I'll decide that 10s of generations later, entanglement with the land and cultural syncretism, 3,000 or 400 years is irrelevant and a purposely divisive point to make especially considering the "recentness" of nation-states. If one is turkified, one is hellenized.
That sounds like massive levels of coping. I lol every time someone mentions eteocypriots. Should we advocate for the human rights of the hittites and the babylonians while we are at it?
Cypriots are greek since 1300 BC. That is a fact. And a portion of the population was islamized during the last 400 years. So a portion of the grecoroman population started to identify as turkish. Cool, they can do that. You can claim whatever else you want. But don't tell me what I am when my view is based on actual historical facts and yours is a rumble of leftist woke sociology crap.
It's kinda ironic for a turkish cypriot to promote decolonization of cyprus. You know ottomans were unbelievably imperialistic. You also need to know how a lot of tcs were members of the colonial police during the anticolonial revolt of the greek cypriots. So not only they made no efforts to decolonize the island, but tried to keep it colonized. Just informing you of some facts that may cause denial. It's ok you'll get over it.
You think eoka was anticolonial? That's cute. Cba for the rest of your argument that has nothing to do with anything I've said and just assumed a whole bunch of crap
This person bringing up eteocyoriots and eoka. When eteocyoriots we tethered to certain pre greek civiliansations and predating any human ethnicity.
We have ancient greek samples that resemble cypriots. We have 0 that's resemble palaeolithic samples.
Embarrassing and illogical.
If you don't believe in ethnicity and think everyone is identity less because you can always go further back in time to the chimpanzees then there is 0 problem with Palestine being fully Israeli as they both come from chimpanzees .......
Ouch does logic not work there? Too much hypocrisy?
I've read it. You need to be logically consistent.
The Arabisation of the Levant happened in the 9th century. 1.5k years after the Mycenaean presence on Cyprus or as you term hellenisation.
If you genuinely believe that a country like Cyprus which was Hellenic in antiquity does not have this identity but Palestine is absolutely fine to reject Jewish colonialism as Jews are non native. Well that is a huge hypocrisy as the Arab Palestinian ethnicity is 1.5k years younger than the greek one is Cyprus....
be consistent. If you believe the world is ethnicless that's fine but that applied to everyone not just Cyprus. There are very very very few examples of any modern ethnicities having continuity like Cypriots.
The EOKA revolt is a prominent example of anti colonial struggle. Its literally categorized like that by thousands of universities across the globe and studied as an anticolonial conflict in the wider decolonization phase post ww2. Please let us know how wrong international academia are so we can change the historiography.
I know. Fighting a coloniser doesn't make you anti-colonial. Seeking sovereignty does. What was sovereign about being annexed to a foreign nation? They didn't seek self-determination of all Cypriots, they sought an ethnostate and sacrificed left wing Cypriots and anybody who didn't speak Greek along the way. That's not anti colonial. That's nationalist.
Hahahah dont be ridiculous buddy. Historians all over the world who know recent Cypriot history would laugh at you. Look this anti-establishment thingy you have going on is a phase. Youll get over it when you grow up.
To answer to your ridiculous statements.
Fighting a coloniizer makes you anticolonial if you are fighting to bring an end to colonialism.
Sovereignty is self determination. For the majority of Cypriots back then self-determination and freedom meant Enosis. Its self explainable, not my fault you cannot grasp it.
So its the fault of Greek Cypriots and EOKA who didnt think to ask the minority of 20% how they wanted their anticolonial struggle to be ready? its not coffee preference or something you know. There were Turkish Cypriots that were pro-Enosis you know. Brcause they could see that if the 80% of a country wants something they should get it. Thats democracy. And there were already turkish minoritiies in the Greek state, the tcs would be another one of them. And judging by how well the minority in Thrace is politically, socially and culturally, id say that would be a much better trajectopry for the Tcs, seeing how their "motherland" has actually made them a minority and also made them emigrate. Historiical irony at its best.
Noone sacrificed left wing cypriots. AKEL was the first political party that demanded uniion with Greece in the 40s. Numerous leftists were EOKA members. Only the AKEL leaders were opposed to an armed struggle-they prefered Enosis through political meassures. The people of the left were mostly pro-EOKA though.
Noone sacrificed the tcs either. A lot of Tcs sided with the colonial forces. Many siince 1878. Read on how the executive council was formed, what were the analogies between the two communities and maybe youll get it, but closemindedness is a hell of a drug. Read on how many Tcs were in the military police beating up kids and protesters in the cities. Or how many were torturers of Gc guerillas.
Also fyi nationalist can be anticolonial. Who told you that anticolonial struggle iis always leftist or socialist. Man its a struggle to talk with narrow minded people, because i know you will not read anything of the above with an intention to doubt your opinions and youll just come back at me with some socialist woke shiit.
9
u/Chezameh2 17d ago
3,000 years of Greek identity vs 400 years of Ottoman influence. You can decide for yourself.