Talk:Communist Party of Greece/Archive 2

To be included in article

" In the mid 1960s the U.S. State Department estimated the party membership to be approximately 30 000." --Soman 19:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I have a table with the number of members of the CPG for a long period. Maybe we can include that in the article. -- Magioladitis 20:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. --Soman 20:58, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The table I have gives data until 1967. I added a part of the table and I gave the source. Soman, your source in interesting. According to the table i give the membership of the CPG in 1967 was 100-600 (until the Juda). And this is from two different sources and the official documents of the CPG -- Magioladitis 21:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I disagree on this table, even if it is crossrefered with sources coming from KKE itself. The point is that the power in numbers of KKE has no significant historical value. KKE had 2000 imprisoned members in 1941, and 800.000 armed partizans and civilians in 1944. One can not derive any conclusion from such a table for KKE. There is another issue: KKE is not realising - not after 50 years or so- the actual number of its party members for security reasons that are based on its long history of mass procecutions of its members. Therefore, I believe that in wiki article it should clearly stated that the member volume is not crutial for KKE development throughout its history, but we can use some of this info for highlight moments and only if it is trippled crossed. US inteligence and Security Police reviews are not very good sources...

Dkace 13:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

As you can see from the table in the link, two different sources gave the number of the members of the CPG exactly before the Junta only some months after the restoration of Democracy. The number of the members of the CPG during the WWII were released immediately to all the members and some years after the documents were published. Moreover, the membership of a party has historical/research value. Numbers are coming from official documents, CPG's publications and accurate historicists.

These kind of statistics are very common in parties. Many parties release the number of its members in every congress. This was done by CPSU too. -- Magioladitis 14:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't disagree that when two sources are used then numbers such as these can be used in wikipedia. My concern is that when tlking about the CPG these numbers are only known to its Central Commitee, especialy in times of procecution and underground action. I.E. you publish a number 450.000 members on 1944 September and 45.000 October ( which I am most certain is incorect). During the restoration of KKE historical Documents in 1994, I came up with a file that was some kind of report indicating 800.000 members in Greece. I can't back it up, I don't know if it is released. I can only assume from the political circumstances that this might be the case, as EAM had 2.000.000 people on its ranks with KKE "dominating" most of this number.

I believe that a note should be added based on the above. I believe that Magioladitis should add the change. Dkace 20:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

They are fair reasons why the number dropped from 450k to 45k. The first is that 20,000 members were canceled from the party. The second is that 250k members were send to the Agricultural party. Moreover, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The articles are based in the historical truth so far. I understand your objections but if an official source doubts for the facts published has to do it officially. Since these numbers were published by the CPG and in some cases recorded by independent historicists what exactly can we do?

I think the document your read should be about EAM and not the CPG. Of course I can't be sure. Something else: Have in mind that and non-communists parties may lies about the numbers of their members and many other facts they may be different than we think they are. The journalists, the historicists wright the things they wright based on the given facts. If facts change the point of our view will change, the result will change. If you have any source that disputes the numbers given in these documents we can record it.

I hope all this doesn't end to a personal rivalry between you and me. I am just a Wikipedian as you. I really appreciate that you didn't just edit the article and we started a conversation. I hope more people participate and we read other opinions about that. If the majority has the same opinion with you I'll change the entry. In fact, I find this table really interesting and I think Soman does too. -- Magioladitis 21:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not issuing my point in discussion to create a "personal rivalry". For what is worth, I really appreciaty your attitude and Damac's as well, so far. It is the reason why I am suggesting and I am not stepping in, to do changes of my own.

Regarding the membership table: For the time being I will stick with your data. Although it stil looks wrong in 1944, I have no source to back up a change. If I come up with something I will post it in discussion and then we can edit it.

Regarding changes that have been done: I first found very annoying that KKE's history in wiki had sources others but KKE itself. Not only that; As some people have already post in discussion it was the anti-communists that were trying to "tell the story". If you check - and I believe you allready have- all my posts in discussion, I am trying to find the "golden cut" between an anti-communist and a communist in order to serv wikipedia's objectives the best way possible. It is good that there are people that can balance this situation and at least give facts instead of arguments regarding history. I hope we continue this close cooperation.

80.76.56.51 07:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

Revision Control and accepted sources

I apologise to Damac for revising more than once his input for Zachariadis second and third letter. I believe that the referenced book " The black Bible of Communism" is not only a biased reference but an unsientific novel. If wikipedia accepts such references, then we have to write down different versions of its era, not present it as "gobal" truth. It is also well known that newspaper "To BHMA" and Giannis Marinos are not only on different sides than KKE but there are sworn enemies. Therefor I believe that there point of view can be hosted only for historical remarks that have to do with both political sides, not for solely for KKE side ( as the letters of Zachariadis are). Once this stuff is cleared I believe the article will be universally accepted. For the time being, the discussion page is showing that KKE's history article in wiki is becoming a rival ground for conflicting political forces and I believe that this is not the point of wiki. I would appreciate your approach on this issues in order to move forward with our contribution . Thank you, Dimitris Karavidas alias D.K. Ace

Dimitris, you may not agree with "The black Bible of Communism" (a book written by mostly left-wing French intellectuals critical of Stalinism) and TO BHMA (a center-left Athens newspaper) but the fact remains: the former is an international bestseller, and the the latter a mainstream and well-balanced newspaper with one of the largest circulations in Greece. It is interesting to note that the Greek edition of the "Black Bible" includes a lot of details on the intra-communist purges within KKE (Troskyites, etc) which are issues that are well worthy to be included in tis article. Furthermore, TO BHMA reflects an opinion consensus that is wider than the official party-line of KKE. Of course, feel free to also quote official KKE references, if so that all opinions may be read. The goal of us all is for the article to present the issue in a well-rounded way. Peace, Rastapopoulos 13:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

This is my point exactly! We can't have a well-rounded presentation if we quote opinions of authors bittered or favorite from KKE ( for this article). We have to remain on facts not to what the author thinks that these facts mean to his POV! I welcome any part of this book if it is the fact of what happened. I will be more detailed: You quote this book and Marinos to show that KKE had an anti-war line during the Italian invasion. Period. Other, more detailed documents, show that KKE had expressed its anti-war line with Zachariadis first letter from prison, that the underground comitee was not welcoming this letter because they were stacked on there anti-imperialist war line and that at the same time and since 1939 Comitern had critised the underground comitee for wrong uproach against the possible Italian invasion! You miss the point that KKE was bits and pieces and at the same time you lie about Velouchiotis! His efforts for anti-occupation /partizan army formation where started early in 1941. So, where is the rounding-way of this approach? My point is not to present the opinion of the writers on those books - any books- rather than to present the facts as we find them.Period. Know if Marinos wants to write the history of KKE, good luck, but we can't accepted as it is! He is trying to cover his bosses -Lamprakis- history, so why should I have him os reference. From what I know, even Zachos Chantzifwtiou can write about KKE history in Athens- would it be a document? No! I would very much like to hear all opinions of people contributing to this article. It will be good to finalize a universally agreed policy and stop playing cat & mouse with this articleDkace 13:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Please take a breath and think about what you just wrote:

1. Zachariadis first made a patriotic statement about the invasion

2. He retracted it because the underground committee's anti-imperialist line.

3. The underground committee was wrong, because Comintern had criticized it since 1939

It is do evident that this is full of contradictions!

1. Why did the "underground" committee not "listen" to Comintern?

2. What about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Stalin and Hitler? Was it a myth? Did it not influence the position of KKE at the time? Did Comintern not hear about it?

3. You imply Zachariadis was wrong to issue the anti-imperialist letters because Comintern was in favor of Greece resisting the Italians. So are you admitting that KKE's positions were (or should have been) directly controlled by the USSR. What kind of an independent party was KKE? Why did the KKE committee make a mistake was and confuse Comintern's orders?

4. Why, in your opinion, did Zachariadis retract his first letter?

5. How do you explain that KKE changes its "anti-imperialist" line when Hitler invaded the USSR? Were the problematic communications between KKE and Comintern restored then by coincidence?

6. Did Comintern also criticise the Poles for not fighting hard-enough against the Nazis and the Soviets during the invasion?

Rastapopoulos 13:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Firstly, Zachariadis really wrote these three letters. They were published by the CC of the CPG in 1955. There are also available in internet. I can give you links if you want. Did he changed his approach? Well, any document is written under certain circumstances and doesn't apply in all the cases forever. He certainly didn't change his aim: To create a new country, the Democratic Republic of Greece.

Secondly, I think what is important for wikipedia is how the line the CC of the CPG gave t the communists affected the history. Thanks to Zachariadis we had the great resistance epic of EAM/ELAS. The CPG didn't stop there, it said that the war must continue against the greek government and started a second war against the Greek urban class. I think these are the facts which must be stated.

Firstly, you claim that his aim was to create the "Democratic" Republic of Greece. Zacharidis's/your (Stalinist) definition of Democratic is completely at odds with the consensus definition. I understand that when you say "Democratic" you imply totalitarian one-party marxist regimes regimes such as today's North Korea, Zivkov's Bulgaria or maybe Pol Pot's "Democratic Kampuchea". When everybody else talks about Democratic, they refer to countries like Sweden, Canada, Holland which hold regular elections, and all citizens enjoy freedom of speech and basic human rights ...

Secondly, you state that Zachariadis "...started a second war against the Greek urban class". That is not the case, he started a war against all Greek classes, urban, agrarian, what-have-you, that were not in favor of a marxist "dictatorship of the proletariat". And that is the triple truth! Rastapopoulos 06:13, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

The letters/the line of Comintern/etc.: For the real meaning of the letters Zachariadis, again, wrote an article later, after his return to Greece. Now, of course CPG was part of the Comintern but... Comintern's ine for the Second World War was not so absolute. Moreover, the line could vary depending the circumstances. USSR changed slightly its line during WWII. They are many disputes between communists for that. They are documents of Stalin, Dimitrov and Zachariadis that, if we look the outside the historical frame, they seem to contradict. I think Marino's approach is simplified. I can write some things about but here we are trying to write an encyclopedia and I prefer if you just stay in some general phrases, otherwise we really have to expand the article and state the two maybe more!) different approaches separably. --Magioladitis 16:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am glad that there are people that understand the basics for building up an encyclopedia. Rastapopoulos wants to propagate his right-wing believes, not to add value to the task of wikipedia. For what is worth I will answer the following:

1. Zachariadis was in isolation! He couldn't know what are the reactions of the underground comitee to his letters. Perhaps his only info was coming from someone or the police. One must understand the circumstances!

2. Comitern was the political center of the communists that time. Its decisions were made according to the cituation in all countries that CPs were acting. But the national actions of a CP were derived by its own members, not by Comitern! This hard to understand if you are a fasist or a person that wants simplified tales as history. The Communist Movement world wide is based on the most democratic principles, but this is a story we don't need to analyze here, especialy to people like Rastapopoulos.

3. I fully support Magioladitis POV on how to write this encyclopedia. One general description, all the possible links that can one make up his own mind, period. In discussion page we can solve other issues...

I am placing here an example of how to build this page.

We want to demonstrate the history of KKE regarding WWII.

facts:

a. KKE was heavily "wounded" by METAXA's dictatorship. Few members not correct political communication-references

b. KKE's leader under prison isolation releases three letters. All letters in their exact date are presented in the article.- references

c. KKE together with 5 other parties are creating EAM-ELAS-EPON, the biggest resistance paltforms from 1942-1944, creation of Political Comitee of National Liberation with 2million voters under the occupation, first women-voting right in Greece - references

d. KKE reaches its biggest list of members by 1944-number-references.

e. KKE backing EAM in the afterwar goverment crisis. Civil Conflict in Athens between ELAS and Police-Greek Forces under British Command- British Troops, Churchil statement for occupied Athens, Varkiza Treaty - references

f.KKE and EAM are not participating in the elections of 1946 - references

Via all the above facts that can build a sustainable encyclopedia information we can demonstrate references from all sides and overcome the difficulty of the different point of view of the people contributing to this task. We can agree to more expanded paragraphs for each fact keeping the rule that has to be afact and an opinion. I.e. KKE's underground Comitee declined the letter of Zachariadis as fake- reference, they released other decisions against the war effort-reference, Comitern had critisise this decision -reference, but on XXXX of 194X KKE decided to start the liberation fight-reference

All the above are just used as an example of how to approach the subject. I would like to hear more opinions on this. Otherwise it will end up a silly internet game between fasists and communists with not a correct outcome.

80.76.56.51 08:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

For the anti-communist delirium of Rastapopolos this part:

1. Zachariadis first made a patriotic statement about the invasion Correct- you learn fast!Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)DK Ace

2. He retracted it because the underground committee's anti-imperialist line Wrong, he nevre retracted it- your anticommunist spirit start working!Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace.

3. The underground committee was wrong, because Comintern had criticized it since 1939 Comintern had critisized the political line of the underground Comitee.Right or wrong is now proven by historyDkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K Ace

It is do evident that this is full of contradictions! When I was younger I was told that fasists are narrow minded . I didn't believe them. Know you prove me wrong! Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

1. Why did the "underground" committee not "listen" to Comintern?Because KKE was part of Comintern but also had to apply its politics in Greece. Simple...Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

2. What about the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Stalin and Hitler? Was it a myth? Did it not influence the position of KKE at the time? Did Comintern not hear about it?Let's see. It may be another OBVIOUS explanation, apart from this fasist lies you have been fed up! What if the Pact what the Soviets claimed- that is bought time to prepare there defences! What if this Pact did not alter the position of Comintern against the fasist all over the world - which you obviously don't know!!!- What if NAZI germany was still the No1 enemy of USSR, even after the "Peace Talks" of Chamberlen's Britain! You lack history perspection my poor anti-communist friend!Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

3. You imply Zachariadis was wrong to issue the anti-imperialist letters because Comintern was in favor of Greece resisting the Italians. So are you admitting that KKE's positions were (or should have been) directly controlled by the USSR. What kind of an independent party was KKE? Why did the KKE committee make a mistake was and confuse Comintern's orders? I am not implying correct or wrong on Zachariadis statement. You know nothing about 3rd International History and you can't understand the direct democracy inside Communist Organization. Live your Myth in...wherever you like! There is no answer to people that don't know and -worst- don't like to learn!Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

4. Why, in your opinion, did Zachariadis retract his first letter?Why in your opinion believe that he did? He never did it. Different situations, different letters, same outcome: KKE was the back bone of the National resistance. His political mistakes led to a Greece under imperialist oppression. Yeh! You won! Nice! Great! Good for the old champs from UK/US and their native colaborators! "Democracy" in Greece! Bliah!Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

5. How do you explain that KKE changes its "anti-imperialist" line when Hitler invaded the USSR? Were the problematic communications between KKE and Comintern restored then by coincidence?Uhggg! You don't read, do you?Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

6. Did Comintern also criticise the Poles for not fighting hard-enough against the Nazis and the Soviets during the invasion? 'Did Britain pushed the Poles against the USSR so hard that finally drove them to slotter by their "buddies" the NAZIs? Did they? READ HISTORY MY FRIEND-READ HISTORY_FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES!!!!YOU are in the dark you know! wake up!!!Fasism is not good for your health and for sure you will not apply it in here! Dkace 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace'

Dimitris, how dare you call me a fascist? Not that it is of your concern, but my philosophy is libertarian, and as I consider fascism to me the most odious insult, whether it refers to its black or red variety, the latter you certainly adhere to. I will not dignify your ad hominem provocations with further dialogue, as it is quite clear from your rants who you are and what you represent. But I will take it as a personal mission to make sure this article remains balanced. People of your ideology have tried very hard to remove references to Zachariadis's second and third letteres, very much in the way that Stalin removed the image of Trotsky using photomontage. The second and third letters speak for themselves. I will certainly not stand to anybody editing comments with proper mainstream references. TO BHMA and I. Marinos may be fascists in the mind of a raving and drooling Stalinist, but they are certainly not so as per the mainstream consensus !! Rastapopoulos 12:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Your provocations are showing the word: Fasist or "liberal" you are an anti-communist that wants to include this article on your agenta! Please note the first of my last two posts and say if you agree or not on this structure of this article. It leaves you a lot of place for anti-communist propaganda IF readers select the links that you propose.

It is certenly time for more people to interfere and balance the article. Rastapopoulos is getting what he deserves in POlitical terms, as he equalizes Communists to man-eating-monsters. This is not far from fasist's policy against enemies and it is certenly out of the scopes of wikipedia! I call for an agreement on the structure of the article. It seems that our "liberal" friend has declare war to anything that shows the facts. Dkace 13:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

1. I added the dispute template until the problem is solved(?). 2. This is not a forum. Don't use bold for whole paragraphs. If it is necessary let's split this conversation into parts. 3. Stop edit war and wait until the problem is solved in the talk page first. -- Magioladitis 13:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I totaly agree. That was my suggestion until the page was edited with the known from above commends. My suggestion for the structure of the article still stands, unless there are more clear views on how to proceed.Sorry for the bold, I tried to distinguish answer from question. Dkace 13:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Magioladiti, thanks for your sober approach. If I have let myself fall for Dimitris's ad hominem provocations, mea culpa. But in all fairness, being called a fascist is a very serious insult. Being called an non-marxist, on the other hand, something I can live with - I never appreciate the "democratic" practices of Pol Pot and Breshniev -- so sue me, Dimitri :) The sequence of Dimitris's proposed framework is fine, however the phrasing completely is laden with his POV - for example the Metaxas regime, though Maniadakis et al. certainly had done an effective job in "wounding" the organization of KKE, however I cannot accept that simplistic view that all links between Zachariadis / KKE /their control center in Moscow had been completely severed. KKE's pacifism as per the second and third letters of Zachariadis, which was a complete U-turn vis-a-vis his first letter, reflected the geopolitical situation at the time. It is interesting to note that the French Communists held a very similar pacifist position vis-a-vis the NAzis (as did KKE) until Hitler attcked the USSR, but I digress. Let us all try to make this article work, and refrain from name-calling. Rastapopoulos 14:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I started a different approach on Rastapopoulos when instead on helping on the article structure he made changes and start calling everybody else a totaliarian Stalinist! This is not a forum and it was really the last time for me to deal with such provocations.

One note on the all the above: Let's try to agree on the structure and then we fill each line up to be one or more paragraphs. If we maintane a "neutral" backbone, then we can finally agree on the main paragraphs. I say again, this "neutral" backbone should be based purely on facts that reflecting the total history of KKE, not opinions of people from any "viewing" side. I.E. it can be part of the article the special conditions of KKE during METAXA's dictatorship, but the first approach can't be that. Same as the letters of Zachariadis. This is I believe the idea of wikipedia. Everybody contributes for the best encyclopedic result, not to propagate his opinion.

I will not expand more my thoughts here, not until everyone agrees on the final structure. I suggest we leave it a week or so, opening a new topic. If Magioladitis like he can manage this task.Dkace 14:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

in greece fascists and liberals are two difference sides of the same coin. fascists did not kill beloyiannis it was liberals, it was not only fascists who kept illegal kke from 30s to 70s.it was not only fascistswho keep in exile thousands of leftists in all these 'beautiful islands'.it was not only fascists that categorise greeks according to their beliefs.every time someone wants to put a blame on kke he is talking about ussr, ddr, cambodia but not about kke. this shows something. i tried to avoid talk about personal and family events( and i could write many many things, murders,exile,.....) this wikipedia article is right-wing.it is obvious.i do noy claim that greek communist are saints and all the others are devils, but history is written by winners and dse lost the war. and really dse was mostly a reaction of self-defence to the white terrorism(terrorism by greek right,xites,tagmatasfilites)and less an effort to get kke in power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.251.255.244 (talk) 09:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Article Structure and Revisions/Additions

I checked the new article on the Macedonian issue for KKE. I suggest that we should follow a rule on adding or reverting an article. If wiki's point is to present in detail aspects of KKE's policy on several issues, then this has to be done with accurate transfer from the original documents not by Points of View of the editors. The editor should mention the events that triggered desputed decisions etc, etc, etc and by doing this at this point we will lose the main tearget which is to agree and present a history article that covers all major points on the history of KKE. Therefor I suggest that we start with era-by-era on this page starting from WWII using the structure I suggested on the above topic. I am working on refining that structure so to be more "neutral" and I will issue my first version in talk page on Friday-Saturday. It will be good to have more people contributing on this. Dkace 10:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Reference to KKE's early policy on promoting the secession of sovereign regions of the Greek state, in collaboration with organizations of a neighboring country, are of paramount importance to the Party's history and legacy , as it provides NPOV evidence that KKE's policies in the past represented treason, in the strict sense of the word: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the parent nation.". Rastapopoulos 13:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)You mean Venizelos giving up Northern Epirus in return of Eastern Thrace I presume! You are funnyDkace 13:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Small detail: Northern Epirus was not part of the Greek state at the time. It was briefly liberated by the Greek army, when Greece waged an "imperialistic fascist war" (to quote KKE!) against "its brothers, the people of Italy" :-) Rastapopoulos 14:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Huge detail: Northern Epirus was GIVEN to Albanian Relm after the Balkan wars. I told you, you need to learn read and writting before editing wikipediaDkace 18:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

N. Epirus was a sad victim of the dichotomy of Greeks between Venizelists and Royalists. A dichotomy that, however, was eclipsed in magnitude by the civil war, for which there is very little to be proud of unless you are a raving fanatic. To answer your question, I propose that the "structure" of this article is fine as is. One thing certainly lacking is a section on the position of KKE vis-a-vis Northern Epirus. For example Zachariadis's position on the 2nd congress of KKE in 1936 ("...plutocracy and fascism in Greece are holding expansionist view on Northern Epirus..."). Pehaps we could revisit the letter sent by the centr. com. of KKE to the Albanian CP (published dec. 1959 in NEOS KOSMOS) which lauded Hoxha's regime and the wonderful standard of living of the Albanian people under Enver's paradise, and which castigated Greece's cold war approach and its expansionist views toward N. Epirus. I can provide dozens more examples of KKE's "support" and "concern" of the Greeks of N. Epirus...Rastapopoulos 19:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Although you still prove that you are after all a fascist relic with no life- what so ever- let's try to keep this section free of forum talk and focus on the main target:ACCEPTABLE STRUCTURE FOR THE ARTICLE. If you have nothing to contribute, keep your "holy war" and you will be granted in the after life. On the other hand, if you do have a suggestion on the structure of the article, please write it down and let's discuss it. Dkace 13:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

A "fascist relic with no life-" ? I return the "compliment" to you, my κονσερβοκούτι-toting friend :) Rastapopoulos 14:35, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Without historic memory again... The tin-cans alias κονσερβοκουτια, where never a "gun" for the revolutionary forces rather NAZI colaborators used it for decapitation of the communists...Do you have any real suggestion for the article?Dkace 18:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

We must agree that we disagree on this one. The not-so-fine-martial-art of using the lid of a tin was first developed by KKE on the throats of their former comrades, the Trotskyite "archive marxists". I have no doubt that nazi collaborators also copied KKE's world patent, given their ideological affinity (totalitarians, γαρ). Of course practice makes perfect as illustrated by DSE's dexterity with this instrument during the civil war.Rastapopoulos 20:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Boys, please. No name calling please, although it is clear from the above who started this. Calling somebody a "fascist relic" is not acceptable on Wikipedia. Period. If I see any more allegations like this being thrown around, I will report the person involved.

The inclusion of the KKE's policy on Macedonia is perfectly valid. The section is on the history of the KKE, and this forms part of the party's history. It's in the party resolutions for all to read.

I would be grateful if Dkace could identify what he objects to in this section.

I would be also very grateful if he learned how to sign off this contributions.--Damac 19:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Your sober approach is sorely needed in this neighborhood, Damac.Rastapopoulos 20:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I beleve calling somebody totalitarian Stalinist is also not valid in wikipedia, yet no action was taken after this! Also if someone calls me or the party I support tradors I think is equevalent to fasist relic. So I agree with Damac if this is applied to EVERYONE.

Regarding the "Macedonia" issue. I agree with the post itself but as presented is not reveling why KKE supported this position creating misunderstanding. What was the situation in the Balcan Area by that time. What was the "National Problem" Comintern had to deal with in Soviet and non-Soviet countries, what happened in Northern Greece as part of the whole history of the country - not only related to KKE's history etc. I believe that we have either to put a full summary on this subject including the latest positions ( which are also history today) or to refer it in another frame.

I still call for and agreement on the basic structure of its era. I will post by Monday my suggestion, I would like to have yours as well. Dkace 08:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

KKE's position on the secession of Macedonia and Thrace from sovereign Greece

Please feel free to explain to us all what a "full summary" of the geopolitical factors at the time were that led KKE to be the only political party in Greece to support the secession of Macedonia and Thrace from the sovereign Greek state. As a Greek party, I am sure KKE felt that this "winning" proposition would be in the national interest of Greece and the Greek people. How can promoting the secession of a part of your country, in collaboration with its northern neighbor Bulgaria, be beneficial and not treasonous? Why did KKE change its mind and call what Zachariadis proposed wrong? Please instruct us, Sensei, we are all ears! Also, what is the secret of using a konservokouti so efficiently? Is it, like tennis, all in the wrist? Just kidding :-) Rastapopoulos 12:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Item No1: I am not a Sensai

Item No2: Although it seems that you would very much like to be CEO in Makronisos you missed that opportunity as you were not borned on that era.Petty...

Item No3: Greek Communists were not trying to "cut" pieces of Greece and to give them to other countries. Boulgaria and Serbia by that time were ruled by monarchs and goverments totalitarian that were oppressing their people. On the other hand, Greek Communists were working closely with their brother-parties in the Balkan for a territory free of oppressors, for states that will have the workers ruling them. It is quite a big subject to analyse it piece by piece, but KKE's position was - and is - the mutual benefit between people and States ruled by working class not in any way Capitalist States that oppress working class. On the other hand, deals closed between pre-war greek goverments and neighboor friend/foe goverments were realy treasonous...Northern Epirus, Minor Asia, Dodekanisa, Ioanian Island are examples that show who was/is really the trador around here.

This is why I insist on putting structure and present all aspects correctly according to historical dates, facts and references. So everybody can contribute with his references, not his point-of-view solely.

Item No4: I mentioned but you couldn't follow; tin-cans. alias konservocutia was never a weapon of the revolution. Sten, Brend, Malincher, Piat were the weapons of the Greek Revolutionary forces. The Nazi-British-US colaborators- your political anchestors- were lacking equipment since ELAS and DSE were stripping them they day they were trying to attack greeks. So they were left with German, or American tin-cans as there only weapon to attack the helpless women and children or the political prisoners.I guess it is on the wrist, but you can find it out more easaly I presume :D Dkace 13:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

1. OK. Is instructor (ινστρούχτορας) better?
2. Being a libertarian, I would never dream of working for the public sector, so the Makronissos job would be unfortunately out of the question even if it were still open. Maybe if the reform system were privatized...but I digress! Its a pity however that the geopolitical scene has changed, since I am sure you would have been more than happy to recommend me to a free work-study program in Siberia, to help break the ice! :-)
3. Yes its a big subject to analyze, but please make the first step -- as they say the first step is is half the way:) You seem to be avoiding the issue by stating platitudes about how "complex" an issue it is. Are you saying that KKE was encouraging the secessions of Macedonia and Thrace to save them from Greek oppressors? I lost you there, so please eplain it! Being a free person with no party credo to adhere to, I certainly am critical in the strongest possible way of what pre- and post-war Greek governments did in Asia minor, Monastiri, and more recently Cyprus. Can you stand up as a free man and tell us more about the ταμπακέρα: your party's position on Macedonia and Thrace?
4. My political and physical ancestor (my grandfather) lost both legs in Albania whilst fighting the fascist invaders. You know, at the time Metaxas waged his expansionist, imperialistic and fascist war against our Italian brothers instead of taking them in our arms and offering our traditional Greek hospitality! Too bad be did not listen to Zachariadis and stay home.... Rastapopoulos 14:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Item 1: Ok, if you accept the role of the fasist propagator.

Item 2: It would have been for you pro-bonus! As everyone can see, you will fit better as volunteer rather than public servant. Your hatriot against communists would have helped you to gain a honorable position next to Glastras, the last CO of this exile and former CO of NAZI concetration camp of Thessaloniki!

Item 3: It is quite obvious that not only you don't want to read, but you don't understand as well. History is judged only by putting facts on the timeframe of its era, not by projecting it to today's timeframe. It is more than obvious that you can't understand what people's mutual benefit is and you certenly can't see how different nationalities can be under the same roof!

KKE's position during those years was dictate by the multinational puzzle of the area covering parts of Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania. It was not a suggestion to give pieces of Greece to foreign country rather to re-shape the whole Balcan Area to a Socialist Union with each Nationality ruling its own "home" and through out German, British or other "protectors". One must investigate the population synthesis on these areas, then make conclusions. What is more, KKE defended greek Macedonia by Tito's spies in the area during the 1948 events that end up with Tito closing the borders for DSE fighters.Solely this strategy answers on fascist and provocateur alligations of post-war era that KKE wanted Macedonia independent. After 1950, population was changed radically on the territory, post-war goverments implemented "National Purity" on these territories, Tito created today's FYROM and KKE changed its position on the subject, finalizing this issue with a statement of Florakis in 1988.

You mix political ancestor with biological, since your grandfather lost his legs next to my communist grandfather that was fighting in the Albania front! You dishonor him by being political relative to those that surrendered Greece to the NAZIs and the British!

Dkace 07:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1. Let us just settle this in a civilized way: you are a communist, I am a libertarian.
2. Glastras? You just reminded me of a joke a friend of mine fron KKE(interior) used to say many years ago: "I lost my KNITIS. If you find him, please keep him but return the glastra":-) (note to non-greek speakers: a KNITIS is a member of KNE the youth movement of KKE. Because of their blind devotion to the party,and lack of free thought ourside party dogma, they are popularly known as fyta (vegetables). A glastra is a flowerpot).
3. "fascist and provocateur alligations of post-war era that KKE wanted Macedonia independent" Just read Zachariadis's article I quoted from 1948! Also in the 1930s, when KKE was still in favor od secession, the demographic situation in norther Greece was pretty much the same as today. Please, please, show some self-criticism, even Florakis did so...
4. You should be proud of your grandfather who put the interest of his people above the party line (which ordered Greeks no to fight against the Italians and instead overthrow Metaxas) and fought for Greek dignity and independence. I am an atheist, so I am happy that he cannot read what you are writing about that period, because his bones would be rattling like maracas!
5. When you edit an entry from wikipedia with references, explain why you do so!

Rastapopoulos 07:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1.No my friend, you are an anti-communist with fasist roots.Sorry

2.Glastras was the actual name of this beast. It happens to be the greek word for flowerpot, but that was his name.

3.One think is that I am proud of all my family that remained loyal to KKE's positions and get rid of the invadors via ELAS and EAM. My gf was a KKE official at his neihborhood, never deserted the party as you imply.That is why 2.000.000 people joined the ranks of EAM with KKE the major contributor.Tradors you called them... Bliah!

4.That was really the position of KKE.Why KKE adapted this position for 30 years? Isn't that something we have to present before through just a patch of KKE's documents? NO, as your opinion matters more than others, right? Guess again!

Dkace 09:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1. The burden of proof that I am a fascist falls on you: I will not defend myself against any wild accusation you make for the sake of provocation. You might as well call me a Napoleonist of a worshipper of the Grand Manitou. Of course in your manichean mind everyone who is not a communist is a fascist...
2. Why do you keep removing my post regarding the Zachariadis article? Do you not agree with teh source? After all, its from an official publication of KKE!

Rastapopoulos 10:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I explained why on my previous two posts, don't act like you don't understand. Either you put the whole summary of this decision or it is not correct thus is not KKE's position. That is why I insist on working together building this article. But you seem to ignore anything that oppose your "strong" opinion. Sorry, I can't help you on this.

Fasists are a political category. You seem to fit judging from your aligations, provocations and acts in wikipedia. No one else has been accuse d in here but you. Sorry twice...Dkace 10:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Dake, this is your second warning. Please read Wikipedia:No personal attacks. You have continued to label and imply that Rastapopoulos is a fascist. This is not permissible on Wikipedia. If I see one more such comment or allegation, then I will report you.

Please also take note of Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. You have already reverted this page three times in the past 24 hours. One more unexplained revert, and you will be reported and possibly banned from editing for 24 hours.

I'm sorry it's come to this, but I did warn you.--Damac 12:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1. You insist calling me a fascist! Why? Maybe because I do not appreciate one-party regimes with no freedom of expression such as those ruled Brezhnev, Jaruzelski, Kim Il-sung, Pol Pot and considered by KKE as "democratic"....
2. You have reverted a sourced edit just because it does not suit your POV. The spirit of Wikipedia is for someobody to build upon comeone else's referenced contribution until a consensus is reached. If you feel that Zachariadis's article, and the 5th congress of KKE session need to be expanded upon, do so, but do not censor it because you do not agree. Otherwise grab a copy of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, and enjoy yourself! Rastapopoulos 12:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Calling names is not something that I started - in fact I tried to avoid! Please check all posts in talk page. I ended up to this as none was constraining Rastapopoulos on his attacks against me!

I explained twice why I kept reverting a post on KKE's history directing referring to it as a trador party. Perhaps, by putting only patches from references then I can project the real position and revert this attack as well. Mea culpa, I will be aligned to fit wikipedia's rules. Dkace 12:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't the time or the energy to go back and find who threw the first allegation. I noted that the two of you were engaged in name calling and I asked that you desist from it. Since then, you have made more allegations about Rastapopoulos. It's just not acceptable.

At no state on the article page did Rastapopoulos claim that the KKE's policy on northern Greece was treacherous. He made those remarks here, on the talk page, which is an entirely different matter. You cannot revert something on the article page just because you think it is linked to comments on the talk page. He did say that the KKE suffered in terms of support as a result of the policy. I have read scholarly works on the history of the KKE that say the same thing.--Damac 13:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

So be it. Dkace 14:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Please use a spell checker!

In good faith, I would like to ask Dkace to use a spell checker before posting. Being a native Greek, I too am guilty of occasional mistakes, but let us all try to be less sloppy and avoid expressions such as dectated, Moussolini, Comitee, untached, critisised, tradors, etc etc Rastapopoulos 23:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I have noticed that too in my editing... I blame the time I edit most of the time and that firefox has an issue with dictionaries ( that means I haven't refine it yet). I will do my best .91.140.3.34 20:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace