Kifeas wrote:cypezokyli wrote:miltiades wrote:Piratis , very eloquently explained , I do wish however that AKEL would make the break from the communist ideology official , and further more its leaders refrained from the many venomous attacks on the USA.
Of course we the Cypriots know that Akel is fundamentally a socialist party but I don't know whether it is seen as such by the USA . Do you think that AKEL could be instrumental in formulating bi-communal political entities , ie perhaps a new party along the lines of let us say The Pan - Cyprus Socialist Party , known as PSK ,
and made up of all Cypriots., dedicated to the unification of Cyprus and the well being of all Cypriots.Such party no doubt would enjoy support from Akel supporters as well as Turkish Cypriot socialists.There Im sure very many Turkish Cypriot politically motivated individuals who have the interests of Cyprus as a whole at heart , and would no doubt welcome such an event.
for that to happen , akel should have followed one of the basic ideas of the left - namely internationalism... well it never did.
akel was never able to understand how much nationalism itself carried. the fact that it is the party that has kept its hand clean from tc blood , it doesnot mean that it did something positive towards tcs. especially the last two years akel seems to be less and less trusted by the tcs. the reason is that akel has always put its voting powers over cyprus. it has always chosen the easy way. never took important decisions , never made big mistakes , never wrote history. always a party afraid to assume responsibility.
sadik and piratis are kind of right about akel.
Cypezokyli, beyond reproducing in the forums the anti-Akel empty talk and aphorisms of Makarios Drousiotis and some others, I would have liked to hear from you what specific and particular in your opinion policies and /or actions Akel should or could have taken (or not have taken) in the modern history of Cyprus and which would have made a marked positive difference to our known historical pathway. Do not tell me things which could have made no difference any way, but only things (actions /policies) which would have made a difference. As for Akel harboring and /or cultivating nationalism, based on what evidence do you make such a claim?
when history is written , we can only guess what might have happenned. so we can argue for ever if a specific action (taken or not taken) would have made a marked positive difference. and from the akel perspective , the conditions were in any case never "ripe" enough to make a positive difference. (as if the heroes they admire like lenin or che , waited for the conditions to ripe).
so, getting into that makes no sense imo.
what it makes sense on the other hand , is whether an action taken or not taken can be explained from a "left" point of view , or the left point of view of that time.
because my problem with akel , is that i fail to see the positive difference it made, in comparison to all other cypriot parties.
so if we take some basic points in history :
i cannot see the left perspective in akels action (not taken) regarding EOKA.
if we follow Lenin (who at the time supposingly they did) who said " let every bullet that kills an imperialist be blessed" then they should have joined.
if we take the facts on the ground that EOKA was control by an extreme nationalist who kiled gc communists and tcs , then they should have opposed it.
what did akel do ? it stood back and watch history going by in front of their eyes. i honestly fail to see the left perspective in akel stance.
you might say , what could it have done that it would make a positive difference ? well this is sth we cannot predict. a very pessimistic prediction would be that it would lead to a civil war either gcs vs tcs (if it joined eoka) or communists vs nationalists (if it didnot ) . the optimistic point of view is that it could have echived a real pan-cypriot struggle. we can argue for hours for that.
but i dont see the left perspective in its "we are not really in favor , we are somehow against " stance. (unless the left perspective was decided by another "left" somewhere not in cyprus - but still it needs to be explained through the left ideology )
we forget the first election of the RoC , bc akel admitted (and i honor akel for that) that that was a wrong decision (even though the left perspective is still absent).
its support for makarios its also sth that i fail to see a sensible left explanation. or just because 14 years after the birth of the RoC , makarios was overthrown by the extreme right , it justifies the support of makarios ? he was a priest for christs sake , and he didnot hide the fact that he was an anti-communist. his closest partner for a number of years was even worse. perhaps from a gc point of view it might have made sense to support makarios - but i fail to see the left rationalle behind this.
ofcource the conditions for a left candidate were not ripe (and they didnot ripe even today , 80 years after akels creation!)
now in relation with the tcs . correct if i am wrong , but the tc akel members can be counted in the fingers of one hand. perhaps some more tcs participated in the akel controlled trade unions - and perhaps akel can take advantage of the death of kavazoglou , but i cannot see it convincing the tcs. thats why i always argue that the left in cyprus never existed. people where first gcs or tcs and then left or right (thats what i mean by , akel not being able to understand its own nationalism. not that it uses nationalistic rhetoric) . a real left in cyprus should have been over ethnicities , isnt it ?
i would be also very interested in knowing what exactly akels position was concerning the tcs being in the enclaves. let us take the absolute gc point of view that tcs "withdrew" in the enclaves (and we had nothing to do with it) . what should the left ideology dictate (irrespective of its chances of success ? )
the only progressive material that i ve read up to now comes from a gc businessman (capitalist using a left rhetoric) christofi economidis , who warned that the situation is creating perceptions in both communities that can prove fatal for cyprus. i would be interested in knowing exactly what charavgi wrote concerning the subject and what specific actions did the party that could mobilise 1/3 of the cyprus population did.
let us not get into the discussion of the "resistance" against the coup.
let us not get into its decision of never supporting a left candidate and come to the recent history.
does the sentence "we vote NO to cement YES" makes sense to you ? is that a position ? or is it just another attempt of akel to avoid taking a position ?
lets see its partners in the goverment only concerning the cyppro.
when you listen to takis hatjigeorgiou (akel) and aggelidis or koulias (DIKO) do you get the impression that the two sides have the same vision for cyprus ? when christofias two days before the elections attempts to quote tpap , that AP is still on the table , while omirou argues that the plan is dead, do you get the impression that akels main aim in that coalition is the cyppro ?
so , forgeting the past and watching the future , akel could make a positive difference if it in the next elections coopearates with dysi , in supporting an akel candidate and cutting the crap of ideological differences. when they coopearated with makarios they had no ideological problems and they are even proud of it. Now , after the end of the cold war , where in a number of countries (with no big national problems like ours) like germany , bulgaria , and probably chech republic , the left and the right cooperate i donot see the reason why they should not cooperate with dysi for the good of cyprus. unless ocource akel feels closer to omirou perdikis and kleanthous regarding the cyppro.
lastly , i am not sure if akel is worried about what the tcs think , but the impression i get is that they are getting more and more dissapointed with akel. the question is , (and from a left point of view) should akel care about what the tcs think about its policies ?
closing , the only "left" i can see in cyprus history which did show some signs of activism , was at some (albeit very few) points in time the tc left against denktash (which ofcource didnot always make a positive difference - but at least they tried.... which is better than not trying , isnt it ? )
