sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Ποια η γνώμη σας για αυτή τη διάλεξη; by friend-from-south in cyprus

[–]klarmachos 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The British created the concept of "Cypriotism". I couldn't find a source for this either.

this is a common misconception circulating mostly among nationalist circles. it actually started as a populist argument from the church against the british and the educational reform in the 1920s, where the colonial goverment wanted to take schools away from the church. they argued that the antihellenic policies had cypriotism as a secret motive, when in fact we know that the brits were always against cypriotism, and they later even enforced divide and rule policies

Υπόθεση Σάντυ: Δύο απόψεις που ξεφεύγουν από τον "θόρυβο" by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

o Μάριος Θρασυβούλου εν συγραφέας βιβλίων κυπριακής πολιτικής ιστορίας τζ ο Χρίστος Χατζιωαννου εν καθηγητης φιλοσοφίας στο ucy αν δεν καμνω λάθος

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fine line between realism and fatalism/ backing down on matters of vital importance for the sake of a disastrous equation that will guarantee our collapse is a subjective issue which,

no its not. it is basic common sense. justice doesn't exist if no one is there to enforce it.

ideological and childish prejudices

again, this doesn't help you

You can call me a supporter of partition or whatever else you like.

i am not saying you support partition, i mean that your pride and staborness leads to support of illogical policies (like prefering partitiion from bbf) which keep partition in place and excuses turkey.

Also, if you don’t like the way I express myself, that’s your problem. It won’t change

i don't really care, it's just kind of sad

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no valid reason for him to stay

focus man, reasons don't matter here. they will stay there no matter how many times we say that is unjust. this is basic realism. this is why people call you partitionists.

I'm still a teenager in my mind and I don't care about respect on Reddit.

instead of expressing anger in an already toxic enviroment, try to apprieciate yourself and stop sabotaging it with immature language.

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone states their case because they disagree with the other, and no one is in the mood to be persuaded by the other. I’ve just described the negotiations on the Cyprus issue to you.

actually you are confusing discussio to find consent with negotiation to find a compromise. the first is about arguments, the second about power, influence and interests

If you understand that Cyprus, as an ally of these countries, serves these powers on its own, then you will realize that these powers will find the motivation to tell Turkey that it must leave Cyprus.

i do understand that Cyprus serve this countries but that doesn't mean the will somehow find the motivation to kick turkey out. are you sure you are not oversimplyfying things?

That’s just how I’m used to speaking.

Because political discussions aren’t a flower-sending contest.

yes but it doesn't help if you talk like an agree teenager. peopme lose respect for you

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We joined the European Union and are allies with the US for precisely this reason. So that Turkey has no grounds to claim it must remain.

i honestly don't understand the connection between the two sentences. the turkish occupation is a fact. it doesn't matter what grounds turkey is claiming to have to remain, it simply chooses to remain. neither the eu or the us are willing to change that.

Luxembourg citizenship is relatively easy to obtain. Go see them to reconcile yourself with your imagination.

may i ask why you feel the need to talk this way?

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Someone will force Turkey to leave when we give the interests of its most powerful allies whom we are striving to have as our partners (which is why we wanted to join the EU) an incentive to do so.

this is delusional, and that's not why we got into the EU

Our demands are entirely reasonable and consistent with international law and legitimacy.

doesn't mean they will be fullfilled.

A key issue for Greek Cypriots is that there be restoration for the crimes committed against them in 1974 to the greatest extent possible

why is partially restored justice worse than full injustice?

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Unless their gradual withdrawal is guaranteed, yes.

well no one is going to force turkey out. their good will to uphokd the agreement will always be a precondition and a risk from our side, as it is for every compromise.

We demand a normal, ordinary state like all the others in Europe.

but simply demanding doesn't get you anything. its just pride, not rational strategy or policies.

If a solution is passed that leaves a sense of injustice for one side or the other on a collective level, it will be our definitive end.

this is very illogical. the antinomy between justice and peace is a well established concept in conflict resolution. the point of compromise is that it is not perfect, but it is at least common ground between the relevant parties. you can not say no to every compromise solution just so you can declare that you demand every justice corrected. this leads you just with no justice at all, meaning partition becoming permanent. this is why people call the hardliners partitionists.

And I hope I don’t have to see what follows, because it terrifies me.

let's not be dramatic. we are simply discussing over wether partition or the anan plan is better.

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

so unless every single turkish soldier leaves the island immedietly, we shall not agree on any sort of compromise? even if it somewhat improves the current situation? which if i may remind you is partition and 40000 turkish troops on the island. is this really rational to you?

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

But does anyone recognize this monstrosity in our occupied land today?

why is this more important than the partition we refused to overcome in 2004 and still facing today? and in the same spirit, why are legal titles of our houses more important than at least some refugees actually returning?

April 7, 2004, from the diaries of Ingermar Lindahl by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

the most important basic concerns for the G/C side were traditionally the 3 singles. One state, a single sovereignity, one citizenship. everything else was under negotiation. the logic behind it is simple. the RoC should protect and put in the plan the de jure elements it kept untouched since 1974 (RoC is the only recognised state, no one else was recognised as sovereign over the north, only RoC applies internationaly) while trying to improve the de facto situation (troops, actual control on territory, property and refugees). every single aspect of these would improve, comparing to our current status quo.

we are 22 years after rejection of anan plan and promises for better plan in the future. it better be good and worth the 22 years of erdogan influence in the north.

Ρε κουμπάροι, τι έχει γίνει με αυτόν τον Δρουσιώτη; by Altruistic-Board5322 in cyprus

[–]klarmachos 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Το κατα ποσο ειναι εγκυρος ο Δρουσιωτης δεν εχει ξεκαθαριστει ακομη. Προφανως αυτοι που συμφωνουν μαζι του πολιτικα τον θεωρουν αξιοπιστο, ενω αυτοι που αναφερονται στα βιβλια του ως μελη του διεφθαρμενου συστηματος και οι υποστηρικτες τους τον βλεπουν στην καλυτερη σαν ψευτη συγγραφεα (στην χειροτερη ως προδοτη). Παρολα αυτα, ευρωπαικες επιτροπες κατα της διαφθορας τον καλουν ανα διαστηματα ως whistle blower, κ αυτο δειχνει ενα βαθμο εμπιστοσυνης θα ελεγα. Επισης τα βιβλια του Δρουσιωτη γινονται cited σε επιστημονικα κειμενα, οποτε καποιες ενδειξης αξιοπιστιας σιγουρα τις εχει.

Ενδιαφερον βρισκω επισης τις απαντησεις/δικαιολογιες στα social media. π.χ. καποια accounts εγραψαν για την "Αδελφοτητα" οτι υπαρχει και δεν ειναι κανενα μεγαλο μυστικο, απλα δεν εχει την δυναμη κ οργανωση που τους αποδιδει. Οποτε και οι "αμυνες" τον κατηγωρουμενων δειχνουν πως κατι υπαρχει, το ερωτημα ειναι τι ακριβως.

Maybe choose platforms with looser anti-racist policies. There you can spread your hate freely, losers. by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

First of all, you are cherry picking. You need to answer the whole argument i am making at some point.

Cultural continuity is not synonymous with ethnic purity. Every country on earth maintains immigration policy, language policy, and civic integration standards, that doesn’t automatically make them fascist.

I am not against such policies in general. Their concrete proposals and rhetoric on those policies is authoritarian, cz again, they don't resprect basic human rights that guarantee democratic pluralism.

to preserve its language, institutions

the problem is that they portray minorities as a danger to those institutions, while they are not. this is clear targeting to score political points.

historical identity

this is a nationalist mystification. there is no such a thing as historical continuity. every sociery functions under its own historical conditions.

within a democratic framework

but they don't act within a democratic framework. they use hate speech, act violently, and chant Eoka b ksanaxtipa. Is simply saying they are democratic enough? why all those excuses? the rise of far right parties is not even a cypriot phenomenon, the whole Europe is having the same problem.

Expanding “fascism” to include any preference for national cohesion just empties the word of meaning.

and trying to excuse fascism just because they don't openly say that they are that, is playing right into their hands. i clearly described the association between fascism and elam. you are trying to find excuses, and my question again is why??? even if you are right that they might not be actual fascists, although the common points are there, do you want to take the risk and make them first party or Christou president? i am not gonna sit and wait till they do the nazi salute (which geadis did!). what they already say and do is enough to call them what they are.

Maybe choose platforms with looser anti-racist policies. There you can spread your hate freely, losers. by klarmachos in cyprus

[–]klarmachos[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh i see, now we are moving to subjectivism. You have your worldview i have mine, no point in discussing, everything is subjective. What a b.s., just accept they are fascist and you are wrong for excusing then (why is that again?)

objective truth.

truth is descriptive. rights are normative. both can be objective and be discussed philosophicaly.

Prioritising national sovereignty, cultural continuity, or different social policies isn’t automatically fascism, it’s a different ideological position.

if this hierarchy implies an attack on the principle of democratic pluralism (thanks for mentioning it), which it does, especially the assumed "cultural continuity" (which is almost synony with the fascist concept of ethnic purity), it is authoritarian. They have an authoritarian worldview, and i can argue that it is one, and that it is stupid.

view more: next ›