational democracy in school? Have u ever read anything about consociationalism in your newspapers? Have u ever watched a discussion program on TV...?

Ps: Have u ever asked yourself why still there r TCs that wants Taksim? No. if u questioned it you would understand that the main reason is there r significant number of GCs that still aspiring a majoritarian type democracy which will give them the full control of Cyprus and make TCs and ineffective minority...

Have i ever asked myself why those GCs still aspire a mjoritarian democracy in a united Cyprus? Yes. Mainly a retrospective Turcophobia, secondarily interests of pan Hellenes and finally unscrupulousness...

In other words you just admitted that consciationalism is not an OPTION neither for the politicians nor for the people, because none of them is upto it's standards.

Then what's all this fuss about?

If u r aware; we, a bunch of people just discuss here about some issues related to Cyprus problem. Our incompetent, self interested politicians and intelligentsia r not even aware of the existence of this forum... if even we discover the perfect solution and all agree upon it; woouldn't change the agenda of those incompetent politicians and intelligentsia... the only fact regarding my posts on this forum is; it makes me happy to share my knowledge and arguements with others...

Well I am glad it makes you happy, it makes me happy to think sometimes too.


But how about the "kavga" don't you like the "kavga" in this forum?

Çocugluumdan berri gavga etmeyi sevmem amma bazan bazı gişiler beni çileden çıkarır; işde o zaman pata küta girişirim...

I think u have never witnessed our kavgas with especially boomerang, GR, Oracle and sometimes guru butdi... I don't like kavga... even when i'm forced to... I only fight when i'm persitently provoked...

[Pyrpolizer]

Çocugluumdan berri gavga etmeyi sevmem amma bazan bazı gişiler beni çileden çıkarır; işde o zaman pata küta girişirim...

I think u have never witnessed our kavgas with especially boomerang, GR, Oracle and sometimes guru butdi... I don't like kavga... even when i'm forced to... I only fight when i'm persitently provoked...

No I haven't , I am ON and OFF from this forum.
But I did witness some very sick insults when Yfred was here, which far exceeded the limits of funny quarrels...

[kurupetos]

Çocugluumdan berri gavga etmeyi sevmem amma bazan bazı gişiler beni çileden çıkarır; işde o zaman pata küta girişirim...

I think u have never witnessed our kavgas with especially boomerang, GR, Oracle and sometimes guru butdi... I don't like kavga... even when i'm forced to... I only fight when i'm persitently provoked...

No I haven't , I am ON and OFF from this forum.
But I did witness some very sick insults when Yfred was here, which far exceeded the limits of funny quarrels...

Nobody can forget the notorious Lurucadi YFred!