FIXED
IDEA
(Publication
Date: April 16, 2007)
I don’t know if I’m fixed in my ways.
My views are generally not fixed; I’m open-minded!
***
During the week, I received a call from the Ministry of National Education. The reason they were calling me was to invite me to the Minister’s press briefing on history textbooks, and I accepted the invitation, saying, ‘Sure thing.’
I suppose we were “informed” at the press briefing.
I say “I suppose” because, speaking for myself, “I wasn’t informed.”
The Minister had clearly prepared very well. He came before us with books, briefing documents, and other materials, and talked and talked.
I did what one is supposed to do in these kinds of situations: while the Minister spoke, I listened, making facial expressions and nodding in ways that meant, “Hmm. Yes… Quite right… Of course…”
Then the moment we had been waiting for finally arrived. The Minister said, “Does anyone have any questions?”
That was the moment I realized I hadn’t been informed!
After a few questions from my colleagues, I decided to ask one too; for some reason…
Eventually, I asked my question and, as you might expect, I wasn’t informed.
One thing was very clear: It was an informational meeting, and I wasn’t being informed.
I left that
meeting innocent and just as uninformed.
Now, asking myself questions, I’m trying to find answers to whether there’s something wrong with me: Question 1: I wonder why I’m not being informed.
Answer 1: I suppose information is being provided, but it doesn’t satisfy me. So, in fact, I am being informed, but I don’t realize it.
Question 2: Why am I not satisfied, or
why don’t I say that I’m dissatisfied?
Answer 2: I suppose I’m fixed in my ways, or the people answering me are fixed in theirs, and that’s why the pointlessness of expressing my dissatisfaction prevents me from pressing the issue.
Question 3: Come on, Cem, stop all that. Look, the reader’s getting bored too. Just say what’s bothering you so you can get it off your chest, and the reader can too.
Besides, this way the reader can consider the things you’re not satisfied with.
Answer 3: What’s the hurry? We were getting to that subject, little by little, anyway.
Well, in brief, the question I asked the Minister was this: ‘Why are we unilaterally removing hostile statements about the Greeks from history textbooks?’
The answer I received—in brief—was: “Just because they don’t do it, should we not do it too? Besides, this is a good thing.”
All right, I agree too: It’s not a good thing for a school textbook to contain statements denigrating a people. I’ve also raised this before in this column; however, what I don’t understand, or haven’t been informed about, is why it’s being done unilaterally.
In other words, doesn’t this need to be a two-sided process for it to be a good thing?
And, with all due respect, the answer to that question cannot be, “Just because they don’t do it, should we not do it too?”
Won’t the result of this be that, in the future, young Greek people will look at your young people with hostility and resentment, while your young people will wear baffled expressions as they wonder why the Greeks look at them with hostility and resentment?
As I said above, I’m not fixed in my ways.
In my view, removing hostile statements and so on isn’t all that important.
What matters to me is the justification found for what’s being done, and the effort to convince people at any cost by invoking factors such as the EU, the US, and so on, to prove that it is the right thing to do.
No, whatever you say, carrying this out unilaterally is, in my view, an entirely wrong strategy.
Why?
Because, according to this strategy, the EU is supposedly commending us on this and similar issues…
In fact, we shouldn’t be doing this just because the EU commends us.
The EU gets everything without giving us anything, and yet we’re asking that EU for something.
If you were in the EU’s position, would you give anything to leaders like these?
Shouldn’t we be the ones making things difficult because the EU isn’t keeping its promises?
Do people think that by doing these things—by being good boys—we’ll get what we want?
Or does the EU think this of us when we do these things: The “minority” administration in Cyprus has come around and removed the hostile statements from its textbooks. Things are going well in Cyprus.
As I said, the issue is not about removing hostile statements or anything like that!
The issue is the question, “Who will benefit from these things we’re doing?” and the answers to it.
In my view, with this strategy, we’ll suffer more harm than good.
By the way, while I thought I hadn’t been informed at the meeting, I should say that I did learn something, even if it wasn’t about the meeting: Our government continues to be fixed in its ways! Especially on the EU issue…
Be respectful in traffic!
All texts and
other content on this page are original and belong to Cem KAR. They may not be used, even in part, in any way in print or any other electronic medium (CD, Internet, etc.) without permission.