A historical
and socio-political overview

Greece is a new country although it has a very rich ancient past. It is righteously considered the cradle of Western civilization and the birth place of democracy, science, free-thought, philosophy, drama, and politics but not as a united, sovereign country. When we refer to ancient Greece, we have to make sure that we refer to the autonomous Greek city-states such as Athens, Sparta, Corinth, Thebes, the Ionian city-states, Macedonia, etc that not only they did not constitute a united country but also engaged in competition and warfare among them. Letʼs bring to mind the Peloponnesian War for example (Athens against Sparta).
So, Greeceʼs ancient past is the ancient past of the independent Greek city states and not the past of a united country. The religion, the mythological references and some cultural elements were common among the various city states but this doesnʼt mean that there was a unified, sovereign country despite the Olympic Games where all the Greek city-states participated. Furthermore, although some general cultural elements were common, there were severe differences in the social institutions and the politics among those city-states.

The Greek city-states were in constant feud and warfare among them. They had no hesitation to form alliances with the Persians so as to conquer another competitive Greek city-state. All of them did that continuously. (Athens, Sparta, Thebes, etc).
The same occurred on a personal level. Many leading political and military figures in the ancient world that had played a major role in battles against the Persians changed over to the opposite camp. They went to the Court of the Persian king who welcomed them and gave them important political and military posts. Then, without any remorse, they sided with the Persians and fought against the Greeks.
Furthermore, thousands of Greeks, simple soldiers, sailors, and generals served in the Persian army during the Persian Wars. All of them fought against the other Greeks in Greece.

The Macedonians

The Macedonian King Phillip and later on his son Alexander the Great, did attempt to unite all the Greeks but they failed. From the beginning, the Lacedaemonians (The Spartans) were out. They rejected such a union from the start. In addition, the rest of the Greek city states which formed the union became a part of a vast empire where the citizen-hoplite and its role as the protector of the democratic institutions vanished into thin air.  

Alexander the Great who is admired by many as the most glorious carrier of the Greek civilization and the man who civilized the East, was in reality a ruthless butcher who conquered lands and peoples using his sword. He neither civilized nor humanized the lands he conquered. His death brought about the dismemberment of his empire and the end of the ancient Greek world as we know it because after Alexander, his empire faced opposition, rebellion and very grudging cooperation from the older city states and newer leagues (The Aetolian League and the Achaean League).  

 Alexander the Great dismantled the empire of Cyrus, but at the same time wiped out all the Greek city-states. He plundered the treasures of Asia and tortured the peoples more than the Achaemenid dynasty did. This, in fact, was the primary purpose of the campaign. Loot. Plunderage was necessary for the power and the life of the royal house and the enrichment of its loyal court members.
The internal strife and the disgraceful behavior of Alexander's successors completed the decline of the Greek cities ̶ states, which had begun from the time of the Greek Macedonian King Philip. That is why the Greek city-states became an easy prey for the Romans.

The Romans sought to integrate Alexander into their civil-military ideology and practice by undertaking to continue his "work", an imperialist expedition for the conquest of the East through subjugation of peoples, massacres and persecution. Consuls and emperors admired and worshipped Alexander. They showed unprecedented determination to follow his footsteps as he was a role model to them. He was the prime example of a conqueror and a super dominant military figure.

Outside of Greeceʼs mainland, the situation wasnʼt any better due to the fact that the so called Greek world was divided into bitter rivals led by Alexanderʼs generals. The three main factions ─Macedonia proper, the Seleucid kingdom of Syria, and the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt─ were constantly competing and fighting against each other.  None of them had the strength to rule without local proxies, so there were  several smaller states and cities which encouraged the feuds among the big kingdoms and thus creating a very unstable pattern of temporary alliances and betrayals.


The Romans did not try to impose a uniform system of local government but instead, they encouraged the Greeks to maintain their traditional political systems. In Athens, the old political institutions were preserved, at least in their form, and the Agora (Market) remained the center of the city's political life.

The Romans

The battle of Corinth in 146 BC between the Romans on one hand and the Corinthians with the Achaean League on the other marked the beginning of the Roman domination. The “civilized” Romans exterminated the whole male population of Corinth and sold all the women and children as slaves. The reason why the Romans were victorious and managed to conquer Greece is connected to what is mentioned above: The geographical area of modern Greece was a patchwork of kingdoms, city-states and alliance leagues that were not united by a strong, universally acknowledged system of governance. Besides, the local elites showed much preference towards the Romans who never bothered to interfere in local affairs as the Greek Macedonians did.

From the left: Constantine IX Monomachos (11th century). Alexios Komninos (12th century). Theodore II Laskaris (13th century).
All of them wear non-Greek attire and are called kings of the Romans. This is where the name “Romios” (Roman) is derived from. It means a subject of the Eastern Roman Empire.
The inhabitants of Modern Greece had called themselves “Romios” (“Romioi-plural) for many centuries. In other words, they considered themselves Romans and not Greeks. The word “Greek” began to be used ─in parallel with the word "Romios"─ in the last two centuries when the notion of nationalism was born in the Balkan Peninsula. It served as a description of the Christian - contemporary inhabitants of Greece.

The Middle Ages

The Byzantine Empire, that modern Greeks wish to consider as “Hellenic” (a continuation of the ancient Greek world), also referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire. It was the continuation of the Roman Empire in the East and that lasted up until Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. In reality, Byzantium was a multi-ethnic hard core orthodox Christian territory ruled by the Church, the Emperor and his visible or invisible court members. None of the Byzantine emperors was Greek in origin. Sciences, philosophy and democratic ideals were not only forbidden but also condemned. In 529 C.E, emperor Justinian closed Platoʼs famous Academy of Athens. The Byzantine era can be characterized by stagnation, political intrigues, treachery, conspiracies, corruption and great luxury.

The Ottoman era

The Ottoman occupation that followed after the conquest of Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453 deepened the gap between Greece and the West and created subjects that were neither genetically nor culturally connected to the ancient Greek philosophical and scientific heritage. The constant flows of “newcomers” mainly from the North and the East created a new race of people that were simply illiterate and Christian orthodox.

The Greek Orthodox Church that along with a great part of the population welcomed the Ottomans (it continued to welcome every invader including the Nazis during WWII) was given special privileges by the Sultan and was put in charge of tax collection that the subjects had to pay to their conqueror. Nevertheless, the Ottomans, was not as brutal and suppressive as they are portrayed in the Greek History books. They didnʼt really interfere with the religious beliefs and the spoken language of their subjects (there were many languages spoken back then). They built bridges and roads and treated their subjects fairly provided that they paid their taxes and did not revolt.

The Greek war of Independence didnʼt take place because the Greek subjects re-discovered their past which was completely forgotten. The “new comers” that had become subjects of the Ottoman Empire were mere savages that survived by getting ransom after blackmailing and kidnapping both Muslims and Christians and by looting villages. Kyriakos Simopoulos, a noted Greek author in his multi-volume work titled:“Foreign Sight-Seers in Greece
and ”How The Foreign Visitors Saw Greece in 1821” which is based on the narrations of European visitors presents the completely distorted ideas that the European Romantics had about the “modern population” of Greece. They chartered ships to bring clothing and food to the “Greeks” who were supposedly suffering from the “Ottoman yoke” but they ended up returning to their ships not only disappointed but also completely naked since the minute they disembarked, they were attacked by local (mainly of Albanian and Wallachian origin) uncouth mobs who violently stole all of their possessions including their clothes.

The real ancestors

of Modern Greeks

The majority of modern Greeks today traces its origin from the mixture of Albanians, Wallachians, Northern Africans and Anatolians who had infested the land of Greece back then along with Slavs and some Francs and Venetians. Unfortunately even today, most modern Greeks are oblivious to their true historic and genetic origin. They think that they are the offsprings of ancient Greeks who suddenly saw the “light” and became Christians. Quite the opposite is true; they were Christians who were made to believe that their ancestors were the ancient Greeks. (
Yiannis Lazaris: “The unknown 1821 - The apostasy of romioi”, ed. “Dromon”, Athens, 2016). The same applies of course for almost every country. There is no racial purity anywhere.

Some argue that the romantic ideas in the European Renaissance and the desire to rediscover the ancient Greek world led to the Greek War of Independence. However, this is not the case either.

In the beginning of the 15th century, the Ottomans, with almost no resistance, invaded Greece as liberators from the Byzantine yoke. The pro-Ottoman climate was cultivated much before the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by the Ottomans.
When Mehmed the Conqueror was besieging Constantinople, thousands of Christians were serving in his army.
The order of the ecclesiastical hierarchy was: a struggle to the end against the Church Union (a union between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox one). "It is better to wear a Turkish fez than a Roman hood" was what was propagated by the church then.
"We shouldnʼt be concerned about the fell of Polis (Constantinople). Instead, we should be happy that our faith (Eastern Orthodox Christian dogma) was preserved” said a few years later the ecumenical patriarch Gennadios Scholarios.

The Collapse of the Ottomans

The Ottoman Empire was a thorn in the underbelly of Europe. Apart from the obvious cultural and religious differences that made most European powers hostile to them, the Ottomans were also directly antagonistic to European trade with the Orient. Furthermore, they had over-expanded as an empire and the population in most Balkan lands was hostile to the Ottoman occupation. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire could have occurred much earlier but some factors prevented it:  

The first factor is associated with the power play between the major European countries. Between 1683 (Battle of Vienna) and 1923, there are 240 years of decline of which the first half (until 1804 when the Serbs revolted) were spent without Ottoman power being seriously contested with the exception of the Russians. Their other great Ottoman enemies, the Habsburgs were content with the territories conceded then. Venice had declined before the Ottomans did.

The other European powers used them opportunistically as an ally from time to time, against Russia or the Habsburgs. They also used the aspirations of subject nations for independence, without committing to support their revolts until 1830. After 1830, the European powers decided to cause the collapse of the Ottoman Empire because they were afraid that an antagonist would benefit more.

The second reason for the delay of the collapse of the Ottomans was the end of the Crusades.

The third reason was the fact that the Ottomans granted religious tolerance and power to the Orthodox Church, as stated above. The Greek Orthodox Patriarchate was mainly concerned with the elimination of every possible influence of the Roman Catholic Church on its subjects. Furthermore, the Patriarchate did the best it could to keep back the formation of independent Orthodox Churches and prevent their Orthodox subjects from directly aligning themselves with any western power, at least until Russia contested them.


In addition to prosperity in the first centuries, the Ottomans brought new morals.
The Romioi adopted their morals and began to live like them.
Chairs and tables were replaced by low furniture. Cutlery vanished. Instead of dishes, they now served and distributed the food on large trays.
They preferred to sit down rather than in chairs.
They made sure that their women did not go out uncovered.
Men lived a separate social life from women.

Chieftains, overlords, clergy and the majority of the people remained faithful to their Ottoman tradition.

Look at the images and notice the striking similarities between Christian and Ottoman houses.
Up: A characteristic scene in the house of the Bishop of the city of Salon. Before the meal the banqueters wash their hands before they sit around the low table. The houses of the wealthy people had a lot of wood, hanging balconies, loggias, verandas with sofas and divans while their lifestyle imitated the dominant culture of that time.
Down: Characteristic Ottoman living room of the early 19th century. (Benaki Museum).

As another factor for the delayed downfall of the Ottomans is the fact that the major European powers were monarchies that by definition opposed the Enlightenment idea of national liberation; hence they were hostile to any revolting nations inside the Ottoman Empire. Only Napoleon's France was ideologically in favor.

In addition, although the discovery of the New World and the establishment of colonial empires undermined the Ottoman economy because the importance of their strategic position in trade diminished and because their currency was devalued due to inflation from the influx of Spanish gold, colonialism shifted the focus of European powers away from the Orient.

The forgotten Ottoman past of Greece.
The Modern Greek state bases its entire philosophy of education on a total denial of its Ottoman past. It denies that past and starts from the beginning by constructing another “past” which is totally fake.

Modern Greece:
The birth of a protectorate

After the Greek war of Independence in 1821 and finally the establishment of the Modern independent Greek state in 1830 with the Treaty of London, Greece has been functioning as a full-fledged protectorate of the Western powers with rulers and governments that are direct or indirect wealth and property agents of the Industrialized Western plutocratic States in Europe and across the Atlantic.

Prime examples of that claim is the Crimean War, the Asia Minor Catastrophe, Greeceʼs participation in both World Wars, the Civil War, the Military Junta in 1967 and all the years that followed including Greeceʼs  membership in the European Union.
The Crimean War

Ukraine has always been the “apple of discord” for the super powers that determine the fate of the whole world.  Greece at that time was a small kingdom whose borders reached Thessaly. As expected, the Greek Orthodox population supported the political positions of thecoreligionist Russians.

The Greek protectorate (then and now) could not have an independent foreign policy. However, the Russian-Turkish war along with the decline of the Ottoman Empire surely was a golden opportunity for a border expansion of the small kingdom at the expense of the Ottomans since the Ottoman army had withdrawn from the Southern Balkans and had been transferred to the "theater" of the Russian-Turkish warfare.



Faced with the possibility of an uprising of the Modern Greeks (Romioi) which could endanger the stability in the area and cause the rapid collapse of the Ottoman Empire which may have led to the long desired access of Russians in the Mediterranean Sea, the European super powers decided to send fleet and allied forces to impose “law and order” to Greece so as to maintain its neutral status. Greece willingly complied with the demands of the British and the French and kept its neutrality despite its geopolitical interests and the strong opposition of the people.
Certainly, there were some Romioi who rushed to Crimea to actively help the Russians in that war but their force did not exceed 1,000 men. The state, however, fully complied with the status of neutrality imposed by the West.

World War I

The choice of neutrality during the World War I was predictable, feasible and desirable. In essence, it was a "tacit" choice of the British who controlled the region. Greece, after being led into disunion due to the conflict between Prime Minister Venizelos and King Constantine, finally entered the war in mid 1917. The end of the war found the country on the side of the winners.




Τhe Asia Minor Disaster

The expedition to Anatolia was both foolish and impracticable. The already weakened Greek State by the Balkan wars and the WWI did not have the power to financially support such a campaign. Furthermore, The Greek State had not secured a steady support from the so called Western Allies.

The expedition of the Greek troops to Smyrna did not have much to do with big ideas and bigger “homelands”. That was the local rhetoric for the domestic population. In reality, it was a clear mission under a command that the Venizelos regime had received from the British government. The command was specific: The Greek army had to go to Smyrna to maintain peace and order in the Province of Ayadin only.

The plan of the British was to stop the Italians, who had landed already an army on the Turkish coasts opposite to Rhodes, so as to have full control of the province of Aydin themselves. The British could not possible let the Italians have full control of such a cosmopolitan and rich region. Somebody had to do the dirty job and that role was given to Greece.





Moreover, when the destruction of Smyrna took place, the Greek government showed no interest in saving the population. Instead, it passed a law banning the arrival of people in groups from the coasts of Asia Minor in Greece. And when the refugees eventually arrived in Greece after the intervention of the major European powers, the local Greeks were extremely hostile to the refugees and forced them to live for decades under terrible conditions. In 1922, Modern Greece showed one of its worse facets one more time.



World War II

Greece's entry into the World War II is presented as its own choice based on international justice. The reality, of course, is completely different. A protectorate is by definition impossible to pursue a self-contained policy.

Greece was long subdued when the war broke out and its resistance was carried out in the prescribed frameworks of this subordination. The big "NO" to the Axis required a big "YES" to English foreign policy.
Greece was dragged to the war as a waif of the English colonial attitude.

Civil War

British Intelligence agents and commandos who worked undercover in Greece not only did they cause great damage to the Germans, but they also used the Romioi as much as they were useful to them and when they no longer needed them, they caused an internal strife known as the Civil War of 1946-49.


Military Junta

In spite of the simplistic, well-known but misleading and convenient version of the causes that triggered the coup and the coming of the military junta of April 21, 1967 aided by the CIA, the serious and in-depth examination of the facts shows clearly and beyond any doubt that the junta of the Colonels was the product of complicated processes that took place in the background of the country's political life in the early 1960s.

Those processes that caused serious upheavals at the forefront, reflect a "bargain" game played against our country and staged by the major players in international life (multinational monopolies, US governments - UK - USSR - France, Secret services, etc.).


The team of the dictator Papadopoulos (a group of subgroups) that prevailed represented the British influence in the country and not the American one, as it is projected, causing confusion and misunderstandings.
Greeceʼs membership
in the European Union

Greeceʼs entry in the European Economic Community in 1981 was a way to ensure democracy and stability in southern Europe at the height of the Cold War. It was a geopolitical decision taken both by the Europeans and the Americans who feared the Soviet influence in Europe. The fact that Greece neither had nor was willing to have the proper infrastructure to implement the necessary reforms to achieve a real economic growth was not taken into account.

An ageing country that never had a realistic economic plan and a solid tax collecting system is definitely incapable of functioning well within the EU. The corporate, state-supported oligarchic elite of this country along with the myriads of the counter-productive public servants and the privileged pensioners, who retire at 45, still remain the main obstacle for anyone who wishes to reform the economy.

Greece continues to have an economy based on the soviet model even when a right wing party is on power. All the reforms that have been carried out are superficial and wrongly applied.

and Theocracy
are the two
dominant powers
in the minds
of Modern Greeks.

The Socio-cultural roots of Greece

Clans, craft unions, clientelism, favoritism, populism, hatred towards meritocracy and meaningless elections constitute the social backbone of the Modern Greek society. These phenomena existed during the Byzantine Empire but were magnified after the so called War of Independence. Under those circumstances, a non sovereign country cannot establish an economic system that is strong enough to create prosperity and growth. Having lived under huge empires, the modern Romioi have mastered the art of working against anything that could bring real progress and make them lose their hebetude.


Frappé coffee, the favorite drink of modern Greeks.

The so-called heroes of 1821 who supposedly fought for the liberation and the independence of the country, created a state in which they could both perpetuate their power by conveying it to their children and, on the other hand, legislate as they wished to safeguard themselves and increase their political power and wealth while the rest of the population continued to work, as their servants and subjects. The Turks are no longer here but the Greek overlords and proxies are still alive and kicking.

Greece is a country that has been faced with many invasions, bankruptcies, military coups, political chaos, austerity and socio-political turmoil. Since it became a unified country, it has been the bone of contention, the apple of discord among the Western suzerains due to its geopolitical location.

Muammar Ignatius



  • Ανώνυμος 42777

    17 Μαΐ 2017

    Boring, so boring.

  • Ανώνυμος 42776

    17 Μαΐ 2017

    Φάε δύο κρεμούλες.

  • Ανώνυμος 42773

    16 Μαΐ 2017

    Get out of the closet

  • Ανώνυμος 42771

    16 Μαΐ 2017

    Φάε μια κρεμούλα και θα σου περάσει το κόλλημα.

  • Ανώνυμος 42770

    16 Μαΐ 2017

    Και οι πορδίτσες έγιναν πορδές.

  • Ανώνυμος 42769

    16 Μαΐ 2017

    Φαπούλες ή μάλλον φαπάρες!

  • Ανώνυμος 42765

    16 Μαΐ 2017


  • Ανώνυμος 42763

    16 Μαΐ 2017

    Φάε το αυγό σου.

  • Ανώνυμος 42757

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Ναι, ναι, ναι και κο κο κο
    τι Bielidopoulo είναι αυτό.

  • Bielidopoulos

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Εσύ πάντως είσαι μακάκας.

  • Ανώνυμος 42754

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Πάλι κωλοτούμπα, μα ποιός είσαι, ο Κατρούγκαλος είσαι;

  • Bielidopoulos

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Όταν έλεγα για πίτουρα εννούσα του λόγου σου. Μην ανησυχείς προτεκτοράτο είναι βρε. Πλουσιοπάροχα δανειζόμενο, χαοτικό μείγμα βλαχοκαπιταλισμού και κρατισμού. Τώρα τί προτεκτοράτο είναι τούτο κανείς δεν μπορεί να πει, εκτός από κάτι political science πάρτ' αυγό και κούρευτο. Διάβασε την οικονομική ιστορία των κράτων Αφρικής, Ασίας, Αφρικής, Αμερικής, ακόμα και Ευρώπης. Όλα δανείστηκαν και ανήκουν σε σφαίρες επιρροής. Εν Ελλάδι είναι δύσκολο έως αδύνατο να γίνει λογική συζήτηση. Ευφυολογήματα, αερολογίες, σοφιστείες, αυτά δηλαδή που πουλάνε οι ρωμιοί γονείς στα παιδιά τους και οι πολιτικάντηδες (βλέπε Σύριζα) στους ρωμιούς πολίτες. Ενα κομπολόι αερολογίας. Οτιδήποτε προκειμένου να μην θιχτούν τα προνόμια των παλιών. Εξάλλου ο σκοπός (=προνόμια των παλιών) αγιάζει τα μέσα. ;)

  • Ανώνυμος 42752

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Χαχαχαχαχα...... σε καλό σου γέλασα κε την κωλοτούμπα του μωρού μου.

  • Bielidopoulos

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Ναι βρε, μην κλαψουρίζεις. Μπλέκεσαι με τα πίτουρα και σε τρώνε οι κότες.

  • Ανώνυμος 42750

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    Τα περί "προτεκτοράτου" ήταν και δική σου άποψη Bielidopoulos. Μπράβο σου πάντως γιά αυτήν σου την ιδεολογική στροφή.

  • Bielidopoulos

    15 Μαΐ 2017

    "Η χώρα παραμένει βαθιά άρρωστη διανοητικά κυρίως γιατί αρνείται να παραδεχτεί τα αίτια της χρεοκοπίας και να τα αντιμετωπίσει. Ας περιμένουμε λοιπόν την αφορμή που θα προκαλέσει το σοκ το οποίο θα επιδράσει καταλυτικά για να αλλάξουν τα δεδομένα και να ξαναμοιραστούν τα χαρτιά."
    "Η χώρα στενάζει κάτω από την υπερφορολόγηση, τις υπερβολικές ασφαλιστικές εισφορές και την αύξηση των ληξιπρόθεσμων οφειλών. Πουθενά δεν διαφαίνονται σημάδια ανάκαμψης της οικονομίας.
    Εξάλλου τοʼ χουμε πει, ο ενάρετος κύκλος ανάκαμψης θα ξεκινήσει όταν η συνταξιοδοτική δαπάνη από 17% του ΑΕΠ θα πέσει κάτω από το μέσο όρο της ΕΕ που είναι 12-13%."

    Τα γνωστά γράφει δηλαδή και αυτονόητα. Οι ρωμιοί εδώ και 7 χρόνια (από αρχές 2010) συζητάνε τις πταίει και ακόμα να καταλήξουν. Τόσο κουτοπόνηρα λαμόγια που είναι. Φυσικά τί φταίει είναι γνωστό και αυτονόητο, η ουσία είναι τί αλλαγές γίνονται για να αντιμετωπιστεί. Οι διαδοχικές κυβερνήσεις των τελευταίων ετών διαπραγματεύονται δήθεν με τους δανειστές, αλλά στην πραγματικότητα προσπαθούν με λύσσα να διασώσουν το κομματικό/πελατειακό κράτος της ρωμιοσύνης (δημόσιο, συντάξεις) με το φαραωνικών διαστάσεων συνταξιοδοτικό. Και μέχρι τώρα το έχουν καταφέρει. Ακόμα και όταν φτάσει ο κόμπος στο χτένι, αυτοί θα απεργάζονται σχέδια να διασώσουν έστω τον σκληρό πηρύνα του κομματικού κράτους. Είναι γκάου, δεν βάζουν μυαλό με τίποτα. Τα περί προτεκτοράτου που διαβάζουμε και ξαναδιαβάζουμε είναι παλιές ιστορίες και δικαιολογίες. Αν η ρωμιοσύνη είναι προτεκτοράτο τότε οι πολιτικές ηγεσίες και οι φηφοφόροι τους είναι αθώοι, κάτι που είναι άτοπο. Πολλά έχουν αλλάξει τα τελευταία 40 χρόνια ακόμα και για το Ελλαδιστάν. Π.χ. η παύση του ψυχρού πολέμου, σοσιαλισμός του Ανδρέα, Παλαιστινιακό, Άραβες, μετανάστευση από Αλβανία και πρώην Σοβιετική Ένωση. Τώρα αυτό που έχει σημασία είναι το χρέος και οι παθογένειες της ρωμιοσύνης. Και πίσω από αυτά κρύβεται η σαπιοκουλτούρα των ρωμιών.

  • Ανώνυμος 42734

    13 Μαΐ 2017

    I am sure Agnes that the “Mr Know all” syndrome all is not only a greek characteristic but it is a characteristic of people who are very confident about themselves. Usually you call someone with that characteristic as "bossy".

  • Ανώνυμος 42732

    13 Μαΐ 2017

    .....if they can read and understand what has been written, I might add.
    Otherwise, it is better for them to keep their mouths shut and stop behaving like smarty pants.

    It is beyond any doubt that the Greeks suffer from the "Mr. Know it all" syndrome. If they "knew it all" as they claim, Greece wouldn't have been in such a bad shape.

    Agnes Krause

  • Ανώνυμος 42688

    12 Μαΐ 2017

    Stupid people take for granted whatever they read.

  • Ανώνυμος 42686

    11 Μαΐ 2017

    Romioi (also known as "Greeks") are angry when they read articles like this, when truth is show on them, they get mad.

  • Ανώνυμος 42676

    11 Μαΐ 2017

    I was also moved to write in English.
    The article correctly analyses the history of this region of the planet. You should write more articles in English in the future.

  • Ανώνυμος 42675

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Your english teacher is not watching! Hahahaha, this is a very nice and polite invitation to write in english.
    Joseph, there is a widespread belief, especially in this greek-language website, that modern day greeks have nothing to do with the ancient ones. This belief is documented through J. Fallmerayer ʼs books, and books referenced to him. Of course most of Fallmerayerʼs modern day academics and historians never took under serious consideration his opinions, in 19th century Greece he triggered the intellectuals to make any effort to decompose his theory. One way, according to Herzfeld, was the invention of laography. Some modern day greeks think that it is very avant-garde to deny publicly their cultural continuation and their “bloodline” with the ancient greeks. They usually make the same mistake as Fallmerayer did, who used culture findings to prove his “race” opinion about 19th century greeks. Of course, neither Fallmerayer nor his believers explained efficiently the survival and evolution of the greek language through time.

  • Ανώνυμος 42667

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    I agree with all of you above. Stop worrying about making mistakes and start writing not only in greek, but in english as well. Your english teacher is not watching!
    @Bielidopoulos: You wrote that Muamar claims in his older articles that: "το ανυπεράσπιστο προτεκτοράτο που όλοι το εκμεταλλεύονται. Τα περί προτεκτοράτου είναι δικαιολογίες για να βγει λάδι η ρωμιοσύνη".
    As I told you I've read almost all of his articles and what I understood by reading them is exactly the opposite of what you said!
    That's why I told you that I really cannot find any significant difference in the way of thinking between the two of you.
    Austin Powers

  • Ανώνυμος 42666

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    I am the guy above.
    Well, it seems that Venizelos was a mixed blessing for Greece. I don't know much about Modern Greek history but this article did give me the opportunity to do some research on him. I still haven't understood how big the difference is between ancient and modern Greeks regarding their genealogy. Where did the ancient Greeks go? This isn't answered by the author. The people that I know who are non Greeks like myself (sorry guys) don't really know that there is no continuity. On the other hand, how can this continuity be claimed after so many thousands of years? My last name is Goudeau (Joseph Goudeau) and I am told that I have French ancestry since Louisiana was once a French colony. I am also told that I have some Scottish and Irish blood.
    The whole world has mixed populations. Why should the Greeks be any different?

    Thanks to all of you guys who comment in English. I assure you that I appreciate that very much.

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Όσον αφορά το άρθρο το βρίσκω γενικά καλό, οργανωμένο και μαζεμένο. Π.χ. εκεί που αναφέρει ότι οι απριλιανοί είχαν συνεργαστεί με τους βρετανούς και όχι με τους αμερικάνους ή εκεί που λέει ότι η αποικιοκρατία μετακίνησε το κέντρο ενδιαφέροντος (εμπορικού πρωτίστως) από την ανατολική Μεσόγειο και τη μέση ανατολή.
    Η ένστασή μου αφορά την εμμονή του σε παλιότερα άρθρα κυρίως με την προβληματική προτεσταντική ηθική, τον πανγερμανισμό, το ανυπεράσπιστο προτεκτοράτο που όλοι το εκμεταλλεύονται. Τα περί προτεκτοράτου είναι δικαιολογίες για να βγει λάδι η ρωμιοσύνη. Το πρόβλημα επί του παρόντος (που είναι και η ουσία) δεν είναι η προτεσταντική ηθική των γερμανών, ο Τραμπ, η γεοπολιτική κ.λπ., αλλά οι παθογένειες της ρωμιοσύνης. Οι ευρωπαίοι δανείζουν και θέτουν τους στόχους, π.χ. 3% πλεόνασμα. Το μείγμα μέτρων το συνθέτει το κράτος που δανείζεται. Οι ρωμιοί πολιτικάντηδες πάνε στους ευρωπαίους και τους λένε δεν μπορούμε να φτάσουμε τον στόχο και αρχίζει μία ανούσια χρονοβόρα συζήτηση πάρτε τότε αυτό το μέτρο, οι ρωμιοί λένε δεν γίνεται, πάρτε το άλλο μέτρο αλλά πάλι δεν γίνεται. Και μετά έρχονται εδώ και λένε στους ιθαγενείς ότι οι ευρωπαίοι τους λένε να βάλουν φόρους, να ανοίξουν τα επαγγέλματα κ.λπ. Παίζουν δηλαδή το σπασμένο τηλέφωνο μεταξύ ευρωπαίων και του λαού της ρωμιοσύνης. Οι ευρωπαίοι από την άλλη δεν μπορούν να γίνουν πιο συγκεκριμένοι και προσέχουν τις δηλώσεις τους. Μιλάνε γενικά περί οικονομικών δειχτών, διότι αν μιλήσουν ειδικότερα τότε όλοι θα λένε για φασισμό, ότι επεμβαίνουν στα εσωτερικά κράτους, επιβουλεύονται την εθνική κυριαρχία (θέμα πολύ της μόδας μέχρι πριν κάμποσο καιρό), νοσταλγοί του Χίτλερ και άλλα τέτοια.
    Η ρωμιοσύνη έχει αποτύχει σε όλους τους τομείς διότι έχει αποτύχει η παλιά γενιά. Η παλιά γενιά έχει αποτύχει διότι η κουλτούρα που λανσάρει είναι προβληματική, παρωχημένη, ξεπερασμένη, ξεφτιλισμένη. Πρέπει να απορριφθεί αυτή η κουλτούρα. Όσους μπαρμπάδες ξέρω όλοι μέρα αυτολιβανίζονται. Οπότε ανοίγουν το στόμα και χωρίς να τους ρωτήσεις λένε για δουλειά, εργασία, ευθύνες, τρέξιμο, νομίζεις ότι αυτοί οι άνθρωποι είναι πολύ εργατικοί, καπάτσοι και προκομένοι. Έ λοιπόν όλα αυτά είναι λόγια του αέρα. Έτσι έχουν μάθει να κάνουν. Το λένε, το ξαναλένε, το ματαξαναλένε και στο τέλος το παιρνάνε σε όσους τους ακούνε και τους τρέχουν τα σάλια με παραμύθια της Χαλιμάς. Ξέρουν ότι είναι προς όφελός τους να σπαταλούν χρόνο σε αερολογίες διότι πες-πες όλο και κάτι θα μείνει που έλεγε και ο αείμνηστος Γκέμπελς.

  • Ανώνυμος 42664

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Your English is fine my friend.
    Minor mistakes. Congrats on daring to comment in English (I mean it).
    It is really sad to see an article written in (excellent) English and the comments written in Greek. This is disrespect for the non Greek readers unless the administrator isn't interested in their views. He/she should encourage them to write in English.
    Congrats once again. Keep it up.

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Πριν ξεκαθαρίσω την άποψή μου για το άρθρο να πω κάτι για τον Βενιζέλο του 1932. Θα μπορούσε αν είχε @@ να κάνει εσωτερική κάθαρση των παθογενειών. Ούτε λόγος επ' αυτού. Αν τολμούσε να εξαλείψει τις παθογένειες της ρωμιοσύνης, πρώτον θα τελείωνε η πολιτική του καριέρα, δεύτερον θα γκρέμιζε εκ βάθρων το καθεστώς της. Δεν το έκανε. Προτίμησε την εύκολη λύση. Δηλαδή να απαιτεί δάνεια από τους ξένους χωρίς όμως να κάνει μεταρρυθμίσεις και φυσικά οι ξένοι των αγνόησαν. Ούτε και τότε έκανε κάτι ουσιώδες. Προτίμησε τη δύσκολη οδό της υποτίμησης της δραχμής. Τα πάντα δηλαδή προκειμένου να μην θιχτούν οι παθογένειες της ρωμιοσύνης.

  • Ανώνυμος 42662

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    If Greece is a protectorate 42656 then your politicians are not to blame for anything. So any Greek has the right to believe that foreign countries want to take advantage of our sun beach and clean air and they drove us to this economical crisis - again (lol).
    @ 42642-3: please continue to correct my grammar or syntax errors. I 'll appreciate that.

  • Ανώνυμος 42660

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Δικαιολογίες Bielidopoulos.
    Άσε τα ψώφια οτι ετοιμαζόσουν να γράψεις περίληψη των σχολίων σου στα Αγγλικά αλλά επειδή ο άλλος είναι τάχα ρωμιός δεν το κάνεις.
    Δεν γνωρίζεις καλά Αγγλικά και γι' αυτό δεν το κάνεις. Αν είσαι μάγκας γράψε την περίληψη και θα είμαι ο πρώτος που θα σου ζητήσε συγνώμη.
    Ιδού η Ρόδος, ιδού και το πήδημα.


  • Ανώνυμος 42659

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    @ Κίτσα Ντερμπεντέρα: Ι think that they are two guys, not just one.
    Austin Powers

  • Ανώνυμος 42658

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Καλά ρε συ Austin Powers, δεν το έχεις ακόμα καταλάβει;
    Ο Μουαμάρ και ο Μπιελιδόπουλος είναι το ίδιο πρόσωπο.
    Απλά, γράφει και τρολλάρει ο ίδιος με άλλο όνομα, έτσι για να γίνεται χαβαλές.

    Κίτσα η Ντερμπεντέρα

    ΥΓ: Από το άρθρο δεν κατάλαβα γρι.
    Εγώ μιλάω μόνο Πασαλιμανιώτικα.

  • Ανώνυμος 42657

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Δεν νομίζω να συμφωνεί μαζί σου ο Bielidopoulos

  • Ανώνυμος 42656

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Please let me understand something. I'll try to write in english for the sake of our english speaking friends. I've read almost all of the articles of Muamar Ignatius and many of your comments. I think that you are angry with him for reasons that I don't know - and I don't care. But I cannot find any crucial difference on what both of you say. You wrote that Muamar claims that "η Ελλάδα είναι ένα ευπαθές στην εκμετάλλευση από τους ξένους προτεκτοράτο λόγω γεωπολιτικών συμφερόντων κ.λπ.". Don't you agree? The foreign powers created the greek protectorate two hundred years ago (they had their reasons) and till now Greece is still running as a protectorate (42653, I think that you are blind). Where do you disagree with this?
    Austin Powers

  • Ανώνυμος 42654

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    ΞΕΠΕΣΜΟΣ. και η ζωη τραβα την άνηφορα. και οι ταμπελιαριδες κουδουνιζουν την πραμματια τους . για σου ρωμιοσυνη.μεγαλη υποθεση να ασχολουνται με το ποιον σου.

  • Ανώνυμος 42653

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Like I said Bielidopoulos most of the article is horseshit and the rest is his personal opinion. Greece was never a protectorate, but, who cares, nobody seems to identify the mistake. He interprets ancient and middle ages greek history with his own mind regardless the historical facts but, since he thinks that modern greeks have nothing to do with the ancient or middle ages greeks why he bothers?

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Και εκεί που σκεφτόμουνα να γράψω μία σύντομη περίληψη στα αγγλικά όλων όσων ανέφερα, σκέφτηκα το εξής: γιατί να το κάνω, αφού ο τυπάκος που το παίζει καθαρόαιμος αγγλόφωνος και δήθεν δεν καταλαβαίνει ελληνικά πάλι κάποια μακακία θα γράψει. Είτε ελληνικά, είτε αγγλικά πάλι φαπούλες θα πέσουν.
    Ο συντάκτης του άρθρου (Muammar Ignatius..) επιμένει στην κλασσική γραμμή του, αυτήν που έχει ενσωματώσει σε όλα του τα κείμενα. Ότι δηλαδή η Ελλάδα είναι ένα ευπαθές στην εκμετάλλευση από τους ξένους προτεκτοράτο λόγω γεωπολιτικών συμφερόντων κ.λπ. Ας μελετήσει τα όσα σχολίασα πιο πάνω, έχει τόσα πολλά να μάθει.
    Όσον αφορά τους ρωμιούς που χαριεντίζονται αγγλιστί στα 8 πρώτα σχόλια μόνο το γέλιο προκαλούν. Σχόλια μεστά, όλο ουσία!

  • Ανώνυμος 42651

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    You copied-pasted one of my phrases so I guess you are referring to me. I don't get what you're saying but anyway, do as you chose. I am too old to start learning Greek anyway.

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Να διευκρινίσω σε όσους δεν κατάλαβαν. Ο Βενιζέλος ζητούσε δάνεια για να στηρίξει την νομισματική πολιτική ενός προβληματικού και διεφθαρμένου κρατιδίου, οι ξένοι δεν του τα έδιναν θεωρώντας ορθώς ότι δεν συνοδεύονται και από τις ανάλογες θυσίες από πλευρά Ελλάδας και ο Βενιζέλος πλέον δεν είχε άλλη επιλογή παρά λήψη αυστηρών εσωτερικών μέτρων. Σήμερα πάλι η Ελλάδα ζητάει δάνεια για να συντηρήσει το καθεστώς της, πάλι κατηγορεί τους ξένους για τα μνημόνια όχι όμως τις δανειακές συμβάσεις (κλείσιμο ματιού), πάλι δεν θέλει να κάνει θυσίες, με τη διαφορά ότι τώρα ανήκει στην ΕΕ και στην ευρωζώνη συν την αθρόα δανειοδότηση κυρίως την περίοδο Κωστάκη (2004-2009) λόγω ευνοικών διεθνών οικονομικών συγκυριών. Τότε ο καπιταλισμός μοίραζε δάνεια χωρίς πολλές ερωτήσεις.

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    "Google-translate doesn't help me much"
    Χαα! Βλέπεις οι πρώτοι σχολιαστές που έγραψαν στα αγγλικά τα σχόλιά τους ήταν γεμάτα ουσία και νόημα. Ποιος ο λόγος να γράψω αγγλικά όταν οι αναγνώστες πιθανών να μην καταλάβουν και να θέλουν μετάφραση.

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Όπως τότε ο Βενιζέλος ζητούσε δάνεια χωρίς να κάνει θυσίες (περικοπές, μεταρρυθμίσεις), αλλά να μεταβιβάζει τα προβλήματα που δημιουργούν οι παθογένειες του κρατιδίου στους ξένους, έτσι και σήμερα οι διαδοχικές κυβερνήσεις από το 2009 συστηματικά παριστάνουν ότι διαπραγματεύονται, αλλά στην πραγματικότητα καθυστερούν μέχρι οι ξένοι να βαρεθούν να ζητάνε μαζικές απολύσεις δημοσίων υπαλλήλων και τσεκούρι στις συντάξεις, με τελικό αντίτιμο την υπογραφή ό,τι εναλλάκτικών μέτρων υπάρχουν! Στο τέλος η ρωμιοσύνη ξεβρακώνεται και υπογράφει σχεδόν τα πάντα, πλην όμως το πελατειακό/κομματικό κράτος επιβιώνει.
    Και θα συνεχίσει να επιβιώνει έστω ο σκληρός του πυρήνας ακόμα και όταν τα πράγματα φθάσουν στο απροχώρητο. Πιθανών τότε η ρωμιοσύνη να στραφεί σε έναν μετριοπαθή πολιτικό προκειμένου να τον χρησιμοποιήσει ως πιόνι στις διαπραγματεύσεις με τους ξένους ώστε να διασωθεί έστω ο σκληρός πυρήνας του κομματικού κράτους.

  • Ανώνυμος 42647

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    To the guy above.
    Please write your comments in English because they are extensive and I would like to read the points you make. Google-translate doesn't help me much.

    Thanks in advance

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    "Ο Ελευθέριος Βενιζέλος αποφάσισε να χειριστεί το θέμα προσωπικά και να εξασφαλίσει τα εξωτερικά δάνεια που θα στήριζαν την νομισματική του πολιτική. Ταξίδεψε τον Ιανουάριο του 1932 διαδοχικά σε Ρώμη, Παρίσι, Λονδίνο ζητώντας ένα δάνειο 50 εκατομμυρίων δολαρίων για τα επόμενα τέσσερα χρόνια, αλλιώς η Ελλάδα θα εγκατέλειπε τον νόμο του χρυσού και θα βυθιζόταν στην αναξιοπιστία και στην κοινωνική αναταραχή. Τον Μάρτιο συνεδρίασε στο Παρίσι η Δημοσιονομική Επιτροπή όπου ανάμεσα στα άλλα, θα συζητιόταν και το θέμα της Ελλάδας. Στο τρίμηνο που είχε περάσει ουσιαστικά όλες οι εξαγωγές της Ελλάδας είχαν "παγώσει" και η τράπεζα της Ελλάδος είχε δώσει το 1/3 των αποθεματικών της σε συνάλλαγμα στο κράτος έτσι ώστε αυτό να αντεπεξέλθει στις δανειακές υποχρεώσεις του.
    Ο τρόπος παρουσίασης των Ελληνικών προβλημάτων και αναγκών από τον ίδιο τον Ελευθέριο Βενιζέλο δεν έπεισε την Δημοσιονομική Επιτροπή, που θεώρησε ότι η Ελλάδα δεν έκανε καμία θυσία, αντιθέτως ήθελε να μεταβιβάσει τα προβλήματα της στους πιστωτές της. Ο Ελευθέριος Βενιζέλος συνέχισε να ζητά απεγνωσμένα βοήθεια τον Απρίλιο του 1932 στο Συμβούλιο της Κοινωνίας των Εθνών από τους υπουργούς Εξωτερικών της Βρετανίας και της Γαλλίας, χωρίς όμως κάποιο χειροπιαστό αποτέλεσμα, εκτός από αόριστες υποσχέσεις και ευχολόγια. Δεν υπήρχε πλέον χρόνος για διαπραγματεύσεις και αναμονή.
    Την Τετάρτη 27 Απριλίου 1932, η Ελλάδα εγκατέλειψε επισήμως τον «κανόνα του χρυσού». Η δραχμή υποτιμήθηκε ραγδαία και στις 5 Μαΐου η ισοτιμία της με την στερλίνα έπεσε από τις 456 δραχμές στις 539. Τον ίδιο μήνα το κράτος επισημοποίησε την χρεοκοπία του κηρύσσοντας παύση πληρωμών. Το κύρος του Βενιζέλου είχε τρωθεί ανεπανόρθωτα στην λαϊκή συνείδηση, ενώ ένα πανελλαδικό απεργιακό κύμα παρέλυε την χώρα. Στις 21 Μαΐου 1932, ο Ελευθέριος Βενιζέλος παραιτήθηκε από πρωθυπουργός δηλώνοντας δημοσίως πως δεν θα επέστρεφε αν δεν ενισχυόταν η εκτελεστική εξουσία και δεν περιοριζόταν η ελευθεροτυπία."Πτώχευση_της_Ελλάδας_1932

  • Bielidopoulos

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Παραλείπονται κάποια σημαντικά πράγματα και δίνεται έκταση στο "αρχαίο" παρελθόν. Σημάδι ότι οι νεοέλληνες πρέπει επειγόντως να μελετήσουν την ιστορία της πραγματικής τους πατρίδας, δηλαδή από την ίδρυση του κρατιδίου της ρωμιοσύνης το 1830 και μετά. Παράδειγμα: ο Παπαδόπουλος κατήργησε το παλάτι, που τότε ήταν το άντρο των δοσοληψιών και ραδιουργιών. Οποιος ήθελε να κάνει μπίζνες εν Ελλάδι έπρεπε να είχε κολλητό έναν παλατιανό. Η κατάργηση του παλατιού έδωσε την ευκαιρία κατόπιν στον σοσιαληστή Παπανδρέου να λαικοποιήσει τη ρεμούλα, το βόλεμα, το αλισβερίσι κάτω από το τραπέζι, τις μαζικές προσλήψεις μέσω γνωστών και φίλων (άγνωστα τότε βιογραφικό και συνέντευξη).
    Η δε οικονομική ιστορία του κρατιδίου παραμένει να κινείται στα ίδια μοτίβα στη διάρκεια της ύπαρξης του νεοελληνικού κράτους με τη μόνη διαφορά ότι τώρα έχει ένα σκληρό νόμισμα το ευρώ που δεν μπορεί να υποτιμήσει ή τυπώσει ενώ πριν είχε εθνικό νόμισμα και παλάτι. Όλοι οι άλλοι παράμετροι παραμένουν οι ίδιοι.

  • Ανώνυμος 42644

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Whatever works :)

  • Ανώνυμος 42643

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    Furthermore, you seem to ignore the difference between "thing" and "think". Should I assume that you don't know the meaning of the verb "think"? Perhaps, it's because you never "think".

    Cheers again

  • Ανώνυμος 42642

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    My dear friend, the word "shit" is singular and not plural. It seems that your command of the English language is rather weak. That means that no matter how much you try to convince me otherwise, you didn't really understand anything that the author has written. So, for your own sake, give up commenting so as not to ridicule yourself more. However, if you wish to keep it up, I will greatly enjoy reading your "comments". After all, a shit expert like yourself doesn't turn up everyday.


  • Ανώνυμος 42640

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    When someone has shits for brain he keeps asking the same think hoping that he will get a different answer.

  • Ανώνυμος 42639

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    I'll do so but please tell me how on Earth a comment can contain so many different shit flavors.One has to be a gourmet expert like yourself or a high caliber connoisseur in case the shit you are talking about is in liquid form. Listen man, you must be an expert. As a matter of fact a professional shit expert, so please do me a favor and write a few lines on how you got your shit flavor expertise.

    Thanks again.

  • Ανώνυμος 42638

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    It is easy my friend. Just read your own comment again and again.

  • Ανώνυμος 42637

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    I trust your taste! You seem to know a lot about shit to be able to make such distinctions. Keep on eating! When you finish, please write a few lines on how you manage to distinguish all these different shit flavors!

  • Ανώνυμος 42636

    10 Μαΐ 2017

    You know that most of the article is horseshit and the rest is personal opinion of the author.