Greece, History, Truth

[damian]

Mostly along the coastline, but there are a few exceptions, Greeks where living in the Turkish heartland, the Karamanlides, who strangely enough only spoke Turkish and not Greek. Why is that?
They lived there until the population exchange between Turkey and Greece in the 1920s when most of them where resettled in the part of Macedonia that was annexed by Greece in 1913. Why?

Greece are always living on the coasts everywhere because they are coming from the sea and the East. Karamanliedes is also controversial,:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karamanlides

Most refugees from Turkey were resettled in Macedonia because the population there was not Greek. Also one has to add all the theories of the Dorian Macedonians etc or the Dorian invasions are all conjectures also. The history of modern Greece is basically that of a small oligarchy trying to take over the entire region and turn people in Hellenics in order to use them as wage-slaves, collect taxes and capture agricultural land, ports, railroad trade etc.

[Daskalot]

Greece are always living on the coasts everywhere because they are coming from the sea. The Karamanliades I believe were not Greeks but converted Turks who spoke Turkish and the Koran in Greek before the Ottoman conquest.

But Greeks claim the Karamanlides to be pure Greeks. But what does it mean to be Greek? Maybe it is enough that you attend the Church of the Patriarchate to become a Greek?

[damian]

But Greeks claim the Karamanlides to be pure Greeks. But what does it mean to be Greek? Maybe it is enough that you attend the Church of the Patriarchate to become a Greek?

I dont know the answer about the Karamans. It seems to be the same thing as in Macedonia, you became Greek by being churched in Greek. Also most Greeks at the time did not understand koine or modern Greek themselves but spoke rural dialects. They were also forced to learn modern Greek. But according to the grease all these problems were created by Tito. The hostility to Greeks in those regions can be traced back into the archaic world even its not merely a modern phenomenon. The grease presence in the area has always been precarious.


I think its Greeks coming from outside who are superimposing themselves on other peoples, Illyrians, Macedonians, Thracians etc. More research has to be done.

[George S.]

In a lot of instances talking greek makes you greek provided you changed the name.

[damian]

In a lot of instances talking greek makes you greek provided you changed the name.

Thats the ideology the modern grease state, church and plutocracy has.

[TrueMacedonian]

Phanariot prince Theodore Negris and his idea of "greek";


Nationalism, Orthodoxy, and Globalization by Victor Roudometof pg 55


page 22

[Louis]

Negris was not a Prince (!) but served as the Secretary of a Prince in his early 20s, before joining the Revolution.
I wouldn't trust Roudometof who is (more or less) doing the same thing as you. Croping and compiling bits and pieces the way it suits him.

[damian]

Negris was not a Prince (!) but served as the Secretary of a Prince in his early 20s, before joining the Revolution.
I wouldn't trust Roudometof who is (more or less) doing the same thing as you. Croping and compiling bits and pieces the way it suits him.

The point is that the grease are trying to turn everyone in what the Turks called the Rum millet into grease. Now that is disingenuous. I think you have to ask why the grease bourgeiosie-business-ecclesiastical class who funded most of this stuff had the need to do this and the answer is probably economic, the need for population, territory and trade areas, tax payers etc. The destruction of other cultures, populations, Hellenisation etc follows naturally from both the ideology and the economic needs of their quasi-Oriental oligarchy.

[Daskalot]

Negris was not a Prince (!) but served as the Secretary of a Prince in his early 20s, before joining the Revolution.
I wouldn't trust Roudometof who is (more or less) doing the same thing as you. Croping and compiling bits and pieces the way it suits him.

Aren't you as a Greek yourself doing the same thing, compiling bits and pieces that suit your national myth and agenda?
Or are you 100% transparent in regards to your "non existent" minorities, history and national creation?

[TrueMacedonian]

Negris was not a Prince (!) but served as the Secretary of a Prince in his early 20s, before joining the Revolution.
I wouldn't trust Roudometof who is (more or less) doing the same thing as you. Croping and compiling bits and pieces the way it suits him.

Very good lois. But the other book I posted was from something written by Dimitris Livanios. And as far as I can see Roudometof and Livanios use the same source. Maybe you can help us out with why Livanios is calling the Mavrocordat's "Christian Ottomans";




So if I can't trust Roudometof and Livanios then who can we trust? I suppose you have the answers we apparently lack. This forum is loaded with information from many scholars, including many grk scholars, who go into great detail about what you people are. Believe me that golden dawn(showers) blood bank will be passing off Albanian and Turkish blood and calling it "hellenic" because no such ethnic group exists any longer. Today we have a rabble trying desperately to pass themselves as something they are truly not. Quite sad to deny your roots.

[TrueMacedonian]

I guess the Vlach Rigas started all this lois. What is greek? It's a tougher question than asking "What is the meaning of life?"

[George S.]

Louis you seem to be in denial so where's your evidence there to the contrary.I looked at
Roudometofs credentials they are impeccably good.I fully suport the idea that prior to 1832 people of the western world were lumping everyone as one they didn't care what they were because they came from one area & were all orthodox.Painted & tarnished with the same brush.This has been self evident all along.

[Louis]

Where should I start? The article where your fragment comes from is available on line

http://www.historicalreview.org/index.php/historicalReview/article/viewFile/198/94

It's 30 pages, an easy read, and gives all the answers to the issues questioned in dozens of threads. Moreover, Livanios is a good colleauge, so it's my duty and pleasure to promote his work.

If you still have questions after it, I promise to answer them all.

[damian]

Where should I start? The article where your fragment comes from is available on line

http://www.historicalreview.org/index.php/historicalReview/article/viewFile/198/94

It's 30 pages, an easy read, and gives all the answers to the issues questioned in dozens of threads. Moreover, Livanios is a good colleauge, so it's my duty and pleasure to promote his work.

If you still have questions after it, I promise to answer them all.

Din't you think the attempt to hellenise the place was required by their oligarchies needs for capitalist transformation from Ottoman millet to grease state by Hellenising the Rum millet?

[Louis]

No. The Greek Revolution was a national (and religious) one. There were some social undertones that communists tend to exaggerate, but it was not a socialist revolution (or a capitalistic one). The word capitalism was not in their vocabulary, but there were clashes between supporters of modern European structures (a state with a powerful central government) and more “traditional” ones (e.g. semi-autonomous districts with powerful local rulers).
The (post World War II) socialist states were supposedly oases of internationalism, but if you look closer in the recent History of Albania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria etc whole ethnic or religious communities were persecuted and deported there too.