[MGSA-L] =?gb2312?B?UkU6IFtNR1NBLUxdCVN5cml6YSB2cy4gWHJpc2kgQXlnaSBjb2x1bW4gprM=?= =?gb2312?B?ps+m1CCmrabJpsqmz6bUIKa2ptGm1KbSps+my6bYptGmwQ==?=

Dimitris Papanikolaou dimitris.papanikolaou at mod-langs.ox.ac.uk
Fri Sep 28 11:13:29 PDT 2012

Dear Dr. Chryssoloras,

I am confident that all those countries where, according to your description, 'the basic principle is... [that] the state has the monopoly of exercising violence', will be happy to receive you too, publish your policy agendas and accommodate your views. There is no need to overkill at this stage, I don't think.

But do rest assured that there is a bright future ahead; one with clean and clear streets, neatly set rules and well-dressed bodies. In that future, in whichever country you decide you want to invest, your taxes will never be used to support leftist destruction-forces and their persistent work of undoing.


From: mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu [mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu] on behalf of Nikos Chrysoloras [nikos.chrysoloras at gmail.com]
Sent: 28 September 2012 09:20
To: mgsa-l at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Syriza vs. Xrisi Aygi column ¦³¦Ï¦Ô ¦­¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ¦Á

Dear all,
Thank you for your comments. Let me respond to some of them (and take others on board). I tried to be brief and it seems that because of that, there were some misunderstandings.
I did not defend Greece's "ancien regime" (PASOK and ND), neither the Second Adjustment Programme. In fact, allow me to refer you to an article of mine which was published by the Heinrich Boll foundation in Germany last summer, in which I criticize both the policies of the Greek governments since metapolitsefsi, as well as the Troika policies in Greece (http://www.eliamep.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/chrys1.pdf). What I said (or at least, what I tried to say) is that both SYRIZA and Chrissi Avgi's populist discourses question the legitimacy of democratically elected governments. Some of you claimed that my approach to democracy is procedural. Fair enough. But if you suggest that the collective will of a political community is not represented by its elected government (with due respect for the rights of individuals and minority opinions, as prescribed by law), then who does? The Illuminati? Me? You? Tsipras? You see, the issue is not procedural at all...
Of course, there are policies of elected governments which are not legitimate. That's why we have parliaments, courts of law, Councils of State, the European Court of Justice, separation of powers, etc. Is there anyone here who denies that Greece asked for the IMF/EU assistance on its own? If the Greek government and the Greek parliament wanted, they could just default. Obviously, in that case, Greek banks would be cut off from the Eurosystem and the Greek state would not be able to borrow from the markets to cover its primary deficit. Faced with a perfect storm of credit and cash crunch, it would have to print a currency to survive. But successive Greek governments, successive votes in the parliament, as well as the last elections, prove that Greece chose otherwise. Moreover, the Greek Conseil D' Etat has repeatedly ruled that the Memorandum measures are in line with the Greek Constitution. And Greece chose to become a member of the EU, the IMF and the Eurozone years ago. If the country wanted, it could withdraw its membership. So where are the grounds to question the legitimacy of the decisions taken so far? Unless if some of us claim that "we know better, because we are enlightened. To hell with the parliaments, courts and electoral majorities". I fear that some of us are walking a very dangerous path here...
Of course, there is a right to civil disobedience. But on what grounds? Against Issuing receipts when delivering private classes as Mr. Tsipras said? Againist paying public transport tickets (as the SYRIZA-supported "Den Plirono" movement wanted)? Most of you live abroad and have not realized that the Greek so called "Left" parties have adopted the same approach towards taxation, as the "tea party" movement in the US. Like the populists of Andreas Papandreou before them, they never wonder what they can do for their country, just demand from the country to do more and more for them. That is why SYRIZA promised to hire 100,000 more civil servants in Greece, while the country is already in default!
Some of you live abroad, in places where the democratic state has the monopoly of exercising violence, within the rule of law. Until last April, I lived in Greece, where this basic principle is not respected, and whoever wants, be it the thugs of Chrissi Avgi, or the SYRIZA-supported "mbachalakides", can exercise violence at will, with no legal consequences. The result is that my taxes are used to restore the same university buildings, year after year, over and over again, because their facilities are destroyed in habitual "occupations" by SYRIZA and other leftist youths. Historical landmarks and neoclassical buildings are vandalized on a daily basis. The centre of my home city has been repeatedly burned down. The largest destruction took place in 2008, when there was no Memorandum, no high unemployment, and Greek GDP per capita was higher than any other time in modern history. The daily routine (just getting to your work in down town Athens) was a true nightmare, as Syntagma square is closed even to demonstrations of 200 people, and even before the financial crisis.
Some of you said that the problem of Greece started when foreign "oppressors" imposed the Memorandum. I say that the Greek crisis did not start in 2010 (in fact, even recession had started two years earlier). Greece was already in crisis. I am sure that those who criticized me will not agree.
Finally, the comment on Stavrakakis' work, of course I follow it. In fact we have co-authored an article with Stavrakakis for Psychoanalysis, Culture and Society (http://www.scribd.com/doc/20244515/Stavrakakis-and-Chrysoloras-I-Can-t-Get-No-Enjoyment-Lacanian-Theory-and-the-Analysis-of-Nationalism )

Dr. Nikos Chrysoloras
Journalist - EU Correspondent
e-mail: chrysoloras at kathimerini.gr<mailto:chrysoloras at kathimerini.gr>
url: http://www.ekathimerini.com/

Dear Mr. Chrysoloras,

Since you have moved from the language of journalism to the language of political science and social theory (which is the impetus of this academic list, beyond mere sharing of information), permit me to respond to the points you make for the sake of a proper intellectual debate. I respond to your points in sequence below -- and my apologies to all for lengthening even further this discussion.

On 9/27/2012 4:31 AM, Nikos Chrysoloras wrote:
Dear colleagues,
I have been following your debate regarding my article with great interest. Allow me to respond to some of the points made here. Obviously, my article does not suggest that the content of SYRIZA's political discourse is in any way similar to Chrissi Avgi's discourse. But the structure is identical. They both use what Laclau and Mouffe (Laclau, E. & Mouffe C.,  Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, 2nd ed., (London: Verso Books, 2001 [1985]) call "the logic of equivalence". The logic of equivalence, as some of you may already know, constructs  a chain of equivalential identities among different elements that are seen as expressing a certain sameness¡±.
I am very surprised to see you making here an entirely formalist argument. There is already an assumption here that goes unquestioned: The fact that politics is some kind of game, where it is enough for an analyst to juxtapose different groups and measure their differences and similarities, as if they are indeed equivalent. But political constituencies are made by real men and women, with ideologies and beliefs, passions and experiences, prejudices and delusions. All of these elements carry specific histories, which in no way could ever be measured in any quantitative scale but require careful historical analysis of particulars. In real politics, there can never be equivalence of identities, unless human beings become machines.

To say, moreover, that only "the structure of XA and SYRIZA are similar or equivalent" is quite insidious in that it automatically silences the difference in "content of political discourse" which you acknowledge. As a result, the content (and its difference) disappears from the discussion. This gesture is symptomatic of the entire edifice of assumptions on which your analysis is based, but, pardon me if I remind you, that is a political decision on your part to ignore the content.
In the case of SYRIZA's and Chrissi Avgi's populism, the political spectrum is simplified by the two populist discourses, to the extent that is perceived as being formed by two opposing camps: the people  and its ¡°enemies¡±. In an interview with me (http://www.epohi.gr/portal/theoria/8424) Ernesto Laclau , the most important academic author on populism, argues that no matter its content, a discourse is populist to the extent that it refers to the ¡°people¡± as a unified and undivided entity. The available space does not allow me to elaborate further, but for those who are interested, I suggest the book "On Populist Reason" by Laclau.
My point is that both parties are populist.
Knowing your Laclau is well and good, but not very useful when you neglect your history. ALL Greek political parties are populist -- at least since 1981. The New Democracy Party specifically reached practically unfathomable heights of populism under both the Karamanlis and Samaras leadership in recent years, while nonetheless serving global neoliberal interests. That ALL Greek political parties are populist is the unfortunate indication of the degradation of Greek parliamentary politics, but it has been increasingly the tendency of parliamentary politics in most of the 'Western' world -- witness American politics since the Reagan era.

Interestingly enough, SYRIZA is the least populist of Greek parties in that otherwise terrible scale that implicates all. This is because certain of its constituencies have very specific leftist orientations that emphasize all kinds of particularities of identities, particularly in terms of gender and sexuality politics, politics of immigration, and biopolitics in general.
But similarities do not stop there. They both dispute the legitimacy of the Constitution, the Government, and the Democratic regime in general. I will not refer to specific examples from Chrissi Avgi, since we all more or less know what this neo-fascist party supports. But I challenge those who dispute my argument to visit the website of SYRIZA and do a content analysis on its press releases. The press releases do not just state a strong disagreement with the current policies followed in Greece (that would be completely understandable), but dispute the democratic legitimation of the government. Terms like "genocide", "death contracts against the people" are habitually used, while the underlying logic of most of the arguments is that there is a "chain of equivalence" (again), between a foreign oppressor (the EU) and its local puppets (the Greek government).

Of course, this is a slanderous assertion that doesn't fit the context of a serious analysis. It's precisely what such writings like yours and Mr. Kasimatis have been fostering in order to fashion an ideology of extremes. I won't even bother with this one. I will only ask you: how do you imagine that 27% of Greek voters, the overwhelming majority of whom are not SYRIZA members, voted for SYRIZA in the recent elections (and are, by all accounts ready to do so again), if your characterization of SYRIZA is true? Do you believe that nearly one third of Greek voters woke up one day and voted for a party that would strip them of their constitutional rights?

There is one thing to keep in mind that a lot of people seem to forget, or seem to want to forget. SYRIZA is not some fringe group. It is, at this point, a major political movement, with broad support in the population across classes, age groups, etc., and the premier party of parliamentary opposition. For people to denigrate it in such fashion, especially by calling it equivalent with a bunch of thugs, most of whom have criminal records or have criminal charges pending against them, is an insult not to SYRIZA members but to more than a million and half Greek citizens.

Now, we all know that all Greek governments of the past 38 years have been elected in office through legitimate and fair elections. We all know that Greek governments asked for the IMF/EU intervention. We all know that the Second Adjustment Program was approved last March by a 2/3 majority in the Greek parliament, and we all know that the tri-partite pro-European government in Athens enjoys the support of the majority of the parliament and received 48% of the vote in last June's elections. So why, oh why, SYRIZA doesn't just say "I strongly disagree", but argues that "you guys are not legitimate"? The difference is crucial!!

The use of the word "legitimacy" is never innocent -- not only when politicians use it (no matter where they are in the political spectrum), but also when academics use it (political scientists, economists, legal scholars, etc.) Again, there can never be formal legitimacy. Legitimacy is always determined within a sphere of power, and even the most inclusive such sphere will remain structured according to some sort of constitutive asymmetry.

Yes, Greek governments are legitimate insofar as they have been elected. But this does not mean that all their actions, indiscriminately, are legitimate. If that were the case, then all broken promises, all acts of corruption, all clientelist practices, all partisan actions (sometimes against the interests of the nation's sovereignty -- you know, I'm sure, how often this happens in a democracy) would also be legitimate. Are you ready to accept this? I can't imagine.

The fact of the matter is that our country has mortgaged its political sovereignty to elite global economic interests. That's a long theoretical discussion as to why etc. which we can't do here. But it's certainly not the only country by any means. It's also a fact, corroborated by the most famous economists worldwide, that the Second Adjustment Program is the confirmation of Greece's loss of sovereignty for God knows how many years into the future.

And finally, my third point. I use the term "democracy" in my Kathimerini article, in line with John Rawls' theory of justice. For those of us who are not political scientists, let me simplify things a bit. In a fair democratic society, we can all fight for our political views, as long as we all agree on the rules of our fight. If we don't agree on the rules, then democracy will fall apart. It's like playing a soccer game. Both teams do their best to beat the opponent, but the game cannot be played if the teams do not agree on what is a foul, what is a corner kick, if the players can use their hands, etc. SYRIZA consistently supports civil disobedience movements. Members of the party supported the restaurant owners on the island of Hydra who had beaten tax inspectors, because the latter ones tried to check if they issue receipts. Mr. Tsipras said that school teachers can be excused if they deliver private courses to their students, without issuing receipts. And SYRIZA supported the "I am not paying" movement in Greece. So if we can't agree that all citizens are obliged to pay taxes, then how the hell will democratic politics function in Greece?
First of all, you can use the Hydra example if you want, but do your homework and mention to people that one of the leading figures in SYRIZA and current MP, Mr. Dimitris Papdimoulis, had immediately and publicly stigmatized the behavior of the restauranteur and his supporters. (http://www.zougla.gr/politiki/article/skliri-dilosi-papadimouli-gia-tous-idreous-forofigades). But the essence is elsewhere.

I agree that in democracy we have to fight by the same rules, but I remind you that democracy is not a game. It's intense and risky business -- it's agonistic business. And it is so because, though people are presumably free to vote with equal capacity, the asymmetries of power remain and they can never be bracketed from the process. And though the procedural rules are to be agreed upon, one's understanding of democracy will never be agreed upon in any democratic society. That's the case since ancient Athens. You may think democracy in terms of Rawls, and I may think democracy in terms of Ranci¨¨re or Castoriadis. In my democracy, dissent is essential. Civil disobedience is one of the pillars of democracy. I can tell you, there can be democracy without consensus, but there can never be democracy without dissent. Not all dissent is just, of course. But neither is all consent -- so the question is not about justice. We're not discussing ethics here; we're discussing politics.

Thank you for your patience,
Nikos Chrysoloras, PhD (London School of Economics)
EU Correspondent, Kathimerini daily,

I extend my thanks for everybody's patience as well.
Stathis Gourgouris

On 27 September 2012 06:16, <mgsa-l-request at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l-request at uci.edu>> wrote:
Send MGSA-L mailing list submissions to
        mgsa-l at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l at uci.edu>

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        mgsa-l-request at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l-request at uci.edu>

You can reach the person managing the list at
        mgsa-l-owner at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l-owner at uci.edu>

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of MGSA-L digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Syriza vs. Xrisi Aygi column ??? ????? ?????????
      (athanasios grammenos)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: athanasios grammenos <athanasiosgrammenos at gmail.com<mailto:athanasiosgrammenos at gmail.com>>
To: Philip Hager <philip.hager at googlemail.com<mailto:philip.hager at googlemail.com>>
Cc: MGSA List <mgsa-l at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l at uci.edu>>, pn2005 at optusnet.com.au<mailto:pn2005 at optusnet.com.au>, "Grammenos, Dennis" <d-grammenos at neiu.edu<mailto:d-grammenos at neiu.edu>>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 15:50:21 +0300
Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Syriza vs. Xrisi Aygi column ¦³¦Ï¦Ô ¦­¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ¦Á
Dear Mr Hager,

Thank you for talking some time to read and think on the post I sent to the list.

Let me first make clear that I preferred not to escort the initial posting with any comment because I believe in every list member's ability to make his/her own conclusions. Besides, other members occasionally post only with a "fyi" or "to the members of the list" so I didn't want to be out of the spirit. My initiative was oriented only to enrich the public dialogue in this list on the emerging situation in Greece; not easy!

Then, allow me to say that your understanding of my reply is poor. First, nobody accused no one for being a "murderer". This is a risky and arbitrary conclusion of yours and I wish to keep distant. However, as I mentioned to my previous letter, when a political leader raise objections to the very application of the Constitution, or when by declaration of another party leader (Mrs Papariga of KKE) he is publicly linked to the "musketeers-koukouloforoi" (who are criminals whether you like it or not) then there is a very serious suspicion on his polity.

On your second point, I am sorry but I did not use the term "neoliberalism", and it is not polite trying either to interpret and characterize me or to charge me words that I did not use. For your own information though, let me -as a political scientist- to distinguish "neo-liberals" from "neo-cons", which is a common mistake made by the Greek radicals, too. Now, how you conclude from my last message, that "freedom of expression is (restricted to) the right to express the neoliberal consensus", this is your own issue.

In contrast, I said:
"¦°¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ø¦Ð¦É¦Ê?, ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ô¦É¦Ï¦È¦Å¦Ó? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ì?¦Á ?¦Ð¦Ï¦×¦Ç, ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦È? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó¦Á¦Í¦Ï?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Õ¦Ô¦Ò¦É¦Ï¦Ã¦Í¦Ø¦Ì?¦Á, ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ñ¦Á¦Ó¦Ç¦Ã¦É¦Ê? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦È¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê?¦Í ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ì¦Ì?¦Ó¦Ø¦Í, ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ä?¦Ö¦Ï¦Ì¦Á¦É ?¦Ì¦Ø? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ¦Å¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Ø? ¦Â¦Á¦Ò¦É¦Ê? "¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ò¦Á" ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦È? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ö¦Ñ¦Ç¦Ò¦É¦Ì¦Ï¦Ð¦Ï¦É?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ä¦Ï¦Ì¦Ç¦Ó¦É¦Ê?". (=Personally, I do not adopt any of those views, I try to understand the identity, strategy and ethos of the political parties, however I accept the 'other' as a fundamental component of dialogue and I try to use it constructively").

On your conspiracy theory, that "of the Greek media propaganda against those who propose a different solution to the crisis" I will make no comments. Blaming someone of "witchcraft", is a step backwards. I remind you though that the huge majority of the Greek media belongs traditionally to the left wing and beyond "Kathimerini" and "To Vima", the rest are flirting with Drachma, "a different solution to the crisis", as you said.

Last, I want to thank our moderator for he allowed a fruitful conversation (of some fifteen posts) to develop. It shows that debating with different -even contending- views, can give us something important. Well done!

¦¥¦Í ¦Å¦Ë¦Å¦Ô¦È¦Å¦Ñ?¦Á

¦²¦Ó¦É? 26 ¦²¦Å¦Ð¦Ó¦Å¦Ì¦Â¦Ñ?¦Ï¦Ô 2012 2:53 ¦Ì.¦Ì., ¦Ï ¦Ö¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç? Philip Hager <philip.hager at googlemail.com<mailto:philip.hager at googlemail.com>> ?¦Ã¦Ñ¦Á¦×¦Å:
Dear fellow list members,

Although I do think that all this discussion about the ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ?? article is really out of proportion, I could not resist responding: the previous respondant (Ath. Grammenos) wrote that some of syriza's components are not much different to the golden dawn and that this is commonplace knowledge within Greek society. Without meaning to be disrespectful to a fellow MGSAer I'd like to say that none of syriza's members is a verified murderer; articles such as the one in kathimerini (or many in kathimerini and other newspapers for that matter) are responsible for equating syriza with golden dawn; an axiom that then becomes commonsensical because of the Greek media propaganda against those who propose a different solution to the crisis (the golden dawn is not included here, because they do not propose a solution, but mass extermination).

Another thing I wanted to stress here is that the academic way of talking about things, does not reproduce newspaper articles without critically interrogating them and does not use opinions expressed in a newspaper as evidence. Moreover, the use of words such as democracy, freedom (of speech or other) seem to be used in a very particular (and thus limited) way by both ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ?? and Ath. Grammenos (in his latest contribution to this thread): in their understanding democracy is (restricted to) a political system where the absolute truth of neoliberalism must be the compass of all political parties (therefore anyone who against this kind of bourgeois/ liberal/representative democracy becomes an anti-democrat) and freedom of expression is (restricted to) the right to express the neoliberal consensus (therefore anyone who presents an opinion outside the neoliberal consensus is against the freedom of expression(!).

Athanasios Grammenos wrote of a return to the middle ages. Indeed neoliberal rationality constitutes exactly this: a return to the darkest pages of our history books.

Philip Hager

On 25 Sep 2012, at 18:28, athanasios grammenos wrote:

¦¤¦Å¦Í ¦Ö¦Ø¦Ñ¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦Ë? ¦Ë?¦Ã¦É¦Á ?¦Ó¦Á¦Í ¦Ê?¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? "¦Ò¦Ó?¦Æ¦Å¦É" ¦Å¦É¦Ñ¦Ø¦Í?¦Á. ¦¥?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Õ¦Á¦Í?? ?¦Ó¦É ¦Ê¦Å¦Í¦Ó¦Ñ?¦Æ¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦Å¦Ë¦Å?¦È¦Å¦Ñ¦Ï ¦Ä¦É?¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦Ï, ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç ?¦Ð¦Ï¦×¦Ç. ¦°?¦Í¦Ó¦Ø?, ¦Ç ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Ç ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Á¦Õ¦Ï¦Ô¦Ã¦Ê¦Ñ?¦Æ¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ê¦Ï¦É¦Í¦Ø¦Í?¦Á ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Ç. ¦¬¦Ð¦Ï¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Ë¦Ï¦É¦Ð?¦Í ¦Ï¦É "¦Á¦Í¦È¦Ñ¦Ø¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï¦É" ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦Ë?¦Ò¦Ó¦Á? ¦Í¦Á "¦Î¦Å¦Í?¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Ê¦Á¦Í" ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï?¦È¦Ç¦Ò¦Ç ¦Å¦Í?? ¦Ó?¦Ó¦Ï¦É¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê¦Å¦É¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô (¦Á¦Ë?¦È¦Å¦É¦Á, "¦Î¦Å¦Í?¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Ê¦Á¦Í" ? "¦Å¦Í¦Ï¦Ö¦Ë?¦È¦Ç¦Ê¦Á¦Í") ?¦Ì¦Ø? ¦Ï ¦°¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê?? ¦¥¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Ï¦Í¦Á? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ï ¦ª¦Ï¦É¦Í¦Ø¦Í¦É¦Ï¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ì?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Ï? ¦È¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Â¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë? ¦Ö¦Ñ?¦Ò¦É¦Ì¦Ï ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Í¦Á ¦Á¦Í¦Ó¦É¦Ë¦Ç¦Õ¦È¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ó¦É? ¦Æ¦Ô¦Ì?¦Ò¦Å¦É? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ã?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦¥¦Ë¦Ë?¦Ä¦Á ¦Ò?¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ¦Á. ¦ª¦Ñ?¦Ì¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ó?¦Ò¦Ï¦É ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦Ë¦Ï? ¦Ì¦É¦Ë¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦¥¦Ë¦Ë?¦Ä¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó?¦Ò¦Ï¦É ¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó¦Á¦Ë¦Á¦Â¦Á?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ó¦É ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ì¦Â¦Á?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ò' ¦Á¦Ô¦Ó?¦Í.

?¦Ó¦É ¦Ê?¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Å? ¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ò¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦²¦´¦±¦©¦¦¦¡ ¦Ë¦Å¦É¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô¦Ñ¦Ã¦Ï?¦Í ?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ç ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò? ¦¡¦Ô¦Ã? ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ê?¦Ó¦É ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ä?¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ë?¦Ï¦Í ?¦Í¦Á ¦Ì¦Å¦Ã?¦Ë¦Ï ¦Ì?¦Ñ¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦Å¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Í¦É¦Ê?? ¦Ê¦Ï¦É¦Í¦Ø¦Í?¦Á?. ¦£¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Ë¦Ï¦É¦Ð?¦Í ¦Ê?¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï¦É "¦Ò¦Ï¦Ê?¦Ñ¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É"; ¦£¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Á¦Ê¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ê¦Ï¦É¦Í¦Ø¦Í?¦Á! ?¦Ò¦Ø? ¦Ã¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó¦Ï¦É¦Ê¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë? ¦Ì¦Á¦Ê¦Ñ¦É?, ?¦Ò¦Ø? ¦Ð?¦Ë¦É ¦Ã¦É¦Á¦Ó? ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í "¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Ç" ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦È¦Ï?¦Í ¦Í¦Á ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Ä?¦Ò¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê?? ¦È?¦Ò¦Å¦É?, ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó? ¦Â?¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ¦Å¦Ã¦Ì?¦Í¦Å? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Á ¦¥¦¡¦¬¦É¦Ê? ¦Ò?¦Í¦Ä¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ì¦Á. ?¦Ó¦Ò¦É ¦Å¦Î¦Ç¦Ã¦Å?¦Ó¦Á¦É ?¦Ó¦É ¦Á¦Í?¦Ö¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ê?¦È¦Å ¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã?? ?¦Ò¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ð¦Ë¦Ç¦Ñ¦Ï¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ?¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê¦Ô¦Ê¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ¦Å? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í "¦Ë?¦Ò¦Ó¦Á" ¦Á¦Ë¦Ë? ¦È?¦Ã¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï ?¦Ó¦Á¦Í ¦Ê?¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Å¦Ê¦Õ¦Ñ¦Á¦Ò¦Ó¦Å? ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ê¦Ñ¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦±¦É¦Æ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦Ò¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦¡¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ó¦Å¦Ñ?, ?¦Í¦Á ¦Ê?¦Ì¦Ì¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ò¦Ó¦É? ¦Ó?¦Î¦Å¦É? ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦Ð¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ë¦Á¦Ì¦Â?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Á¦Í¦Ó¦É¦¥¦Ô¦Ñ¦Ø¦Ð¦Á?¦Ò¦Ó??, ¦Á¦Í¦Ó¦É¦¡¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Ê¦Á¦Í¦Ï??, ¦Á¦Í¦Ó¦É¦¥¦Â¦Ñ¦Á?¦Ï¦Ô? (¦Í¦Á¦É, ¦Ê¦Á¦É ?¦Ì¦Ø?!), ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ì¦Ì¦Ï¦Ô¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ó?? ¦Ì?¦Ö¦Ñ¦É ¦Á¦Í¦Á¦Ñ¦Ö¦É¦Ê¦Ï??, ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ?¦Ë¦Ï¦É ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦È¦Ô¦Ì¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Á¦Í¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦Á¦Ò¦Ó¦É¦Ê?? ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Ï¦Ê¦Ñ¦Á¦Ó?¦Á?. ?¦Í¦Á ¦Ê?¦Ì¦Ì¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô "¦Ö¦Á?¦Ä¦Å?¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Á¦Ô¦Ó¦É? ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô¦Ë¦Ï¦Õ?¦Ñ¦Ø¦Í". ?¦Í¦Á ¦Ê?¦Ì¦Ì¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ï ¦Á¦Ñ¦Ö¦Ç¦Ã?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ?¦Ö¦Å¦É ¦Ð¦Å¦É: "¦¯¦É ¦Í?¦Ì¦Ï¦É ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦×¦Ç¦Õ?¦Æ¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦¢¦Ï¦Ô¦Ë?, ¦È¦Á ¦Á¦Ê¦Ô¦Ñ?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Å¦Ì?? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦Å¦Æ¦Ï¦Ä¦Ñ?¦Ì¦É¦Ï"! ¦³?¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Ï¦Ê¦Ñ¦Á¦Ó¦É¦Ê?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á!

¦­¦Á ¦Ë¦Ï¦É¦Ð?¦Í ¦Ð?¦Ò¦Á ¦Å¦Ñ¦Å¦È?¦Ò¦Ì¦Á¦Ó¦Á ¦Ä?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦Ñ¦È¦Ñ¦Ï, ?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ê¦Å?¦Ì¦Å¦Í¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦ª¦Á¦Ò¦É¦Ì?¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ?¦Ä¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Õ¦Ç¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ?¦Ä¦Á (¦Á¦Ñ¦Ê¦Å¦Ó? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ï¦Ð¦Ï?¦Á ?¦Ö¦Ø ¦Ò¦Ó¦Å?¦Ë¦Å¦É ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó? ¦Ê¦Á¦É¦Ñ¦Ï??) ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ï¦Ñ¦É¦Ò¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï¦É ¦Å¦Ä? ¦Ì?¦Ò¦Á ¦Ê?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ?¦Ó¦É ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Á¦Í¦Ó¦É¦Ë¦Á¦Ì¦Â?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É. ¦°¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ø¦Ð¦É¦Ê?, ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ô¦É¦Ï¦È¦Å¦Ó? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ì?¦Á ?¦Ð¦Ï¦×¦Ç, ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦È? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦Ó¦Á¦Í¦Ï?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Õ¦Ô¦Ò¦É¦Ï¦Ã¦Í¦Ø¦Ì?¦Á, ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ñ¦Á¦Ó¦Ç¦Ã¦É¦Ê? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦È¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ø¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê?¦Í ¦Ê¦Ï¦Ì¦Ì?¦Ó¦Ø¦Í, ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ä?¦Ö¦Ï¦Ì¦Á¦É ?¦Ì¦Ø? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Õ¦Ï¦Ñ¦Å¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Ø? ¦Â¦Á¦Ò¦É¦Ê? "¦Ò¦Ô¦Í¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ò¦Á" ¦Ä¦É¦Á¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ò¦Ð¦Á¦È? ¦Í¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ö¦Ñ¦Ç¦Ò¦É¦Ì¦Ï¦Ð¦Ï¦É?¦Ò¦Ø ¦Å¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ä¦Ï¦Ì¦Ç¦Ó¦É¦Ê?. ¦µ¦Á?¦Í¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ?¦Ì¦Ø? ?¦Ó¦É ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ?¦Ñ¦È¦Ñ¦Ï ¦Ê¦Á¦È¦Á¦Ô¦Ó? ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ¦Å¦Í¦Ï¦Ö¦Ë¦Å?, ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ç ¦Ò¦Ô¦Ã¦Ê¦Å¦Ê¦Ñ¦É¦Ì?¦Í¦Ç ?¦Ð¦Ï¦×¦Ç. ¦ª¦É ¦Á¦Í ¦Ò¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á "¦Á¦Ê¦Á¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Á?¦Ê?" ¦Ë?¦Ò¦Ó¦Á ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ã?¦Í¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ä¦Å¦Ê¦Ó?? ?¦Ë¦Å? ¦Ï¦É (¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Ï¦Ê¦Ñ¦Á¦Ó¦É¦Ê??)  ¦Á¦Ð?¦×¦Å¦É?, ¦Á¦Í ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ê¦Ë¦Å?¦Ï¦Í¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ê?¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Å? ¦Å¦Ó¦Ò¦É¦È¦Å¦Ë¦É¦Ê? ¦Ó?¦Ó¦Å ¦Ì?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Á¦Í¦Á¦Â¦É?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ï ¦¬¦Å¦Ò¦Á?¦Ø¦Í¦Á?; ¦°?¦Ñ¦Á¦Ò¦Å ¦Ê¦Á¦É¦Ñ?? ¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó?¦Ó¦Å ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô ?¦Ê¦Á¦É¦Ã¦Á¦Í ¦Á¦Í¦È¦Ñ?¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ð¦Ô¦Ñ?!

¦¥¦Í ¦Ó?¦Ë¦Å¦É, ¦Ê?¦Ó¦É ¦Ì¦Ç ¦Ö¦Ñ?¦Ò¦É¦Ì¦Ï ¦Ã¦É¦Á ?¦Í¦Á¦Í ¦Ê¦Ë?¦Ä¦Ï ?¦Ò¦Ø? ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ö¦Ñ?¦Ò¦É¦Ì¦Ï ¦Ã¦É¦Á ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Å? ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Å?. ¦£¦É¦Á ?¦Ò¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ä¦Å¦Í ¦Ì¦Ð¦Ï¦Ñ¦Ï?¦Í ¦Í¦Á ¦Á¦Ð¦Ï¦Ä¦Å¦Ö¦Ó¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ë¦Å¦Ô¦È¦Å¦Ñ?¦Á ¦Ë?¦Ã¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ô¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Ö¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ä?¦Ï ¦Ä¦Ñ?¦Ì¦Ï¦É: ¦Ï ¦Ð¦Ñ?¦Ó¦Ï? ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦Å¦Ô¦Ó¦Ï?¦Í ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦¶¦¡ ? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦²¦´¦±¦©¦¦¦¡. ¦¯ ¦Ä¦Å?¦Ó¦Å¦Ñ¦Ï? ¦Í¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ë?¦Î¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Å¦Í¦Á¦Ë¦Ë¦Á¦Ê¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Á¦Ð¦Á¦Ò¦Ö?¦Ë¦Ç¦Ò¦Ç.

¦ª¦Ë¦Å?¦Í¦Ø ¦Ì¦Å ¦Ì¦É¦Á ¦Õ¦Ñ?¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ò¦Ð¦Ï¦Ô¦Ä¦Á¦É?¦Ó¦Å¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ô ¦Ò?¦Ã¦Ö¦Ñ¦Ï¦Í¦Ï¦Ô ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Í¦Á ¦°¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê¦Ï? ¦¥¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ó?¦Ì¦Ï¦Í¦Á ¦Ê. ¦²¦Ó?¦È¦Ç ¦ª¦Á¦Ë?¦Â¦Á (¦Á¦Ð? ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í "¦ª¦Á¦È¦Ç¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ¦É¦Í?", ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ê¦Á¦Ö?¦Ð¦Ï¦Ð¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô?):
"¦¯ ¦²¦´¦±¦©¦¦¦¡ ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô 2012 ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï ¦°¦¡¦²¦¯¦ª ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô 1981. ¦³¦Ï ¦°¦¡¦²¦¯¦ª ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô 2012 ¦Å?¦Í¦Á¦É ¦Ç ¦¥¦¤¦§¦ª ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô 1977. ¦ª¦Á¦É ¦Ï ¦²¦Á¦Ì¦Á¦Ñ?? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô 2012 ¦Å¦Ó¦Ï¦É¦Ì?¦Æ¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Í¦Á ¦Ô¦Ð¦Ï¦Ä¦Ô¦È¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦Ñ?¦Ë¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦£¦Å¦Ø¦Ñ¦Ã?¦Ï¦Ô ¦±?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç ¦Ó¦Ï 1981. ¦²¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦Ñ?¦Ë¦Ï ¦Ó¦Ç? <¦¡¦Ô¦Ñ¦É¦Á¦Í??>, ¦Ó¦Á ¦Ì¦Ð¦Ë¦Ï¦Ã¦Ê. ¦¯ ¦³¦Ò?¦Ð¦Ñ¦Á? ¦Á¦Í¦Á¦Â¦É?¦Í¦Å¦É ¦Ó¦Ï¦Í ¦¡¦Í¦Ä¦Ñ?¦Á, ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ð¦É¦Ï ¦Í?¦Ï ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ð¦É¦Ï ¦Á¦Ì?¦Ñ¦Õ¦Ø¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Å¦Ð¦Á¦Ñ¦Ö¦É?¦Ó¦É¦Ê¦Ï. ¦´¦Ð?¦Ò¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ë¦Ð?¦Ä¦Á, ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Á¦Í¦Á¦Ó¦Ñ¦Ï¦Ð? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ô¦Ç¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ?¦Á. ¦¬¦É¦Ë?¦Å¦É ¦Ã¦É¦Á ¦Å¦È¦Í¦É¦Ê? ¦Á¦Í¦Å¦Î¦Á¦Ñ¦Ó¦Ç¦Ò?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ë¦Á?¦Ê? ¦Ê¦Ô¦Ñ¦É¦Á¦Ñ¦Ö?¦Á. ¦´¦Ð?¦Ò¦Ö¦Å¦Ó¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Á¦Ô¦Ó?¦Ö¦Ñ¦Ï¦Í¦Á ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Å¦Ô¦Ç¦Ì¦Å¦Ñ?¦Á ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦Å¦Ô¦Ñ? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ?¦Ñ¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ó¦Ç? ¦Ë¦É¦Ó?¦Ó¦Ç¦Ó¦Á?: ¦Ë¦Å¦Õ¦Ó? ¦Ô¦Ð?¦Ñ¦Ö¦Ï¦Ô¦Í. ¦¯¦É ¦Á¦Í¦Ó?¦Ð¦Á¦Ë¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô ¦È¦Á ¦Å¦Ð¦É¦Ò¦Ç¦Ì?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô¦Í ¦Ó¦Ç ¦Ä¦Ç¦Ì¦Á¦Ã¦Ø¦Ã?¦Á ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Ê¦É¦Í¦Ä?¦Í¦Ï¦Ô?, ¦Á¦Ë¦Ë? ¦Ð¦Ï¦É¦Ï? ¦Ó¦Ï¦Ô? ¦Á¦Ê¦Ï?¦Å¦É;"

Further reading
¦§ ¦Ì?¦Í¦Ç ¦Á¦Ð?¦Í¦Ó¦Ç¦Ò¦Ç ¦Ò¦Ó¦Ç¦Í ¦Ð¦Ï¦Ë¦É¦Ó¦É¦Ê? ¦Â?¦Á

¦ª?¦Í¦Ó¦Ï ?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦ª¦ª¦¥

2012 - 1981, deja vu

¦¥¦Í ¦Å¦Ë¦Å¦Ô¦È¦Å¦Ñ?¦Á

2012/9/24 Grammenos, Dennis <d-grammenos at neiu.edu<mailto:d-grammenos at neiu.edu>>
I thought the Nikos Chrysoloras piece in question was an "op-ed."  It sure sounds like that. I wouldn't go as far as to baptize it "journalistic analysis" though whatever that may be in this age of blogging.  As for the "news" and "information" it purportedly provides (valid or otherwise) I had to re-read it to make sure that I hadn't miss anything.  I hadn't. No "news" there, just recycled equivalencies for the least common denominator, verging on a type of discursive mud-slinging that has always been common fodder for Greece's embedded "journalists".

Does it have a place on MGSA-L? Thankfully it was just a link to it for those who care to waste their time reading it.

And, I did waste my time! What a syllogistic mess:) One walks away with the equation SYRIZA=Xrusa Auga.  Wow.

Giasas paidia,

Dennis Grammenos

From: mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu> [mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu<mailto:mgsa-l-bounces at uci.edu>] On Behalf Of Aristide Caratzas [acaratzas at gmail.com<mailto:acaratzas at gmail.com>]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 1:37 AM
To: MGSA List
Cc: Neni Panourgia
Subject: Re: [MGSA-L] Syriza vs. Xrisi Aygi column ¦³¦Ï¦Ô ¦­¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ¦Á

Actually, the posting in question has everything to do with Modern Greek Studies, it is a journalistic analysis, and it provides [unpleasant but valid] news and information.

Censorship has no place on an academic list like ours.

Aristide Caratzas

On Sep 24, 2012, at 1:22 AM, Neni Panourgia wrote:

This posting has no place on this list as it has nothing to do with
Modern Greek Studies, it is not an academic analysis, and is it not a
piece of news or information.


On 9/23/2012 3:50 PM, Roland Moore wrote:
A subscriber to this list sent this link to a Kathimerini column.  For those subscribers who wish to follow recent showdowns between supporters of Syriza and Xrysi Augi...

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From: athanasios grammenos <athanasiosgrammenos at gmail.com<mailto:athanasiosgrammenos at gmail.com>>

    Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 10:18:59 +0300
    Subject: ¦¡¦Ë?¦Î¦Ç? ¦³¦Ò?¦Ð¦Ñ¦Á?, ?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦¬¦É¦Ó ¦±?¦Ì¦Í¦Å?
    ¦¡¦Ë?¦Î¦Ç? ¦³¦Ò?¦Ð¦Ñ¦Á?, ?¦Ð¦Ø? ¦¬¦É¦Ó ¦±?¦Ì¦Í¦Å?

    ¦³¦Ï¦Ô ¦­¦É¦Ê¦Ï¦Ô ¦¶¦Ñ¦Ô¦Ò¦Ï¦Ë¦Ø¦Ñ¦Á

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

Professor Neni Panourgi¨¢

Visiting Associate Professor
Bard College
Anthropology Department
Hopson 301
Warden's Hall, PO Box 5000
Annandale-on-Hudson, NY 12504
(845) 752-7217<tel:%28845%29%20752-7217>

Heyman Center for the Humanities,
Columbia University,
New York, NY 10027

Dangerous Citizens. The Greek Left and the Terror of the State

Ethnographica Moralia Experiments in Interpretive Anthropology

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

-- --
And if you find her poor, Ithaka won¡¯t have fooled you.
Wise as you will have become, so full of experience,
you will have understood by then what these Ithakas mean.

Constantine Cavafy

<¦¥¦Ò¦Ì?¦Í ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Í¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ã?¦Í¦Ï?, ¦Ø? ¦Ç ¦Ó¦Å ¦Õ¦Ø¦Í? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ç ¦Ð?¦Ó¦Ñ¦É¦Ï? ¦Ð¦Á¦É¦Ä¦Å?¦Á ¦Ì¦Á¦Ñ¦Ó¦Ô¦Ñ¦Å?>
¦°¦Ë?¦È¦Ø¦Í ¦£¦Å¦Ì¦É¦Ò¦Ó??

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

-- --
And if you find her poor, Ithaka won¡¯t have fooled you.
Wise as you will have become, so full of experience,
you will have understood by then what these Ithakas mean.

Constantine Cavafy

<¦¥¦Ò¦Ì?¦Í ?¦Ë¦Ë¦Ç¦Í¦Å? ¦Ó¦Ï ¦Ã?¦Í¦Ï?, ¦Ø? ¦Ç ¦Ó¦Å ¦Õ¦Ø¦Í? ¦Ê¦Á¦É ¦Ç ¦Ð?¦Ó¦Ñ¦É¦Ï? ¦Ð¦Á¦É¦Ä¦Å?¦Á ¦Ì¦Á¦Ñ¦Ó¦Ô¦Ñ¦Å?>
¦°¦Ë?¦È¦Ø¦Í ¦£¦Å¦Ì¦É¦Ò¦Ó??

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l

List-Info: https://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/mgsa-l


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://maillists.uci.edu/mailman/public/mgsa-l/attachments/20120928/603d939c/attachment.html 

More information about the MGSA-L mailing list