Cyprus-Forum.com

Piratis wrote:I believe the TC school books are trying to catch up with what we had here for decades already. (if the report above is correct).

Give me a break, catch up with what you had? I have a friend who is involved in a bicommunal project. His group is trying to identify the nationalistic (and usually wrong or partial) elements in the education systems both in the north and the south. He told me how the education in the south, especially history education, is very one-sided and nationalist.

I can get more detailed information from him but please don't tell me that what you have is objective.

Hint: take a look at the all Cyprus final examination paper in the subject greek literature of June 2004. When I saw the proposed essay topics I thought this place has no future. I could immediately see why many young people prefer partition than a solution

Hint: take a look at the all Cyprus final examination paper in the subject greek literature of June 2004. When I saw the proposed essay topics I thought this place has no future. I could immediately see why many young people prefer partition than a solution

Tell us what the essay topics were...instead of me going through the trouble of finding them when I'm not even in Cyprus!

He told me how the education in the south, especially history education, is very one-sided and nationalist.

Sure is one sided, nobody argued for the opposite. Here is what I said:

With this I don't mean our books are perfect. Far from it. But atleast until today it seems they have been a lot more objective than the TC books.

Even your recent books are one sided. One tome for the thousands of years of history in Cyprus, and then almost another tome just for the Ottoman rule! Do even your newer books call the invasion with its name, or they call it "intervention"? Do you really think that even your newer books are anything close to objective?

So you give me a break! One thing is one sided, and another thing is the hate propaganda that apparently your older books promoted.

Now with the new books I hope the information is "just" one sided, which if its the case it will be at about the same level like our books have been for decades.

Actually Bananiot tell us which of the following topics you think was the problematic one... and try to substantiate your views in the future so that no false impression is left to the rest of the members of the forum.

For "eniaies" the topics were:
1. Make suggestions for developing a better environment at school.
2. Write a letter to the director of the British Museum asking for the return of the Parthenon marbles to Greece.
3. Express any concerns on the change of our identity in a multinational mutlicultural multilingual but strongly tied european family.

For "eisagogikes" the topics were:
1. Discuss the contribution of science and technology to the improvement of quality of life.
2. Write a critique on Monti's thesis that material goods are a necessary but not sufficient condition for happiness.
3. Propose ways for the preservation and protection of the environment without harming progress of humanity.
4. Give the characteristics of a "free human" given Ritso's statement that "the most power is in the free soul, the soul with the most knowledge".

Even your recent books are one sided. One tome for the thousands of years of history in Cyprus, and then almost another tome just for the Ottoman rule! Do even your newer books call the invasion with its name, or they call it "intervention"? Do you really think that even your newer books are anything close to objective?

It seems in a "democratic" unified Cyprus, TCs will have to accept the Turkish intervention as Turkish invasion and the GCs Enosis struggle as honourable, rightfull self-determination fight.

What about TCs? They are just deluded by Turkey and foreign powers... They had made to believe that they weren't just a minority...


Do all other GC members of forum think the same?

It seems in a "democratic" unified Cyprus, TCs will have to accept the Turkish intervention as Turkish invasion and the GCs Enosis struggle as honourable, rightfull self-determination fight.

When did I said that TCs will have to accept anything regarding history? Isn't education one of the things I always mention as an example of what TCs will be able to determine exclusively by themselves in a unified Cyprus?

All I am saying is that our books are one sided, and your books are one sided also. Do you argue against that?

All I am saying is that our books are one sided, and your books are one sided also. Do you argue against that?

No.. if this is the case you are trying to emphisize I agree with you...

No.. if this is the case you are trying to emphisize I agree with you...

Well, you know well that irrespective of what is written in the books, the teacher will present it however he/she wants. And that's where problems start...

The "history" of the Republic of Cyprus (1960 onwards) is taught in GC schools at the last term of the final year (at least when I was a student). The book contained minimal information about the 1963-1974 period, concentrating on what led to Makarios' 13 points, how the state was almost dissovled because a prostitute died, the TC retaliation, the bombardment at Tylliria, the incidents at Kofinou and the removal of the Greek division from the island.

In my class the teacher read the several newspaper extracts in the book (skipping the "analysis" bit) and moved on to the 1974 events, pointing the finger of "who brought the turkish army to Cyprus" to the Greek junta and their representatives in Cyprus. In the class next door, they talked about how the RoC was the step before enosis, how the EOKA B' quest was justified when Makarios started talking about "feasible" solutions, and how Makarios eventually brought the Turkish army to Cyprus a few days before Enosis was declared. In both cases, all students had their (i.e. their parents') views, which created lengthy discussions with the teacher based on random arguments and accusations about the thing that they could talk about: whose fault was it that the 1974 events occurred.

The point I want to make is that there is a significant gap between the views of GCs, a disagreement between GC themselves on this issue. There's a book, that states what is commonly acceptable, but there are teachers, "historians", that transmit their own views. And we all have our own views on this. Personally, I haven't lived through that period; the question is, on what basis have I constructed that view?

Now imagine what the gap would be between what may be taught by GC and TC "historians" on average, even if you make the books the same... The question is, how do you guarantee that the teacher will teach what is in the book, given that this is such a sensitive issue?

There is no guarantee but over time people will be less willing to point fingers but the main curse of mankind is always needing someone or something to be the scapegoat for all that happened when if we all took responsibility for our actions made our apologies then we could go forwards without the many versions but the definitive version accepted by all.