A Good Example

Often in past articles, both here and in my main one ( stigmata ) I have given the theory and basic trajectories of how common logic and hard fact is attacked by emotional violence, propaganda and attempt to dazzle through conjectures and unfounded statements that at best consist of the attacker’s personal and very subjective opinion. Today, I am very pleased to be given the chance to offer a real example that illustrates exactly what is going on and how a Nation is being pushed and prodded to give up what has been always factually, anthropologically and historically obvious to any objective observer.

A person that will not give their proper name, so that we can see the true identity and life ( and therefore estimate the interests this person is serving as well as his / her motivation and capacity ), wrote an answer to this blog, taking a lot of time and space to try and obscure the arguments presented without any counter- argument.

Below I will give the article almost in its entirety, using it as an example to what is going on as the mainstream propaganda Greeks are being brainwashed with and have been for some time.

1. Primarily a person seeking to derail a sound and true fact will attempt to provide information he / she will call evidence of their allegation but in reality is part of a much bigger whole disproving them altogether : The person we are using as an example today provided the following self contradicting but very assertive presentation of ‘ fact’ which is disproven by the evidence provided to support it, as is obvious on a closer careful look :
“UPDATE: Macedonia was in the past regarded by its own inhabitants as a wide geographic region, inhabited by many ethnic groups. In the middle of the 19th Century, the Slavs of Macedonia thought of themselves as “Macedonian Bulgarians“. This is well known, of course: The “Macedonian” ethnic identity of their modern descendants did not exist at the time. This fact is evident e.g. in the front cover of a 19th century book, “Folk songs of the Macedonian Bulgars” by Stefan Verkovic (1860)”


On a superficial perusal this seems like a fact. However, it is a methodological mistake when one seeks to prove something scientifically, such as the nature of the inhabitants of “ a wide geographic region” without taking into account that the naming of this wide geographic region from antiquity until today has had many changes none of which included using the name Macedonia to denote anything or anyone not of Greek heritage. Especially the area in question has been named several things of which Macedonia is the most recent political move enforced by a dictator and not the result of age old ethnic identity and the evolving or development of it. Titles of pop culture books which can be named arbitrarily by their authors cannot in any case be evidence of ethnic, historical and anthropological value when history and scientific historical documents of the last three ( 3) centuries at least show otherwise.

It will, however, be fodder for making impressions and political propaganda which will not hold in the scientific community, exactly like Hitler’s invoking of the Arian Race superiority based falsely on some ( not all as should be ) philosophical theories and fabricated scientific evidence based on skull measurements which never did and never will hold on proper scientific scrutiny. He also circulated pamphlets with the prophecies of Nostradamus as sound proof of his claims and even that he did not include in its entirety because Nostradamus was not fully accommodating. Finally, the above example of the 19th century book titled provided, is not mentioned to be part of a Bulgarian political attempt to acquire Greek soil as they have many times since displayed especially during and following the 2 World Wars and therefore does not constitute proof at all of an ethnic identity but of what the attempt to use the particular name in a composite appellation can and will amount to, should it be allowed : attempt for occupation, bloodshed and breaching of Human Rights as was done by the Bulgarians and is still remembered by their victims and their descendents who are still alive.

2. The person seeking to obscure sound and valid arguments may also attempt to present a neutral fact as argument, hoping for the other person’s imagination to fill in the blanks to make it so. For example, in the article we are examining the person says :
“ However, many Greeks and (most) Slavs of today’s (wider) Macedonia are unwilling to accept anyone else being “Macedonian”, than themselves. They both seem to forget that Madeconia has been (for a very long time) a geographic region, rather than an ethnic identity, or a nationality, or an ancient State. E.g.”


The above is a fact. However, it does not prove or even make an indication as to which side is correct. There also a suspicious glossing over of information which is vital in forming an objective and well rounded outlook on the matter by phrases like “ for a very long time” which for the Slavs may amount to seventy (70) years of making such a claiming while for the Greeks it amounts to a few millennia. Also, upon closer scrutiny and content analysis, the above statement implies the animosity that does exist between the holder of a title / name and the contender and the strife that can and will be derived from it if this is not settled properly.
Then, an example is attempted to be offered by this person :

3. The example offered begins as relevant and then goes on at a tangent without sufficient explanation why it is an illustration of the fact it is strung with :
“Mrs. Olga G. Yeritsidou is a Greek psychologist (and a blogger) who declared (in response to rather moderate views I had expressed, in blog-conversation with her ) that… “in Psychology, satire is a manifestation of covert hostility and impotence (or powerlessness)”.
(in Greek, “η σάτιρα… στην ψυχολογία υποδεικνύει κεκαλυμμένη επιθετικότητα και ανημποριά από το άτομο που την εξαπολύει.”)
Well, an ENGLISH post follows, as a critique of the above quote (which is also the post-title in Greek):”

The above quote is irrelevant to the fact the person stated presented in 2. because it is not pertinent to my stance and view of the Skopjan matter but to a scientific estimation according to my application of psychological theories on the function of satire. However, satire and what I think of it has nothing to do with the Skopjan matter but everything, apparently, to do with the reason and motivation of this person’s use of my name as opposed to anyone else’s sharing my views and they are many, regardless of political affiliation, gender and age. It stands to reason because the above statement was made in an effort to make the particular person be serious about a very serious matter instead of using satire which has no purpose ( except to bully someone into remaining silent or goad someone out of a calm and controlled demeanour ) or argumentative value whatsoever.

4. A person that cannot meet another on the objective level with sound arguments will attempt to gag the one he / she cannot counter with threats of tags and branding that this person knows and abhors :
“Mrs. Yeretsidou is an extremely militant advocate of the well known “Macedonia is (only) Greek” hard-line doctrine, which is advocated today only by the Extreme Right in Greek poltiics, even though she does not appear to have any right-wing views (in any other issue than Macedonia)”.


With the above paragraph this person attempts to accuse me or my view as being that of the Junta or any such similar totalitarian and unacceptable regime which is an effort to scare people who are liberal and free spirits to even dare go against mainstream doctrine and propaganda for fear of being branded as what they most hate. He / she also calls me militant ( extremely so ) when everything that is being done is according to the law, the scientific truth and Human Rights. Of course, there is a token nod to the fact that my profile and my writings as well as my family history and personal life conduct is completely opposed to anything totalitarian and as such so do my views upon the Skopjan matter advocate freedom, peace and prosperity for all in the Balkan Peninsula. It will not, however, accommodate interests that are not the vested right of any people. Using a name that is not yours is not a vested right of anyone on any level UNLESS the rightful owner of the name gives you the right to do it.

5. To further obscure and present a person whose arguments cannot be disproven, one can resort to an attempt to ridiculize what the person is saying with a running commentary ( with words like “ wow” and an abundance of suspension points as well as a good helping of irony ) which does not, however, explain why what is being said deserves this ridicule, leaving it again to imagination to fill in the blanks. It also blends irrelevant issues with the relevant ones. For length issues I do not paste the relevant paragraphs but I shall provide the link to the text if anyone is curious.

6. A person will also attempt to misinform and instead of providing objective facts, he / she will instead present the fact in an abundance of descriptive adjectives, anxious to ensure that the reader will not stray from the trajectory this person is setting. For example, though this person does mention that I did not bother to give him / her a history lesson since he / she did not give any indication of being a serious discussion partner, this person fails to mention that I have mentioned the case of the ( official ) naming of the U.K. as U.K. and not Great Britain because France, which possesses the historically coveted by the English region of Bretagne, rightly so opposed to this appellation to protect its territorial rights and prevent further strife. Since this person appears upon content analysis to have knowledge of my views through my blogs ( i.e., has read them ) this is an inaccurate statement on his / her part.

This person also claims not to be a nationalist ( an indirect accusation that my views are extreme since mainstream propaganda portrays Nationalism as equal to Racism with the exception of ethnic badgering between countries during sports events like football events and basketball events ) and by the way he phrases the following, possibly completely uninterested to what any other country can inflict on the land he / she lives in, whether or not he / she is part of the Greek nation. Then the person proceeds to threaten again with a contradictory threat since everyone can call themselves what they want ( according to his / her article ) by stating the following :



“However, I do feel it’s very unjust for Greek Macedonians, to be eventually forced to lose the very term “Macedonia”, which should NOT be the “copyright” of anyone, anymore (I think) within the geographic region of Macedonia: Greek Macedonia, Bulgarian Macedonia, as well as the small part of (wider Geographic) Macedonia that belongs to today’s FYROM.”


Losing the term means two things : first, that we ( Greeks ) have the name or otherwise we wouldn’t be able to lose it and second, that IF WE LOSE IT, IT MEANS THAT WE WOULD BE FORBIDDEN TO USE IT, WHICH MEANS THAT NOT EVERYONE CAN CALL THEMSELVES WHAT THEY WANT AND PEOPLE ARE BOTHERED, OFFENDED OR THREATENED AND THEREFORE ACT TO PROTECT THE NAMES THEY POSSESS.


7. Then, this person proceeds to fulfil a “promise” to me ( which upon its fulfilment he / she did not in any way let me know, and it was one of my readers who dropped me a note asking me to answer it ) by trying to disprove what I have stated is the true situation regarding the Skopjan matter. Below I will paste all of it and in brackets indicate what is attempted to be achieved by this display :


“1. Macedonia and her name at this moment stand established in theory as well as in action as part/grounds of the country of Hellas (Greece).


No. I am afraid that the term “Macedonia” is now seriously in danger of becoming another country’s copyright, unless we can achieve a compromise about it. [ this is not proof but this person’s opinion which is regurgitated by the media. This is an opinion presented as fact with no support to prove it valid. That another country is claiming the name does not mean that it is not Greek and established as such.]



2. UNLESS ONE BECOMES AN INVADING FORCE THROUGH AN IMPERIALISTIC WAR, nobody can usurp the name, the lands and the history of Macedonia within the law.


No. Nobody would start an imperialistic war (against Greece) for the sake of the word “Macedonia”, although some extremists would like such a war, in BOTH countries (Greece and FYROM). [ this is not proof but this person’s opinion which is regurgitated by the media. This is an opinion presented as fact with no support to prove it valid. That another country is claiming the name does not mean that it is not Greek and established as such. History has proven that war has occurred over this name before, along with moves made by other countries’ dictators.]



3. This legality to usurp can be given ONLY DELIBERATELY AND ONLY BY HELLAS (GREECE) HERSELF.


No. That’s nonsense (or delusions of grandeur and childish omnipotence). Our problem is completely different: That the other side refuses to bargain. [ This is an attempt to ridiculize and inexplicably characterise what is a valid and provable fact. What is provided as an answer is not proof or argument but this person’s opinion. This is an opinion presented as fact with no support to prove it valid. That another country is claiming the name does not mean that it is not Greek and established as such, which is why arbitration by the U.N. is taking place and why NATO accepted it.]


CONSEQUENTLY IT IS BEING ENFORCED ON GREEKS THREATENING (of the type: ‘we made wrong moves/ we are bound by political agreements/ we will be isolated/ there will be war’) AND MANIPULATION OF DIFFERENT MANNER (of the type: ‘you are fanatics/nationalists/ cruel/ hard/ historically uneducated/ etc’) SO THAT WE WILL WILLINGLY AND ON OUR OWN GIVE THIS LEGALITY WHICH IS LACKING FROM THE CLAIMS OF THE STATE OF SKOPJE.


Nope. I’m afraid that sounds like paranoid bulshit. It also doesn’t make much sense (in English)… [ this is another attempt to characterise without backing up with arguments the characterisation. The derogatory nature of the characterisation indicates anger, helplessness to disprove the statement and pent up aggression on that person’s part. It usually takes place when a person is cornered and out of arguments, constituting an attempt to derail from the objective to the subjective personal levels. It also displays a poor knowledge of the English syntax ( however unusual ) but this is particular to this person and not the general strategy this person is using.]


IF WE ACCEPT ANY KIND OF NAME CONTAINING THE TERM ‘MACEDONIA’ (that is, if we compromise as we are being pressured to do) :
1. WE WILLINGLY LEGALIZE THE STATE OF SKOPJE IN ALL ITS CLAIMS AND DEMANDS.


No. If we can achieve an agreement safeguarding the rights of Greek Macedonians, then no claims and demands can ever again be justified. If -on the other hand- we stubbornly insist on a name that does not even contain the word “Macedonia”, then the other side will never agree to this! So, emotionally (and otherwise) we will then acquire an eternal enemy, thereby legalising the other side’s claims and demands, ever worsening, as time passes. [ This is again all conjectural and lacking the common knowledge that when you give in to an irrational and unjust claim you simply indicate that the one who claimed it should have asked for more.]


2. WE DENOUNCE MACEDONIA (in terms of the land, the people, the history and culture)IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS WE NAME OURSELVES AS CAPTORS, TRESSPASSERS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THEY ARE ACCUSING US OF.



No. It is our historic obligation to achieve a peaceful compromise with those Slavic people whose presence in our own country (as well as other regions of the Balkans) was just as valid as our own, once upon a time. But we do have to give up psychological denial: Denial of the fact that they were just as native within the wider geographic region of Macedonia just as our own (native) Greek Macedonians. [ This lacks historical documentation and it is an insult to the men and women we honour in our National Anniversaries who obviously did not think they were obligated to give up what was rightfully theirs and shed their blood to keep it. It is also ethnic slander because it does not indicate how any Slavic or other people coming to reside in Greece became absorbed by the indigenous population instead of forming minorities as is being implied here. ]


WHAT WE MUST DO:
WE STAND FAST TO NOT RECOGNISING OR ADMITTING THE CLAIMS OF THE SKOPJANS AND THEIR ALLIES AND NOT EVER ACCEPT THE TERM ‘MACEDONIA’ IN THEIR STATE’S NAME OR ANY COMPROMISE AS THEY ARE PRESSURING US. SUCH COMPROMISE WILL LEAD TO ETHNIC DECOMPOSITION AND DESTABILIZATION OF THE PEACE IN THE BALKANS.


No. This extremist attitude is advocated ONLY by the Extreme Right (in Greece), today. ALL other political parties have agreed on a moderate stance (of a composite name containing the word “Macedonia”) instead. [ This is not argument disproving or proving anything except an unacceptable attempt to compartmentalise pluralism of opinion into what political parties say. It also is a greater disrespect to any individual, Greek or not, as it is implying an incapacity of individuals to be able to think critically and instead relying on party politics to form an opinion. Also, an opinion is not copyright to a political party. Anyone can have it and in the same time not be part of it or use it in the way the alluded to party is, which is not in any way in the interests of the true Greek people. ]


ATTENTION! THE ONLY WAR WHICH CAN BE WAGED IF WE DO NOT COMPROMISE IS AGGRESSIVE / IMPERIALISTIC AGAINST US, WHICH IS VERY HARD TO ACHIEVE BY THE STATE OF SKOJE ALONE, WHICH WILL BE FORCED TO TAKE ON THE ROLE THAT IS BEING ATTEMPTED TO BE PINNED ON US: CONDOTTIERES AND TRESPASSERS.



No. Such war (although at the moment unlikely) can happen anyway, regardless of how the other side is called officially. As a matter of fact, war-like sentiments are likely to increase on both sides, if an agreement is not reached that saves the dignity of both. [ Again this is an unfounded opinion without any argumentative support. ]


IF WE COMPROMISE THE ROLE OF THE TRESPASSERS WILL HAVE BEEN ATTRIBUTED TO US WITH OUR OWN CONSENT AND THE WAR THAT WILL BE WAGED WILL BE LIBERATING, JUST AS IT HAS HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE CASES OF IRAQ AND YUGOSLAVIA.


No. There is nobody to liberate (unless the tiny minority of Macedonian Slavs in Greece is overestimated by our own… paranoid national imagination). [ Again this is an unfounded opinion without any argumentative support. It also is another attempt to ridiculize. ]


IF WE DO NOT COMPROMISE, THERE IS A CHANCE TO UPHOLD AND KEEP THE PEACE IN OUR REGION AND OUR NATION INTACT.


No. Only if a reasonable compromise is not mutually accepted, hostile feelings can get the chance of being cultivated in both countries, against each other; certainly not helpful for Peace. [ Again this is an unfounded opinion without any argumentative support. Peace is achieved when everyone’s boundaries are extremely clear. Any parent with two children is aware of this fact. ]


IF WE DO COMPROMISE, THIS OPPORTUNITY WILL BE GONE FOR EVER.
No, Absolutely Not True: We have ALREADY compromised. It’s now the OTHER side’s obligation, to respect this compromise, and respond to it…” [ Again this is an unfounded opinion without any argumentative support. Without a National referendum the diplomatic strategy followed only reflects the opinions and interests served by anyone else except the Greek people. ]


This person rambles on and on in the same way which is typical and identical and falling in the obscuring strategies discussed and illustrated. Time and length do not allow me to continue reiterating how so called statements this person makes are unfounded / slanted / misleading or simple attempts to ridiculize or call names. Any person interested can do that on their own time by following the link I will provide at the end of the article. I will finish today’s illustration of how opinion leaders attempt to intimidate those with critical thinking and objective thought while hiding behind a pseudoname which grants them impunity and the capacity to argue for both sides depending on where the wind blows, with this fine specimen :


“So, an uncompromising attitude, that depends on the highly arrogant, irrational premise that we can dictate to another independent nation how to call themselves, is justified and sanctified as an absolute logical prerequisite for Peace in our region; Not only peace, but for the very integrity of Greece (keeping our nation “intact”). (wow…)
I.e. Mrs. Yeretsidou imagines that as soon as a certain small neighbouring country is officially recognised internationally as “Macedonia” (without any adjective or any geographic qualification) then the path towards instability, war and the destruction of the Greek nation will follow, as an inescapable logical consequence!
-How paranoid! Well, 120 countries have already accepted FYROM as “Republic of Macedonia” and there have been no such evil consequences!”

It is easy to detect all the stratagems : false characterisation ( arrogant, irrational premise when the premise is defendable by law and Human Rights ), unfounded claims ( that we cannot and apparently should not prevent another country from calling itself something that is ours, not as is attempted to be presented dictating in general what the name should be ) and gratuitous name calling ( paranoid, arrogant, etc ) without the presentation of a single argument except of the typical manipulator’s tenet “ THAT’S WHAT EVERYONE WANTS”( if 120 countries have accepted it it does not mean we must, as the country of the U.S.A. has displayed often on environmental and other issues including Human Rights and Nuclear Weapons while everyone else – literally- abides by them. It also is not important how many countries have accepted something but if the crucial ones within the matter – in this case Greece, as the power of the veto displayed – have ).

Link to all of the article, as promised: http://omadeon.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/macedonian-salad/