Talk:Zamanfou/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

First opinion

As a greek i find this article really amusing! It does need to be cleared up, although mostly everything described is right (exceptions to this: in my experience women use the "male version" a lot more often than the "female version", and there is no "Miyagi" way! This sounds more like a seasonal and closed-social-group-specific variation, or a variation made up by someone using the phrase in a humorous way - that does happen. Same goes for the full length version.). The main problem is that the article mixes up description of the attitude with the prase and gesture, and calls it an "art form" as well, where did that come from? The only case would be to use the phrase "he has made it into an art form" when refering to a person and the "zamanfou" attitude - you would never call such a person an "artist" though, unless used in a humorous way.

A distinction between "zamanfou" (also pronounced as two words, zaman-fou) and "starxidismos" would be:

zamanfou: general attitude of indifference, kind of ignorance by choice (of attitude).

starxidismos: knowing about important stuff in general but not giving a damn.

also note "ohaderfismos" (ωχαδερφισμός, from ωχ αδερφέ! - "oh brother!"), describing the "i know about your problem but i have my own so leave me alone" or "yeah, whatever, let somebody else do it" attitude. You will often encounter this term in the press, used in discussions of why public matters are not going well.

Nice to see such an article on wikipedia, i might work on it properly in the future! ;)

Hey man, thanks for the suggestions! I took out the "art form" thing, i meant to take it out completely, but i forgot somewhere along the way. I'm easily distracted :) . I'll fix the article to show the difference between zamanfu and starxidismos and ohaderfismos.

Project2501a 05:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Another opinion

Let me start by saying that I am not against the exposition of the flaws of our country. However, in some parts, this "article" is just plain crude, vulgar and misleading. The "female version" is appalling and a figment of the writer's imagination. Perhaps he was having a bad day. It is common of us Greeks to whine and complain about our country (sometimes justly, other times for sport, as a hobby). It should be cleared up. As it is, it is better suited for uncyclopedia.

THIS <<ARTICLE>> SHOULD BE DELETED AS A WHOLE.

It is crude, it is bad-written, it is not objective, and most of all, it is not suited for Wikipedia. There are plenty of free web hosting sites, and blogs, where you can express yourself. Wikipedia is not your blog or your personal website.

( Unsigned comment by User:Thanasakis )

Dear Thanasi,

If it's crude, and badly writen, please, edit it and make it uncrude. I know, I'm not exactly Shakespear.

If it's misleading, please demostrate to me, where that misleading is.

If it's not objective, please, by all means, do edit it and make it objective.

If it's not suited as a sociological article for wikipedia, please show me why.

The article is correct as far as the attitude segment is consearned. It is describing a current social attitude in Greece. So, i'd say, if you don't agree, please do edit the article and make fix it up to encyclopaedic standards. It's by all means not a personal opinion.

Project2501a 05:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

From User:83.134.2.10

CAVEAT: while extremely interesting, the historic-sociological analysis presented in this page under ==Background== is quite superficial and contestable: the phenomena observed after the fall of the '67-'74 dictatorship were manifold and complex: it is arbitrary, simplistic and, for me, simply wrong to presume that the self-interest, the disinterest for the common good, the tax escapism and the draft dodging have the same roots... I suggest that somebody who has given some deeper thoughts on these subjects (Κούρτοβικ, Γιανναράς, maybe Κούλογλου, to begin with) should have a look at the text to render it closer to reality. The fact that the phenomenon started in Athens and was spread to the rest of the country is irrelevant, since every phenomenon of this epoch followed that precise way of dissemination. The supporters, claimed to be found among younger ages (16-25), is also an example of arbitrary and superficial presentation: First, I believe that many supporters are nowadays much older than this age; second, I severely doubt that the 16-25 year olds of today (2006) are representative of this category of people: maybe a certain age bracket in the 80's with some other (to be defined) characteristics can be representative, but this again needs a lot of thought. Moreover, expressions presented as common here ("στα μουνόχειλά μου!") are far from being in common use compared to others ("βαράω τον κώλο μου, βαράω και το μουνί μου!"), at least as common as the former, ignored here initially (added subsequently).

All in all, this text is a good seed, but still needs a lot of work. As it is said in greek, "καλό τυρί σε κακό τουλούμι"- "good cheese in a bad skin (container)". Nevertheless, enjoy:

Why don't you call those people up and kindly ask them to help us fix this article? Project2501a

ok Project2501a - I got your message: I did my best to re-edit contested parts, so, most of my criticisms above are not relevant anymore. Sorry if you felt offended; I didn't mean to be personal - Wikipedia is a common good, remember? ;-) And thanks to you, I now better understand the essence of it, thanks!

!

Ok, it seems that everything is clear:in which other country's wikipedia article there would be a section named zamanfou?That says it all, i believe! I really laughed my head off while reading this stuff!Anyway, the older, "be serious" side of mine just keeps yelling from inside:"All right, this is funny but we Greeks should not be happy about it"...but then the real Greek side of me says something the older one cannot understand pretty well: \/

Anyway, guys, this is really funny but I have to say something that makes me feel strange. I have been around in Greek IRC servers for some time now. Today I entered an international server, where users where mainly Western European and American. I can assure you that the things they talked about where far more different than the things us "zamanfoutists" talk about. And ok, simply having fun and "kafriles" (if you know what I mean, you Greeks) is fine, but as long as it is not only that, right?

That's what you get for hanging solely around GRnet, dude. You're being turned into a Ghetto: You forget that there's a whole world out there (read the Real World(TM) that does NOT deal with our Greek "internals", brother. (Read: frappe, Acropolis, Olympiakos and souvlaki).

Now, what's that about καφρίλες; What kafriles?

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 17:34, 10 January 2006

Two questions

You seem to turn the gesture into science, which would be funny with some friends at the pub, but I cannot really find a reason for this to be included in an encyclopaedia. I find it rather offensive for a culture/nationality. In every culture, you find people that do not care; why do Greek people get the honour to be specially presented in the social section of a www encyclopaedia? Do you really think that the “zaman-fou movement” in Greece of the 80’s was such a big thing? Nicoletta 13:05, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 13:05 10 Jan 2006

I'm not the original creator of the article, but I have worked on it. I'm also Greek and within the 30-year old age Group of Greek males, so, I feel obligated to answer.

Yes. It was a big thing. While, true, there's normal distribution in any society does include people that don't care, that Bell curve peaks alot to far to the "@@ it"-side, it's a lot more evident in the Greek society. As I posted in the article, the climate set by the fall of the Junta, the invasion of Cyprus (and the subsequent war), combined with the not-yet-healed wounds of the Greek Civil War, promoted a more docile mindset, during the 80s, away from the political connotations/tones of the Metapoliteusi and the usual "Green/Blue/Red" political flavoring (Although this coloring did metastasize to soccer: The political and ideological confortation of the 50s, 60s and 70s found an outlet into soccer: In the past 20 years, Greek soccer fans have turned into regular hooligans, compared to the soccer fan base during the 1960s and 1970s. They no longer wanna go to the field to watch the game, but they go to have a fight, either with the cops or with the fans of the opposing team.

So, I think it's a valid social phenomenon in Greece and not something to laugh at with a couple of friends in the pub.

If you're not convinced, here's an example: Greece is 6th in the world in buying armaments, after the US, China and India. A 10 million people country has been spending 10% of its GDP on guns for, the past 10 years, while spending on education and social security combined has been fixed at 11%. We recieved 20 billion Euros from the EU as part of the 4th European Development program, for the period 2008-2018, and for approximately the SAME TIME, we gonna spend 52 billion Euros in buying armaments, using the pretext that Turkey, Albania, FYROM and Bulgaria are lurking in the dark; that they are out to get us, while the true reasons are purely monetary (μίζες/kickbacks from weapon sales) and political dealings (πολιτικά συμφέροντα/politicians opening up admitely boot camps at non-relevant places, purely to gain a greater voter base ).

You tell me, what would your average neo-Greek response to the example above be?

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 17:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

A minor comment

There was constant reference to 2006 ("as of 2006" etc) in the article which clearly makes no sense: There is nothing special about 2006 in this context. No "turning point". The author probably meant to say "by 2006" (as in "to date") but got mixed up in the subtleties of the English language... I took the liberty to remove/edit the references to that - in true wiki spirit. In terms of the actual context, I would agree it is rather arbitrary at times (the origins of the phenomenon are associated with the Junta?? Surely this is circumstantial and the whole thing is related to deeper socio-cultural and ultimately ethical problems emerging in a post war Greece at odds with its surrounding and self. It is more so in Greece than the rest of Europe, for obvious reasons, than Nicoletta (and I) would like to believe, but certainly not a Greek prerogative. Its exposure and subsequent discussion however is very Greek and does wonders for the soul! More context and less form would benefit this as well... Regards, Christos

Thanks Christos, much appreciated! Yes, you're right, it's not associated with the Junta, it's not a prerogative, it's actually something that's happening. Althought I still got a lot more than Nikos Dimou to read before i can actually make this article something. Yes, the article *is* flawed. So, I ask all of our wiki readers to help us fix it.

And thanks for fixing my english, it's been slowly deteriorating for the past 2-3 years. Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 17:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedia

Satire and irony should not take the form of a "sociological" article in an encyclopedia. The result is definitely misleading.

Dimitris

Could you please show me where the satire and irony is? Cuz I fail to see it.

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 16:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Rename

I propose the article be renamed into Zamanfoutism or Je m'en foutisme. Pictureuploader 00:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

lol, it's a transliterated Greek word, dude, we can't just anglisize it by adding an -ism ending. Nor can we use the french name, because it then looses significance. It's a native Greek phenomenon. I say it's fine as it is. I've already added a redirect from Zamanfu to the article, for English speakers who find the -ou ending wierd. Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5

Well, I have known it as Zamanfoutismos to be exact Pictureuploader 18:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Laspi.Gr has said it best

Please read the following link http://www.laspi.gr/nero%2Bhoma.php?faelaspi=sports/za-man-fu.htm&image=sports/title.gif —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.251.84.203 (talk • contribs)

Laspi: A very bright article indeed ! - some of the examples there(especially the uncivic behaviour, halas so widespread in Hellas) could perhaps be taken over here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.134.1.155 (talk • contribs)

Begining of Zmanfou

Zamanfou is an expression older the 1980.Mayby it is in use before the II World War when the French language was the most common foreign language in Greece.Since i was a child ,and i am 62 years old,I remember the expression Ζαμανφού κι'απάνω τούρλα. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.38.108.105 (talk • contribs)

heeeey, we got us here a representative of the older Greek generation. Hi there! :D Would you care to edit the article and give us a historical perspective? Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5

Deserves a research?

My opinion: amusing! Yet, got me seriously thinking. Similar behavior I have seen in Cyprus, USA and even in Japan (re: the new generation). This is bigger than what you think! The article should be deleted? I think if it is supported with some real research it should not. So, you social researchers, here is a topic for a nice paper or even a PhD dissertation! Ready, set ... Go!!!

Minatsu 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Delete it as fast as possible

This article contains vulgarisms that are inappropriate to Wikipedia. Also, the opinions described are false: Perhaps it is a way for certain people to express themselves, but it's not an entire "phenomenon" in Greece. Maybe the user was misleaded by his own social circle and wrote this article of extremely low quality. I believe that anyone who finds this amusing is no more than a cretin. The only amusing thing about it is that it began in 2004 (according to it's history page) and still hasn't been deleted! I already voted for it to be deleted, and I hope the decision to keep it will be re-discussed. Its existence insults Wikipedia's status and validity to its readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.103.233.67 (talk • contribs)

Firstly, I would like to note that if you are interested in having a discussion in WP it would make our lives easier if you registered. It is disturbing to have to address an IP instead of a name/nickname. Secondly, I want to thank you for calling me and others around here a cretin. Please bear in mind though that such behaviour is not accepted in wikipedia. There exists an official policy in Wikipedia called No personal attacks. A user such as yourself who is interested in the well being of this project should at least care to abide by its official policies. Thirdly, since you seem to actually care fot Wikipedia's standards, please bear in mind that these standards are safeguarded among others by what we call Consensus and the idea of Assuming Good Faith on behalf of others. And the deletion of this particular article has been decided after a poll (in which you took part) by means of consesus, accoriding to WP:DP. Why not respect the decision of the community? Wikipedia is a community based encyclopedia after all!

Now, apart from all the above, let's get to the core of your disagreement. I understand that the problem is that the article contains vulgarisms and most importantly that you believe that this phenomenon of "Je m'en foutisme" is not something that is worth having around here as it is at best a marginal phenomenon.

Concerning vulgarisms, I would like to point you to this piece of official policy. Concerning the extent of the phenomenon, I'd like to note that if you disagree with the article saying that it is a widespread phenomenon, Be Bold and edit the page in a constructive manner. If an article says something you find inaccurate or false, you do not nominate it for deletion; instead you edit it (while discussing it in the talk page) to make it more accurate. If you believe it to be biased, POVish etc, you do not delete it, you edit it. The other day I personally broke WP:3RR (and got away with it :-) ) trying to convince a Turkish editor that the Turkish Invasion of Cyprus should not be deleted on the grounds that it is a POV article, but rather edited to make it NPOV.

If there is a disagreement as to wheather "Je m'en foutisme" exists in Greek society, the way to solve this is to recognize this as a POV dispute and try to present the facts in an NPOV way: "Zamanfou is believed by some people such as X <citation> to be .... Other people such as Y <citation> drop the case as insignificant and point out that.......". The actual existence of Zamanfou can (and apparently is) disputed, but that there exist people who agree it exists (and among them notable wirters, such as Nikos Dimou) is a fact and therefore Zmanfou is something that can be included in Wikipedia.

-- Michalis Famelis 15:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Needs clean-up

My opinion is that this article needs cleanup, especially in the first paragraph with all these anglisized words that mean nothing to a non-Greek speaker. Although it isn't very easy, I think an effort should be made to explain these words/phrases in English. I also believe that the article might be a bit overreacting to the described "ideology". As a Greek, I know about this and I believe that nowdays it isn't such a widespread "lifestyle", but more like an attidute of certain people in Greece towards certain things. Please consider this while trying to improve the article. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.54.249.176 (talk • contribs)

O RLY!!!! :D You're right, it's not an ideology: it's a lifestyle. One that has gotten so deep under the skin of Greek people that we are not even consious of it any more. We just scratch it up as the Greek Reality, the price we pay for living in Greece, according to the "if you don't like it get out"-line of argument. I've already given an example above to Nicoletta. I'll give you another example, specially drawn up, just for you, disbelievers:

A Greek Army Cadet ("Δόκιμος") was found brutally beaten up, 2 weeks ago, after doing his round to check his post, in Evros. 500 meters away from his guard post. The Official Army Report says "suicide". The parents asked for a second autopsy. Second autopsy said it couldn't have been a suicide. The Army refused to recognise the second autopsy.

Despite knowing that the cadet was brutaly murdered, or that there's a good chance you'll be given a stupid order that probably will lead to your own injury and/or death, you'll rise up early tommorow morning, grab that draft paper and walk right past through those bootcamp gates, rationalising your actions, not even blinking an eye, " cuz your father and your grandfather and your second cousin got drafted and nothing happened to them, so, that cadet must have had it comming..."

Brother, I believe you were saying something about Zamanfou not being widespread. I believe you're not looking hard enough. Try a mirror. Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 21:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Please do not remove the disputed tag

You keep removing the disputed tag. A substantial number of user comments both in the discussion page and in the deletion discussion history page do challenge the factual accuracy of the entire article. I think that readers should definitely be aware of the controversy. I believe that the disputed tag is necessary as it warns the readers of the potential problem and encourages them to read the discussion pages where further information is provided. By removing the tag again and again I think that you're crossing the line. Dimitris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.1.243.155 (talk • contribs)

substansial number, let's see, that includes: You and Nicoletta tried to argue about it, but did nothing more than dismiss the article than a whole. Nicoletta did a drive-by comment and has not answered my counter-argument, still. So, by way of induction, that leaves us with, uh, you. Yes, you are substantial. Alright, I'll bite the bait and introduce a disputed section. Genglemen, make your arguments.

By the way, the readers should be informed of the controversy, but that's not what the disputed tag is for: it's to let people know that there's conversation to resolve a matter and not just let it stale like a Law in the Greek Parlament. So state your case in the disputed section in the talk page. Elsewise, I will remove the disputed tag.

PS. I'm crossing the line to what?

Project2501a | _{I got you/Under my skin} ^{ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5}

I counted 11 (besides my own) comments both on this discussion page and on the deletion discussion page, all disputing the factual accuracy of the entirety or parts of the article. Nine of those comments suggested that the article should be deleted. Several other comments claimed that rewriting is required for the article to be acceptable. I suggest you made more effort to be less hostile and ironic in your replies. Actually having read your replies here, I wonder, in what possible way could you defend the article when accused of lack of NPOV? 29 January 2006 Dimitris

Disputed

First, a note

I'm a little concerned to see some rather poor talkpage etiquette on this page, which makes the discussion hard to follow. In the interest of consideration for readers of the discussion, please make a good-faith attempt to abide by these simple principles on talkpages:

Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful.

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users." Please keep this in mind while editing. Thanks, Bishonen | talk 21:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC).

Critisism from Dimitris from the 2006/01/11 AfD

Comment Unrestrained generalization could be borderline racism. Note the following comments:

‘look for alterial motives when a Greek national asks you to delete an article’
‘your average modern Greek assumes bad faith’
‘Greek society, currently, really hates the idea of their dirty laundry getting public’
‘not even part of a sub-culture but rather a vital part of the modern Greek mentality’
‘it’s the quintessence of modern Greek society and psyche’
‘Anyone who has been in Athens for 5 minutes can attest as to the existence or not of Zamanfu’

Such sort of aphorisms, (most of them written by the same person who wrote the article), are simply biased in their ‘steamroller logic’. I was born in Athens and I’ve lived my entire life in Greece. I’m 28 years old now and I have never met a single human being that I would categorize as part of this ‘social phenomenon’. Have I lived in a bubble then?

You know, as far as I’m concerned what really makes this article fall apart is the systematization that it leads to. Taking this word and that gesture and some example of mentality of indifference and combining them all to create an actual ‘sociological phenomenon’ a system of values, a pattern of behaviour, conscious and so specific. Well such a theory or movement or system simply does not exist

The author also gives specific information that even more enhances the view of this as an actual sociological phenomenon, official and probably studied by scientists. Note the following:

‘that has developed since the late 1980s’
‘main supporters of this phenomenon were generally between the ages of 16-25’
‘citizens that chose to prioritize their individual well being’
‘It is thought of as a form of insubordination against the state and the Greek status quo’
‘Due to Zamanfou, as of 2006 the cohesiveness of the Greek society has deteriorated to some extend’
‘this was also one cause of the less than optimal recovery of the Greek economy,
as a member of the European Union, during the eighties and the nineties’
‘Subscribers to this ideology use a characteristic phrase’
‘The Hellenic Armed Forces have developed a military version of Zamanfou, called Loufa’

I doubt the credibility of all of the above quotes.I suppose that in this context the hand gesture so eloquently described by the author is a definite way for the scientist to recognize the ‘Zanmafoutian’. It could be a sure way for members of the ‘movement’ to recognize each other as well. You know sort of like a secret handshake :)

The part about the military variation of the ‘phenomenon’ called ‘loufa’ is also nonsense. Loufa or the verb loufaro is slang and describes the international in my opinion tendency to slack off. It is not a word or a tendency that is specific to the Greek military forces.

It’s like me saying that there are people in America for example, who sometimes instead of working spend their time in the office surfing the internet or checking their personal email. Actually there are expressions in the English language such as ‘I don’t give a damn’, ‘I don’t give a shit’, “I don’t give a flying fuck” etc, all used to express indifference. The people who use such expressions and slack off at work are part of a specific sociological phenomenon. Add a few dates, a fancy name and a link to a ‘how to slack off at work and get away with it’ guide and I have my sociological Wikipedia article.

There is not such a thing as a sociological phenomenon called Zamanfou, developed in the late 1980’s, originally in Athens, from 16-25 year olds…. etc, etc. Just the personal, totally unscientific systematization of a number of words, phrases and international mentalities, all woven together by the author in a pseudo-scientific mess.

It might be funny, certainly puts a smile on your face, but it is just not true. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. People come here for information. It should not include articles appearing to be scientific while providing completely personal views and ideas. Dimitris

At least have the decency not to mutilate my post with your own comments. You can reply right underneath it. You keep being hostile and rude. Please lets keep this discussion civilised.

Comment from APOSTOLOS

I had a good laugh reading the article. I really believe we shouldn't take ourselves too seriously. Frankly, I was more stunned to see how much the guy actually wrote, than to read the article. I don't think it was offensive or bad humour, rather a pretty accurate display of satire-the-greek-way. Of course it's not scientific and it was obviously not meant to be perceived as scientific. If anyone thought even for a second that this was an actual sociological essay of some kind, now THIS is frightening. As for the whole we-shouldn't-scorn-our-greek-attitude thing, naive self-rightousness and political corectness are much more dangerous. Don't delete it, rather put a "this is a joke" sign over it (for our not-so-acute friends). APOSTOLOS 62.169.208.105 17:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Just a thought

Anyone else see parallels with Generation X? If you speak French, see e.g. [1] [2]. AvB ÷ talk 00:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, Zamanfou is *THE* expression/output of Generation X in Greece (damn, i should now, i'm the last leg of them ;) ). The issue here is, not just Generation X, but how did the attitude of that generation, combinded with the mindset of the after-Polytechnic Uprising of 1973, the Colonels Junda and the Metapolitefsi and the general low-income of the then-Greek populus, created a unique effect, which, to my knowledge, is unique to Greece, or at least the severity/extend of the this "indiffence" that a whole population feels insecure enough that people feel necessary, to become a goverment employee, by all means, including and not limited to, bribing goverment employees

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 Project2501a 15:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Now, seriously...

I wrote something with a hint of sarcasm earlier. Seriously, after reading what Dimitris wrote, I will have to back him up since what he wrote is close to what I think about the subject. "Zamanfou" is just another word for indifference and this is not a Greek "invention" by all means. It is part of the human mentality! You can find indifferent people all over the globe. What is unique in the article is how indifference is communicated among the Greeks (gestures, expressions, etc.) and I guess that is what people find amusing and interesting.

A nice article (of course supported with evidence) would be on how people around the globe communicate indifference. That will be informative and acceptable (in my oppinion). For example in Peru, similar expressions for indifference are used but instead of the testicles the penis is referred! I'm sure other people around the world have their unique way to communicate indifference.

BTW, I totally disagree with the term "counterculture phenomenon" you are using. Please read the wikipedia article about counterculture (since you are linking to that, the least you can do) and then if you still insist that zamanfou is in fact what you claim kindly provide proof of that. To save you and the readers an extra click here is what counterculture is:

"counterculture is a term used to describe a cultural group whose values and norms are at odds with those of the social mainstream, a cultural equivalent of a political opposition"

As I mentioned above, "zamanfou" is just a way to express indifference and nothing but that. No groups, organized or not.

And while I'm at it, you mentioned that this kind of behavior is most prominent in a certain age group and during a specific period. More food for thought, a good study would have been why certain age groups and during certain periods of time behave like that globally. What makes them be indiffirent during the 70's and not during the 40's, or during the 30's? Why middle aged people are less indifferent than people in their early 20's? Good luck!

Now I'm thinking about it, since you have put lots of effort and work on the article and seems that you don't want to see everything go down the drain, why don't you merge with the indifference article? I guess you have a lot to write there and the article needs to be developed. Just a suggestion...

Minatsu 07:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Zamanfu with the article

Many of us wants to delete it, but noone yet disputed the truth of it. It seems to me, that the only problem with the article is irony in it as well as the negetiveness of the topic it describes. So, article stays. Irony could be diminished though (if someone could rewritte some paragraphs in a more "scientific" manner). In other words: zamanfu with the article

That's the whole point: The article is damn true, and that's why people are trying to delete it. It's true. It's not 100% encyclopaedic, true, it does need some re-writing but, basically, it's true. That's why it hurts :P . Why do you think that most people trying to "delete" or "re-write" the article happen to be of Greek origin? Cuz it's embarassing to a society to realise that their "gig" is up :) Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 15:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment from Dimitris

This article is worthy of an 80s greek video-prunk movie, but nothing more. It would be more appropriate to have an exact interpretation of the expression (read: apathy,indifference). Those features characterise people in every society on this planet.

For example (quoting from article): Lack of consideration, civil disobedience, tax evasion, "hit-and-run" social and personal behaviour and mentality, dodging the draft, vandalism and property destruction, total disregard for most of the common law, "screw the rest of the world" mentality - these were common expressions of this phenomenon

If someone can point me to a country that those things do not happen, I will happily move there. Pls, no 3rd world countries/dictatorships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.207.123.244 (talk • contribs)

ROTFLMAO + One OMG + 3 LOLs. Yes, "Point out to me a country where all these anti-ellenic spooky stuff you describe do not happen, so, Greece is not special that way!!" But you don't wanna compare poor lil' Greece with a third world country, cuz you know, it's not, mostly cuz we say so, and mostly, cuz it's embarashing, even though the whole of the Greek goverment, social structure and mindset is top-down and greately resembles that of the Taliban in their way of thinking. "God is great! We're the chosen ones!"

OK, here's a list of non-third world countries where this "apathy" just is not present: Albania, FYROM, Bulgaria, Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Lybia and Italy. Did i miss anyone?

By the way dude, I'm curious, what's your affiliation with the "Golden Dawn"/"Patriotic Allience" group?

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 12:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Some new comments

Since some of you think that the adoption of a scientific discourse is required to address the topic throughout:

From the introduction

I think it is quite evident to most of us that "zamanfou" does not qualify as a phenomenon. It was not as widespread as the author makes it out to be, and the writings of Nikos Dimou and a couple of other authors alone are not enough to provide a sound basis for a phenomenon, and most of the times these writings were produced in a jocular manner, and as a social comment, rather than as an establishment of a social movement or phenomenon. Also, it did never acquire sufficient social manifestation of presence to qualify as such. I'm going to go ahead and change the word "phenomenon" to something very much more fitting, like occurrence or instance. Further, I think many can attest that it is of a decreasing magnitude.

Hey man. Damn, you're the first Greek who is actually trying to improve on the article rather than delete it. Hehe, so, here, let's have a serious discussion about it.

ok, "Most of you", who, exactly? the only real voice of opposition is Dimitris and he wants the article deleted. the other one was Schizas, and he tried to delete it too, but he got slammed down something fierce for using bad faith.

Couple of other authors? I.M Panagiotopoulos is not exactly "some other author" and he was writing about the phenomenon back in the 1970s. Neither is Paulos Tsimas, whose writing I'm going throught right now, nor is Liana Kanelli, who also wrote about the subject, while she used to be a journalist. I'll give the benefit of the doubt that the two most vocalised dissidents, in our times, about Zamanfou and OKOMOE-ism (OKOMOE: The Classic, The Arshole, The Greek megalomaniac(?)/Ο Κλασσικός, Ο Μαλ@κας, Ο Ελληναράς), Tzimis Panousis and Nikolas Asimos are/were fringe intellectualls/authors, who the majority of Greek society ignored and/or never heard of. But, I also found printed works by Stratos Myrivilis, Lefteris Papadopoulos and Manolis Rasoulis. I mean, there you (will) have it, some pretty notable Greek people protesting about the Oxarderfismos, which is what basically zamanfu is about.

If it's not as widespread, as you say, why do i keep hearing "Sta arxidia mou! Why should I mind what that malaka has to say?" every 10 minutes when i'm Agiou Nikolaou in Patra?

If the above prominent Greek authors, chronographers and social commentary people have talked and written about it, how come it doesn't qualify as as phenomenon? Social commentary is provided as a responce to a given situation which the commentator believes to be socially harmful. I would agree that it's not a phenomenonm if some fringe author or whack pseudo-intellectual delved into the matter, but the fact is that prominent people are constantly talking about it. If it never did acquire sufficient social manifestation of presence to qualify as such, why is it that the hand movement is universally recognised by Greeks and Greeks alone? It's not as if only the people in Pasalimani or Plaka know about it... it's the whole damn country. It's a meme, nowdays.

Social movement? no, can't quite categorise it as such because i haven't found any PhD references (το γράψανε στ'αρχίδια τους και αυτοί ;). The apparent lack of any academic references does not disqualify Zamanfou as a social fenomenon, though. Phenomenons can go unnoticed by the academia, you know. So, no, I beg to differ, yes to phenomenon, no to movement.

Further, I think many can attest that it is of a decreasing magnitude.

Uh, no, dude, sorry, can't bring that into the Wiki, not encyclopedic. Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 09:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it will help if we make clear that Zamanfou is not the definite term when Papadopoulos, Rasoulis etc refer to the phenomenon. They donlt use this particular word to describe the problem (it's NOT a movement, NOR a terminology), however they do touch it, no matter which words they use Pictureuploader 00:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Background

This section is badly written. I will go ahead with a bold mind, and try to correct it, although not very soon, unfortunately, so help will be appreciated. Also, a dystopia is a term used for fiction, and denotes a hypothetical and speculative construction. Therefore it is not appropriate to describe Greek society of the late 70's or 80's - or any society to date, for that matter.

Very valid point. I changed it to "instability" Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 10:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Consequences

I also disagree with comments such as: "Due to Zamanfou, as of 2006 the cohesiveness of the Greek society has deteriorated somewhat", "this was also one cause of the less than optimal recovery of the Greek economy, as a member of the European Union, during the eighties and the nineties" and others, some of which Dimitris pointed out. if you have any evidence for these claims, please present it here. If you don't, and it's your personal opinion, then reserve it for yourself - but remember that pasting a link from the site of Nikos Dimou does not in any way prove the veracity of your statements. If you must include such claims in the article, then explain why, and rewrite it in such a way that the highly personal quality of the statement is reflected: "Author [..] has speculated/postulated that...".

1. you can't rewrite it to reflect any personal qualities.
2. why doesn't a link from the site of Nikos Dimou prove my point?

Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 10:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Hand gestures section

The highly ironic quality of this paragraph (and indeed the whole article) is appreciated, but is ultimately inappropriate and unfitting. I will consider shortening it, but if consensus agrees, then it will be removed save for some cursory comments.

Well, be bold with the hand gestures section. We can always talk about about it afterwards. Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 10:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Loufa seection

I think this represents more truthful statements than the rest of the article, and maybe the whole article should focus on it, with the rest presented as an incarnation, in normal social life, of said occurrence in the military. However, there is this:

"During that time, they are brought to the realisation that they live in a conservative society, where their own self-worth is irrelevant."

Again, this is unsubstuntiated and groundless. The only thing that I accept as valid, is the adherence to conformity and discipline, as necessary steps to achieve teamwork, that the army( and any army) tries to instill.

King Gale 07:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated, how? Ever heard anybody trying to achieve something in their tour of duty, and didn't have a "visma" to help him do it? And I would totally agree with you (about the confomity and discipline) but we both know that those two words in the Greek army have a whole other meaning and end other than achieving team spirit, ie, the Souvlatzis outside of the camp has to live, somehow, too, dude ;) Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 10:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

This is just too much

Not being a member of Wikipedia I had no way of signing my comments here, except by my name (Dimitris) and my IP address (which by the way is dynamic and constantly changes). Returning to this page after a long time I find a comment made by another Dimitris (it is an extremely common name after all) and an answer to that comment by the authors of the ‘Zamanfou’ article, obviously thinking they are answering to the same person, in which they actually call him/me a fascist.

Is that what it comes down to people? That’s what you understood. From all my effort to specifically explain exactly what I find objectionable in your article, and why I believe that it is inappropriate for an Encyclopedia you conclude that I am a fascist? I disagree with you so I must be some fascist pig right?

From day one you have systematically attacked and insulted anyone who dared to disagree with you, in complete disregard of Wikipedia principles and when you were instructed by a Wikipedia administrator to keep it civilized, you proceeded (in an effort to persuade us of the validity of your claims perhaps) to write him and everybody else on your testicles.

Since you keep degrading this discussion to the level of name calling and personal attacks, I will say that I came here unfortunately having mistaken stupidity for sarcasm. But the true nature of things became crystal clear pretty soon, after reading the biased, illogical and sometimes utterly idiotic comments that you kept adding every time someone had the nerve to actually disagree with you. And in those comments not once did I see the open minded thinker who actually cares enough to read what the others believe, but only the fanatical zealot who wants to ridicule and silence. In your biased passion you have unfortunately come pretty close to the fascists you hate. And there is something else that you have in common. In the heat of your fanaticism you take the Greeks and you render them unique. You separate them from all the rest. It is the same principle really. It is just that they (the fascists) believe that we are different (as in better) and you believe that we are different (as in worst).

The fact remains that the ‘Zamanfou’ article is an assortment of unsubstantiated personal views and opinions covered thinly by a pseudoscientific veil. It should not be an article in this encyclopedia as it clashes with a number of its most basic principles. But what do I really know? Apparently I am just some fascist pig and I should probably go home, read ‘Mein Kampf’ and practice on how to raise my right arm in a more abrupt manner. Dimitris --195.74.238.142 18:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

You keep removing the disputed tag

Please do not remove the disputed tag. This has been discussed here before. Why do you think that the article is not disputed anymore? You are quite the little dictator aren't you? Dimitris --195.74.238.142 18:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

What a great article

I was sent this as a joke.

By the time i finished I was convinced i was faced with a masterpiece of commentary on greece which was both hilarious and very pertinent.

I have spent 23 months in the Greek navy. I have lectured Sociology at the University of London. And as an investment banker with direct exposure to the cutting edge of the Greek economy and its relation to the rest of Europe i found the article totally spot on.

Loufa, in all its zamanfou glory is the day to day norm of the Greek armed forces. This has been my experience and the experience of just about every greek I have met. Do I have statistical evidence to back it up? No. So what, the social sciences often cannot rely on hard numbers to reach conclusions for very good reasons: it is sometimes not possible. On other occasions some things are so obvious, so clear you do not carry out research to verify it. Will the sun rise tomorrow? It will and I have no idea which precise academic work proves that. If this is not a directly relevant example, what about the following: are Greeks, on the whole (not all, of course) largely anti-american in a way that, say the britons are not? I would be categorical that they are and I would base my opinion on my own personal impressions, not on any "hard empirical evidence". On the same basis I feel I only need to refer to the experience of those that have had the good fortune of having been drafted in the armed forces to demonstrate that Loufa is a social phenomenon, worthy of analysis as much as unemployment and poverty, possibly even more so, being a likely contributary factor for both.

But Loufa is not just an army phenomenon, though it is, as the author of the article rightly points out a phenomenon which within the army it is located within a context of theoretical full accountability of one's actions - and that in fact makes it even more accutely perceptible. It is a Greek-wide phenomenon and it has indeed led to Greece having some characteristics which one will not find at this widespread scale easily anywhere on the planet and certainly not in Europe.

Let me give you some examples from my vocation as an investment banker: the ring road around athens, the so called "attiki odos". It has the record of having taken the longest period of time for any concession project anywhere NOT for constructing but for simply agreeing the contract, after the deal was awarded, between the banks, the contractors and the government. How long were people pushing paper around at turtle speed, for how long were civil officials scratching their balls and burying their heads in the sand, for how many weeks on end, week after week, were meetings postponed, conference calls cancelled, government work

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.235.44.82 (talk • contribs)

DUDE! from my part, thanks! I knew there were sane Greeks out there! :D Project2501a | ΑΝΥΠΟΤΑΞΙΑ, ΑΠΑΛΛΑΓΗ, Ι-5 17:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Zamanfou (συνεχεια)

Εχοντας διαβασει τα σχολια των αναγνωστων και τα δικα σου, θεωρω πως το αρθρο ειναι καλο αλλα θα επρεπε να περιλαμβανει ενα γενικοτερο φοντο των δεκαετιων 70 80 90. Αδυνατει να απαντησει σε ερωτηματα οπως :

• Ποιος ξεκινησε το ρευμα;
• Υπηρχαν δηλωμενοι θιασωτες;
• Υπαρχουν ουσιωδη παραδειγματα της επιδρασης του;

Καποια ελλιπης απαντηση εχει δοθει. Π.χ. πεθαινει ενας φανταρος απο μαλακιες των διοικητων του αλλα στα @@ μας καπου θα εφταιγε και αυτος για να την επαθε. Πρεπει να ξεκαθαρισω πως το 80 ημουν απο -3 εως 7 χρονων οποτε δεν εχω ουσιωδεις αναμνησεις. ωστοσο πιστευω πως σε μια περιοδο πολιτικης ασταθειας 89-91 που γινονταν εκλογες ανα 3 μηνες με συστημα κοντα στην απλη αναλογικη οπου καθε κομα μπορει να παρει λογο λογικα θα υπηρχε υπηρχε ισα ισα μεγαλη κινητικοτητα. Η ανοδος του Μητσοτακη με 50% και η πτωση του με 39% (διαφορα δεκα μοναδων σε 3 χρονια) δειχνει κατι αναλογο. Οσον αφορα την ποδοσφαιροποιηση αυτο θεωρειται γενικα φαινομενο της χουντας για αποπροσανατολισμο του κοσμου. Η δεκαετια 60 ( εποχη του 1 1 4 ) ειναι μαλλον περιοδος κινητικοποιησης που τελειωνει με την ανατροπη του παπανδρεου. Τοτε καθε μερα γινονταν πορεις. (η τουλαχιστον ετσι γραφουν τα χρονικα της εποχης)

Θελω να καταληξω οτι το ζαμανφου ειναι μαλλον η ασχολια του απελπισμενου μη πολιτικοποιημενου πολιτη που απλως αδιαφορει για τις πολιτικες εξελιξεισ γιατι

• θεωρει πως δεν τον επηρρεαζουν
• θεωρει πως δεν μπορει να επεμβει

π.χ. στις ευρωεκλογες ομως ειχαμε 35% αποχη (αν θυμαμαι καλα). Αρα μπορουμε να πουμε πως το ζμφ εκφραζει ενα ρευμα 35% του ελληνικου πληθυσμου (που ειναι μικρο) και απεχει συνειδητα απο την πολιτικοποιηση του επειδη

• ολοι ειναι μαλακες
• ολοι ειναι ιδιοι
• ολοι τα αρπαζουν
• αλλα η πιο ομορφη χωρα ειναι η Ελλαδαρα ( η ετσι τουλαχιστον μας εμαθαν στο δημοτικο)

Πιστευω οτι αυτη ειναι η ουσι του ΖΜΦ.

• Εδω ειναι Ελλαδα. Οποιον δεν τον αρεσει να γκρεμοτσακιστει και να φυγει!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Panosfidis (talk • contribs)