Cyprus-Forum.com

[Oracle]

Hello Afrosiatis

I don't have forum-time today, but just to quickly say; please don't fall into the trap of thinking that "markers" used to track Man's migrations once out of Africa, are the same as genetic differences which make people more or less "genetically similar". Think brothers and sisters with same parents - one sibling might end-up with blue eyes and the other brown eyes. They are still as "genetically similar" - but look different - as two siblings both with blue eyes, for example.

The split to two main paths (East and West) is pretty much as you describe but came late-on in our history (anything between 150,000 to 400,000 years ago, some say - but this is not long). So, we are ONE race and too genetically similar to draw anything more from our DNA, other than to compare some environmentally induced changes (highly variable), relative to the virtually immutable/stable DNA (junk?) which we had from earlier in our history. These markers just track our paths through different climes and various dietary changes. They do not make us as humans, more or less 'genetically similar' - we already are one race of Homo sapiens. The next layer of information comes from cultural and linguistic habits - again these are different but our species/one-race specific DNA is the 'same'. So, you need to read the migratory DNA marker studies alongside recorded history and cultural variables.

[Afroasiatis]

Hello Afrosiatis

I don't have forum-time today, but just to quickly say; please don't fall into the trap of thinking that "markers" used to track Man's migrations once out of Africa, are the same as genetic differences which make people more or less "genetically similar". Think brothers and sisters with same parents - one sibling might end-up with blue eyes and the other brown eyes. They are still as "genetically similar" - but look different - as two siblings both with blue eyes, for example.

The split to two main paths (East and West) is pretty much as you describe but came late-on in our history (anything between 150,000 to 400,000 years ago, some say - but this is not long). So, we are ONE race and too genetically similar to draw anything more from our DNA, other than to compare some environmentally induced changes (highly variable), relative to the virtually immutable/stable DNA (junk?) which we had from earlier in our history. These markers just track our paths through different climes and various dietary changes. They do not make us as humans, more or less 'genetically similar' - we already are one race of Homo sapiens. The next layer of information comes from cultural and linguistic habits - again these are different but our species/one-race specific DNA is the 'same'. So, you need to read the migratory DNA marker studies alongside recorded history and cultural variables.

Hello Oracle.

To your first point, I'm really not any kind of expert in genetics, but I understand of course the difference between genotype and phenotype. However, I think there is no doubt that the outlook of someone is decided among others by his genes, and persons inside one family do usually look similar - so, if you have groups of people which look similar to each other (as e.g. Greeks and Turks), this is explained to a big part through genetic similarities. Isn't that so?

As to the rest, I admit I'm a bit confused as to what is your main point here. If it is, that there was migration from Central Asia to Asia Minor, you are obviously right, and I don't know of anyone serious questioning that. And similarly, I don't think that anyone would seriously doubt that modern Turks are also descendants of various native Anatolian peoples, among others.

If what you're saying is that we should concentrate on the cultural aspects than the genetic, then I certainly agree. In this sense, I think again the modern Turks are also culturally a mixture of various cultural traditions. Not so different than modern Greeks, of course. In fact, the greek/turkish (better: orthodox/muslim) factor is perhaps not so decisive for the cultural identity as it is thought to be. At least up to some time ago, the regional identities could be more decisive. GCs and TCs are probably culturally nearer to each other than to Greeks and Turks in the "mother-countries". And about a century ago, same would most probably go for Muslim and Christian Pontians, or Muslim and Christian Cretans.

[Piratis]

Again: democratic principles are for states.

Other bodies or organizations can adopt some of the democratic principles to one level or another, but when we are referring to a Democracy we are reffing to a state, not anything else. EU is not a democracy (but a union of democratic states). UN is not a democracy either. A family can not be a democracy etc.

EU countries are as independent as they want to. Any country can leave the EU if it decides to do so.

And again, this is a legalist argument. If someone really gives value to democracy, he would like democratic principles to be applied everywhere.

It is not "legalist", but a basic fact. Are you saying that all other democratic countries in EU don't value democracy because they don't brake up their countries by means of ethnic cleansing? I hope you understand you are talking a load of nonsense.

Yet again you are mixing apples and oranges.
How many votes does the Turkish minority get in the Bundesrat?

Do you know any country where an 18% minority is equated with the 82% majority, and at the same time smaller minorities are totally excluded?

Officially, there is not such a thing as a Turkish minority in Germany (the recognized minorities are Danes, Sorbs and Friesians, if I'm not wrong), and it certainly doesn't have a federal state of its own.

If the representation in federal organs in a future united Cyprus is based on federal state, let's say "sub-citizenship", and not on ethnic identity, this makes it no different to the german model.

But even if not so, TCs are never going to be fully equated with GCs in a federal Cyprus - this is just an exaggeration. If you ask me whether there are countries were minorities are recognized as equal communities, I already mentioned the examples of Bosnia and Belgium - it's another thing if we like them or not.

The TC minority doesn't have a state of its own. They are trying to create one by stealing our land and ethnically cleansing us. This has absolutely nothing to do with the German model.

And this is what solving the Cyprus problem is all about. Making things right. We don't want to make Cyprus another Bosnia, nor Belgium (which is about to brake up).

If making north Cyprus Turkish, legalizing the ethnic cleansing and adopting some racist and undemocratic system that goes against our human rights is called a "solution" for you, then I wonder what you think the problem is.

Well, the problem is the situation we have today: limited free movement, a part of the country living under a strange not-recognized status, people not able to use their land or houses without even getting a compensation for it, uncontrollable incoming from settlers putting TC identity under serious danger, militarization and the associated risks, thousands of foreign army and military camps etc etc. This is what we need to solve.

I disagree.

"Limited free movement". We don't care about moving freely in north Cyprus as tourists. Having 1 less tourist destination is hardly a problem. The problem is Turks having control over our lands.

"a part of the country living under a strange not-recognized status". And the solution to this problem is to recognize this part of the country as being a separate Turkish state? This is the "solution" of the problem????

"people not able to use their land or houses without even getting a compensation for it". Yes, people should get their lands back. The "solution" you propose doesn't do that for many of them and it actually makes it harder for them to get compensation since today Turkey is responsible to give compensations while with the "solution" that you support we would have to compensate ourselves.

"uncontrollable incoming from settlers putting TC identity under serious danger" The TCs don't care about their identity. And who would control the Settler issue after the "solution" you support. The Turks would still have control over north Cyprus and they could import as many Settlers as they want. Who would stop them? The difference is that these settles would also be free to roam the whole Cyprus, thus making this problem worst

"thousands of foreign army and military camps". The Turkish army is here for a reason: To divide Cyprus. If Cyprus is partitioned with our signature then they would have achieved their mission and there wouldn't be any need for them to continue to be in Cyprus.

Here is the real Cyprus Problem: The Turks having under occupation land that belongs to us and interfering in our internal affairs. The solution is LIBERATION from the Turks. This means liberating north Cyprus from the Turkish troops and bringing it under our control, and gaining our freedom so we can democratically rule our whole island.

[Oracle]

Hello Afrosiatis

I don't have forum-time today, but just to quickly say; please don't fall into the trap of thinking that "markers" used to track Man's migrations once out of Africa, are the same as genetic differences which make people more or less "genetically similar". Think brothers and sisters with same parents - one sibling might end-up with blue eyes and the other brown eyes. They are still as "genetically similar" - but look different - as two siblings both with blue eyes, for example.

The split to two main paths (East and West) is pretty much as you describe but came late-on in our history (anything between 150,000 to 400,000 years ago, some say - but this is not long). So, we are ONE race and too genetically similar to draw anything more from our DNA, other than to compare some environmentally induced changes (highly variable), relative to the virtually immutable/stable DNA (junk?) which we had from earlier in our history. These markers just track our paths through different climes and various dietary changes. They do not make us as humans, more or less 'genetically similar' - we already are one race of Homo sapiens. The next layer of information comes from cultural and linguistic habits - again these are different but our species/one-race specific DNA is the 'same'. So, you need to read the migratory DNA marker studies alongside recorded history and cultural variables.

Hello Oracle.

To your first point, I'm really not any kind of expert in genetics, but I understand of course the difference between genotype and phenotype. However, I think there is no doubt that the outlook of someone is decided among others by his genes, and persons inside one family do usually look similar - so, if you have groups of people which look similar to each other (as e.g. Greeks and Turks), this is explained to a big part through genetic similarities. Isn't that so?

As to the rest, I admit I'm a bit confused as to what is your main point here. If it is, that there was migration from Central Asia to Asia Minor, you are obviously right, and I don't know of anyone serious questioning that. And similarly, I don't think that anyone would seriously doubt that modern Turks are also descendants of various native Anatolian peoples, among others.

If what you're saying is that we should concentrate on the cultural aspects than the genetic, then I certainly agree. In this sense, I think again the modern Turks are also culturally a mixture of various cultural traditions. Not so different than modern Greeks, of course. In fact, the greek/turkish (better: orthodox/muslim) factor is perhaps not so decisive for the cultural identity as it is thought to be. At least up to some time ago, the regional identities could be more decisive. GCs and TCs are probably culturally nearer to each other than to Greeks and Turks in the "mother-countries". And about a century ago, same would most probably go for Muslim and Christian Pontians, or Muslim and Christian Cretans.

Hello again.

It's nice to discuss the little nuances of understanding we each have about the basis of our humanity, in such a friendly manner.

You're correct that the phenotype is the outward manifestation of the genotype; but the genetic differences which lead to quite dramatic phenotypic variations are actually quite small. Maybe one base change in the DNA of a gene could affect its activity profoundly. The point I was trying to make is that these subtle genetic variations are too minuscule to be used to classify people into different types (races). Besides, we all possess the same genes (+/- sex chromosomes) with equal chances of mutations or recombination to yield our endless differences in phenotypes. Some, quite alarmingly, different to our parents. So, we are not different races because of these genetic differences which become visible under different environmental cues.

As for the other points, we mostly agree. No culture is untouched by others, and nearest-neighbours tend to swap and learn from each other. With 70 Million people in Turkey, we know there are many cultural groups which have been absorbed by the recent conquerors, over the last few centuries, and the marker-analyses gaining popularity for tracking migrations will soon reveal our mysteries, since DNA has a good memory.

However, the cultural differences which are poignant in the Cyprus Problem are a little more embedded, in my opinion, than simply liking the sound of similar musical instruments and such type. I do suspect that there is a wide cultural divide which is memetically passed down the generations alongside various traditions and expectations. It's probably responsible for the success the 'Turkic tribes' have had in usurping, colonising and replacing natives who, otherwise, had for thousands of years settled into territorial co-operation. It's being exercised right now in some of the unhealthy beliefs we see manifested in arguments for holding on to the occupied north; what most civilized people consider as not rightfully theirs (Turk-TCs) to keep. This theft is supported and reinforced as normal from Turkish-state level. These unhealthy memes are being used to keep people separate from each other - with the excuse that we are different races - perpetuated by that popular nugget we see resurfacing every few months, here on CF, that "GCs and TCs" are more 'genetically similar' than they are to "Turks" and "Greeks". What racist tosh. It is in fact the cultural norms of these people which are more different than their respective genes. The phenotype!

[Afroasiatis]

Again: democratic principles are for states.

Other bodies or organizations can adopt some of the democratic principles to one level or another, but when we are referring to a Democracy we are reffing to a state, not anything else. EU is not a democracy (but a union of democratic states). UN is not a democracy either. A family can not be a democracy etc.

EU countries are as independent as they want to. Any country can leave the EU if it decides to do so.

And again, this is a legalist argument. If someone really gives value to democracy, he would like democratic principles to be applied everywhere.

It is not "legalist", but a basic fact.

It is a basic fact for sure, and it's also a legalist argument. There is no doubt you 're right, but still this is avoiding the main question.

Are you saying that all other democratic countries in EU don't value democracy because they don't brake up their countries by means of ethnic cleansing?

No, I'm saying they don't value democracy because they accept to be ruled based on non-democratic principles.

The TC minority doesn't have a state of its own. They are trying to create one by stealing our land and ethnically cleansing us. This has absolutely nothing to do with the German model.

You 're speaking about the way the TC state was created. This has of course nothing to do with the way the german states were created (it has though a lot to do with the way e.g. the bosnian federal states were created. And also the way many independent states were created: the most obvious example is Israel, but partly also states like Turkey, Greece, Czechoslovakia, among many others).

But I'm speaking about that. I'm speaking about the way the TC state will function inside a federational system. And this has similarities to the german model, among others.

I disagree.

"Limited free movement". We don't care about moving freely in north Cyprus as tourists. Having 1 less tourist destination is hardly a problem. The problem is Turks having control over our lands.

"a part of the country living under a strange not-recognized status". And the solution to this problem is to recognize this part of the country as being a separate Turkish state? This is the "solution" of the problem????

"people not able to use their land or houses without even getting a compensation for it". Yes, people should get their lands back. The "solution" you propose doesn't do that for many of them and it actually makes it harder for them to get compensation since today Turkey is responsible to give compensations while with the "solution" that you support we would have to compensate ourselves.

"uncontrollable incoming from settlers putting TC identity under serious danger" The TCs don't care about their identity. And who would control the Settler issue after the "solution" you support. The Turks would still have control over north Cyprus and they could import as many Settlers as they want. Who would stop them? The difference is that these settles would also be free to roam the whole Cyprus, thus making this problem worst

"thousands of foreign army and military camps". The Turkish army is here for a reason: To divide Cyprus. If Cyprus is partitioned with our signature then they would have achieved their mission and there wouldn't be any need for them to continue to be in Cyprus.

To limited free movement: for you a Cyprus where everybody can move freely may be the same with a Cyprus that you have to show an ID card and go through police control to move around your own country, but for me it is not. It's something that bothers me, as well as the fact that the crossings may be closed any day, as long as some TC minister or turkish general decides so.
As for going in North Cyprus as "tourists", this depends on you. I personally don't feel more of a tourist in North Nicosia than in Limassol.

To non-recognition problem: the solution to this is to find a way in which all Cypriots will have the same status, in matters of international recognition.

To the property problem: First, how do you claim to know so much in detail which kind of solution I propose? How long do you know me? And who would we "compensate ourselves"?
Anyway, in an agreed BBF every refugee would either receive his land back, or get a compensation. As the situation is today, he gets neither. And that's the problem to solve.

To settlers: obviously, you don't have enough contacts to TCs, if you claim they don't care about their identity. As to who would stop the import of more and more settlers in a BBF, the answer is obvious: the federal government.

To the army: the turkish army already divided Cyprus, that's history. In my opinion, it's a problem having thousands of foreign armies in our island (whether turkish or british), but also the great degree of militarization in our own GC and TC societies. And it's a problem even independently of the division of Cyprus.

[Afroasiatis]

Hello again.

It's nice to discuss the little nuances of understanding we each have about the basis of our humanity, in such a friendly manner.

You're correct that the phenotype is the outward manifestation of the genotype; but the genetic differences which lead to quite dramatic phenotypic variations are actually quite small. Maybe one base change in the DNA of a gene could affect its activity profoundly. The point I was trying to make is that these subtle genetic variations are too minuscule to be used to classify people into different types (races). Besides, we all possess the same genes (+/- sex chromosomes) with equal chances of mutations or recombination to yield our endless differences in phenotypes. Some, quite alarmingly, different to our parents. So, we are not different races because of these genetic differences which become visible under different environmental cues.

As for the other points, we mostly agree. No culture is untouched by others, and nearest-neighbours tend to swap and learn from each other. With 70 Million people in Turkey, we know there are many cultural groups which have been absorbed by the recent conquerors, over the last few centuries, and the marker-analyses gaining popularity for tracking migrations will soon reveal our mysteries, since DNA has a good memory.

I also think it's good we can speak about these issues in friendly manner.

To what you say up to here, I don't disagree, as far as I understand it correctly. So I'll move directly to the last part:

However, the cultural differences which are poignant in the Cyprus Problem are a little more embedded, in my opinion, than simply liking the sound of similar musical instruments and such type. I do suspect that there is a wide cultural divide which is memetically passed down the generations alongside various traditions and expectations. It's probably responsible for the success the 'Turkic tribes' have had in usurping, colonising and replacing natives who, otherwise, had for thousands of years settled into territorial co-operation. It's being exercised right now in some of the unhealthy beliefs we see manifested in arguments for holding on to the occupied north; what most civilized people consider as not rightfully theirs (Turk-TCs) to keep. This theft is supported and reinforced as normal from Turkish-state level. These unhealthy memes are being used to keep people separate from each other - with the excuse that we are different races - perpetuated by that popular nugget we see resurfacing every few months, here on CF, that "GCs and TCs" are more 'genetically similar' than they are to "Turks" and "Greeks". What racist tosh. It is in fact the cultural norms of these people which are more different than their respective genes. The phenotype!

I can't say I see much of cultural differences playing a role in the Cyprus problem - except to the extent they define group identities (i.e. I belong to the "Christians" or to "Muslims", to "Greeks" or to the "Turks"). But generally, I think many things in our lifes, even the way TCs and GCs view the Cyprus problem, are shaped through similar mentalities, which are based on common culture.

As for the success of the Turkish tribes, was their behavior really that different to other tribes which had come earlier in our region, like the greek tribes, the slavic tribes, the semitic tribes etc? Didn't they also often use, as newcomers, violence in order to subjugate the indigenous populations? And did the natives really live in territorial co-operation before the arrival of Turks? There were plenty of wars between Byzantines, Arabs, Persians, Latins, Slavs.

But let's move more into the part mostly relevant to the Cyprus question. You correctly point out to the way the theft of north cypriot land (and I would add, also the ethnic cleansing of GCs from there) "is supported and reinforced as normal from Turkish-state level". But is this really to be explained through cultural differences? Don't the Israelis do the same with Palestine, and even in much greater scale? Isn't a similar situation in Abkhazia? Would that mean that Jews, Turks/TCs, and Russians/Abkhazians have cultural similarities to each other which make them different to Arabs, Greeks/ GCs and Georgians?

[Lit]

Hello again.

It's nice to discuss the little nuances of understanding we each have about the basis of our humanity, in such a friendly manner.

You're correct that the phenotype is the outward manifestation of the genotype; but the genetic differences which lead to quite dramatic phenotypic variations are actually quite small. Maybe one base change in the DNA of a gene could affect its activity profoundly. The point I was trying to make is that these subtle genetic variations are too minuscule to be used to classify people into different types (races). Besides, we all possess the same genes (+/- sex chromosomes) with equal chances of mutations or recombination to yield our endless differences in phenotypes. Some, quite alarmingly, different to our parents. So, we are not different races because of these genetic differences which become visible under different environmental cues.

As for the other points, we mostly agree. No culture is untouched by others, and nearest-neighbours tend to swap and learn from each other. With 70 Million people in Turkey, we know there are many cultural groups which have been absorbed by the recent conquerors, over the last few centuries, and the marker-analyses gaining popularity for tracking migrations will soon reveal our mysteries, since DNA has a good memory.

I also think it's good we can speak about these issues in friendly manner.

To what you say up to here, I don't disagree, as far as I understand it correctly. So I'll move directly to the last part:

However, the cultural differences which are poignant in the Cyprus Problem are a little more embedded, in my opinion, than simply liking the sound of similar musical instruments and such type. I do suspect that there is a wide cultural divide which is memetically passed down the generations alongside various traditions and expectations. It's probably responsible for the success the 'Turkic tribes' have had in usurping, colonising and replacing natives who, otherwise, had for thousands of years settled into territorial co-operation. It's being exercised right now in some of the unhealthy beliefs we see manifested in arguments for holding on to the occupied north; what most civilized people consider as not rightfully theirs (Turk-TCs) to keep. This theft is supported and reinforced as normal from Turkish-state level. These unhealthy memes are being used to keep people separate from each other - with the excuse that we are different races - perpetuated by that popular nugget we see resurfacing every few months, here on CF, that "GCs and TCs" are more 'genetically similar' than they are to "Turks" and "Greeks". What racist tosh. It is in fact the cultural norms of these people which are more different than their respective genes. The phenotype!

I can't say I see much of cultural differences playing a role in the Cyprus problem - except to the extent they define group identities (i.e. I belong to the "Christians" or to "Muslims", to "Greeks" or to the "Turks"). But generally, I think many things in our lifes, even the way TCs and GCs view the Cyprus problem, are shaped through similar mentalities, which are based on common culture.

As for the success of the Turkish tribes, was their behavior really that different to other tribes which had come earlier in our region, like the greek tribes, the slavic tribes, the semitic tribes etc? Didn't they also often use, as newcomers, violence in order to subjugate the indigenous populations? And did the natives really live in territorial co-operation before the arrival of Turks? There were plenty of wars between Byzantines, Arabs, Persians, Latins, Slavs.

But let's move more into the part mostly relevant to the Cyprus question. You correctly point out to the way the theft of north cypriot land (and I would add, also the ethnic cleansing of GCs from there) "is supported and reinforced as normal from Turkish-state level". But is this really to be explained through cultural differences? Don't the Israelis do the same with Palestine, and even in much greater scale? Isn't a similar situation in Abkhazia? Would that mean that Jews, Turks/TCs, and Russians/Abkhazians have cultural similarities to each other which make them different to Arabs, Greeks/ GCs and Georgians?

About the most ridiculous thing ive read on this forum. You can not compare the Cyprus issue with any of the above. Each is unique...for example.... Abkhazia is a region with a rich and ancient history where as there never was an existence of a so called "trnc". Nice try.

[Viewpoint]

How was Australia formed? we have much more rights than those that first set foot on Australia.

[Oracle]

I can't say I see much of cultural differences playing a role in the Cyprus problem - except to the extent they define group identities (i.e. I belong to the "Christians" or to "Muslims", to "Greeks" or to the "Turks"). But generally, I think many things in our lifes, even the way TCs and GCs view the Cyprus problem, are shaped through similar mentalities, which are based on common culture.

Not at all. There is no pertinent 'common culture' between TCs and GCs. The GCs have a long heritage of craft manufacture, long-established trades, education, even ideology honed for thousands of years with the help of an excellent written tradition.

The TCs are from nomadic tribal stocks; restless, aggressive and prone to moral ignorance.

We see this today, manifested as the Cyprus Problem!

[denizaksulu]

I can't say I see much of cultural differences playing a role in the Cyprus problem - except to the extent they define group identities (i.e. I belong to the "Christians" or to "Muslims", to "Greeks" or to the "Turks"). But generally, I think many things in our lifes, even the way TCs and GCs view the Cyprus problem, are shaped through similar mentalities, which are based on common culture.

Not at all. There is no pertinent 'common culture' between TCs and GCs. The GCs have a long heritage of craft manufacture, long-established trades, education, even ideology honed for thousands of years with the help of an excellent written tradition.

The TCs are from nomadic tribal stocks; restless, aggressive and prone to moral ignorance.

We see this today, manifested as the Cyprus Problem!

Some 'TCs are from nomadic tribal stocks.'

This,'restless, aggressive and prone to moral ignorance' can apply to most Cypriots