From: gavrila@imhfhp16.epfl.ch (Spyros Gavrilakis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: Greece and the EC (Greg 1)
Date: 8 Jan 93 13:42:19 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne

In article <1993Jan5.210517.20575@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, g
d8f@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Gregory  Dandulakis) writes:


>In modern propaganda regime you never use *false* information,
>you just use *selective* one.

Possibly. However, the chorus of unfavourable reports from at
least 3 different countries should make one think a bit.

>As far as my information comes
>from the same sources like yours. The differerence lies that
>I don't follow their political connotations blindly.

Rejection of criticism is dead easy. It is instinctive to defend
one's self and indignation comes with no effort.  However, facing
up to criticism is much more difficult and it has some personal
and social costs. Flipping into reverse-accusation mode is
no sign of sophistication (cf Hasan B. Mutlu).

>You follow their arguments. You don't explain why they keep
>dealing in financial terms so warmly yet.

They honor their signatures with a difficult country.

>Pretty good. It's $18 billion. Still you don't answer the question
>about the total balance sheet.

If u mean the "cost" of closing down various concerns, it is not
obvious that there is one. Companies that they cannot stand
competition are worthless. If the "other costs" are unbearable,
Greece can reconsider is membership of the EC - which  at present
has no intention of doing. It is perhaps futile to whine that
Greece sufferred from its entry into the EC since the way out
of the EC is open to any country that has complains.
(There is a second post from Gregory with extracts from EIU.)

>EC deals with Greece. Not with parties.

With the goverments in power.


>They accepted Spain and Portugal after the
>supposed troubles with Greece were felt. And still they evaluate
>the Ibirian markets pretty well. If Greece was the only trouble
>they could easily single her out one way or an other.

This is all wrong. Since their admission into the EC, Spain and
Portugal (initially the poorest country in the EC), have thrived.
Their membership had substantial beneficial effects on their
economies and democracies. Both Iberian countries have left Greece
standing even though the latter entered the EC earlier. The
admission of the two Iberian countries was no mistake.

>Between foreign ministries there is NO sympathy; there is only
>common interests.

Interesting; W. Churchill has misquoted you!

>>>because it has not yet become equal to the  strength of the
>>> ex-colonial states,
>>
>>Cheap shot this one. Somehow the wealth of the rich countries is
>>morally tainted and Greeks would rather live in honorable povetry.
>>There are ex-colonial countries that are relatively poor and
>>countries with no colonial past that are rich. This cannot be used
>>as excuse for Greece.

>Tell me one. They were either resources' rich (including geostrategically
>justifying mass US support) or ex-colonial countries.

Portugal b4 the EC entry :  ex-colonial, poor.
Switzerland : no colonies, no natural resource, very independent & rich.


>>The conspiracy theory again. Where is the evidence? Was the
>>case of the "Yugo Kalaboki" manufactured by the wicked media barons?

>Yugo Kalaboki? Yes check the Italians ones :-).

Horror! What advertisment for Greek morals.

>Gr

sg



Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek