Talk:Communist Party of Greece

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Greece Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Communist Party of Greece, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Mid	This article has been rated as a Mid priority article
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked

It was founded as SEKE (sosialistiko ergatiko komma Elladas) and participated in the second international for a couple of years before becoming communist and changing name.

Indeed. I intend to write something about this and Abraham Benaroya in the (not-so-near) future). In the meanwhile, be bold and make the changes you suggest on this article. Etz Haim

Contents 1 logo better than sticker 2 Too much Anti-Communist starch! 3 Ambivalence? 4 Yes, Ambivalence! (although that term does imply free will...) 5 This is quite a complex matter 6 Rastapopoulos's editing of editing 7 Are the stub tags needed? 8 Eleutherios Stavrides 9 Claim by former King Constantine false 10 Name of the language 11 Merger 12 Elections 13 template merging 14 Mass emigration 15 Stop reverting my changes 16 KKE - the same party over 90 years? 17 To be included in article 18 Revision Control and accepted sources 19 Article Structure and Revisions/Additions 20 KKE's position on the secession of Macedonia and Thrace from sovereign Greece 21 Please use a spell checker! 22 Material removed from article 23 Socialists, Communists and other naming conventions on wikipedia article 24 Is the expression "Official KKE history" a valid one? 25 KKE'S policy on the secession of northern Greece 26 Aim

[edit] logo better than sticker

I think the KKE logo should be placed instead of that sticker.

[edit] Too much Anti-Communist starch!

Rastapopoulos said: "This is a very sanitized "party-line" description. I added the bit about KKE's ambivalence to join the resistance during the period the Hitler-Stalin pact was in effect. Also there is no mention of the fate of some of the leaders of KKE (one, in particular, "committed suicide" in the USSR). There is no mention of the Stalinist purges on former comrades (eg the "untimely demise" of scores of Greek Troskyites in the hands of KKE members). Also, the Greek civil war is simplistically described a fight between resistance fighters and British backed right-wingers...in brief the article is one sided and leaves quite a lot to be desired.Rastapopoulos 08:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, you know what to do...--Damac 08:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)"

Let's see: The Communist Party of Greece is a Stalinist Party that its only effort was to kill or destroy its members and its country. It had anti-patriotic positions which led to similar actions during all phases of modern greek history!

Is that so? I would very much like someone to explain how come such a dispicaple party can hold for 90 years? How became the leader of the greek resistance against the Nazi-Fasist occupation during 1941-1944. Whith what strength and human resource could fight a Civil War in the whole country against the British - US puppets? Why it was bound for 40 years with thousands of its members executed and one hundret thousand in -prison for no less than 10 years ( 1946-1958 and 1967-1973)?

Well, silly people those greeks! A party led by the "Slayer" Stalin, could bring them in strikes and an 8 hour day work become true. Such a dispicaple party, could give the fight in the streets and pension became reality for all greeks. Such a small fraction of a small fraction of the greek left, with no allies, could call into arms 150.000 people during the Nazi-Fasist occupation of 1940-1944, multiplied its members from 2000 in 1940 ( with more than 1000 imprisoned by the dictatorship of the Fasist - British ally goverment of Metaxas) to 800.000 by 1944, the day that Greece was liberated. This modern Slayers, the Communists, could become ally with 2.000.000 of Greek citizens and form EAM that led the liberation fights during all those years. And what is more the "rebelion against the State" as the right-wing historians wants to call the fight against then new invadors ( British and US) was sustained for 3 years with more that 30.000 fighters, a goverment and almost half of the country controled by this goverments rules.

Oh, now I understand why 100.000 were imprisoned, why the NAZI colaborators, X-members and tagmatasfalites were not brought to justice! Because they were fighting against these human slayers, the communists!!! Good job lads! Great!

Question is simple now: Did KKE fought (and still fighting) for a better society, or is founded and still exists to cause crimes? If we follow the main book tha wiki is refering, communists have to be burned to fire. But peoples fight has different story to tell...

D.

This page appears to have been written by a right-wing propagandist. The KKE is presented as nothing more than a band of thugs without any other intent that to destroy Greece. This is typical right-wing slanderous propaganda. The people who wrote this article are the same (ideologically at least) as those who truly betrayed Greece and not only did not fight the fascist invaders but also joined them in the plight and rape of Greece – Nazi Collaborationists attempting to rewrite history via wikipedia.

These people sided with the Nazis (when they figured it suited there selfish and murderous interests best) and later, after the liberation of Greece, (to which the sacrifice of the lives of thousands of KKE members, partisans and sympathisers greatly contributed), they joined the new invaders, UK + USA, and formed another dictatorship to oppress the Greek people, and murder communists by the thousands. A regime which according to this pathetic article was legitimate (a legitimate fascist regime :-)).

Ironically, if it wasn’t for the efforts and sacrifices of the KKE (and others), there might not even exist bourgeois democracy in Greece today.

The article needs serious revision for it to become something more than just bad quality propaganda.JustMe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.192.60.213 (talk) 14:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia, so feel free to edit. However please read and understand wiki NPOV policies first: your assertion that people who edited this article are Nazi collaborators is certainly not NPOV...Rastapopoulos 14:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ambivalence?

During the invasion of Greece in 1940, the KKE was banned and its leadership imprisoned. In October 31, three days after the war started, Secretary General Nikos Zahariades sent a letter from the prison, which was published in the party's newspaper, calling all communists to defend the country.

As for "eventually joined the resistance", I removed it because EAM-ELAS was actually the first resistance organization to be formed...

[edit] Yes, Ambivalence! (although that term does imply free will...)

As alienating as it might be for KKE supporters, the party at first did nothing to help defend the country from the invading Italians and Germans. Why? Simply because the USSR and the Axis countries were de facto allies at the time, as per the Molotov - Ribbentropp pact of August 23 1939.

Zahariadis's “patriotic” letter you mention was disavowed by the party. He was even accused of releasing it to win the favor of Maniadakis and be released from prison. According to the London based / Soviet-funded newspaper World News and Views (December 14 1940), the letter was fabricated by the Metaxas regime -- the article also stated that KKE did not support the war, which it considered to be a feud between imperialist opponents (Andrew L. Zapantis, Greek Soviet Relations 1917-1941, 1983).

On November 16 1940, a second letter was released by Zahariadis which accused the Greek army of waging a “fascist” and “imperialistic war” and appealed to the USSR for peace mediation. The KKE Central Committee (December 7) called upon Greek soldiers to desert their ranks and overthrow the government. In a third letter (January 1941), Zahariadis reiterated the latter, and reasserted KKE’s somewhat bizarre position for the secession of Greek Macedonia from Greece.

The Molotov - Ribbentropp pact caused understandable confusion to many KKE party members at the time. In his memoirs, KKE cadre Yiannis Manousakas mentions how some KKE officials expected the Nazi invaders to be allies and liberators: “the Germans will not bombard us, because the mustached-one (Stalin) told them not to do so, they are communists there (Germany), they are his (Stalin's) own people!” (Έμφύλιος στή σκιά της Άκροναυπλίας - Έκδόσεις "Δωδώνη - 1986)

The Greek communist party’s pacifist position was finally reversed once Germany surprise-attacked the USSR on June 22 1941. Then, and only then, did the KKE call upon the Greek people to resist the fascist and Nazi invaders. Their position was was once again dictated from abroad. EAM-ELAS was eventually formed thereafter.Rastapopoulos 11:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

this is not true. even before the nazis attack to ussr, communists formed epitropi ethnikis sotirias and metopo ethnikis sotirias,and other organizations of resistance against nazis.Do not forget that hundreds of communists were imprisoned from the fascist regime of Metaxas in akronafplia. Many of these communists managed to escape and immmediately organize resistasnt groups.Communists fighted against Italian and German forces from the very first moment. On the contrary most of the old political parties left the country and came back only after Greece was free. Zachariades letter seemed to have played a great role in the willingness of greek people to resist.Do not forget that Greece was the only occupied country from nazis that did not form and send army against russians.

[edit] This is quite a complex matter

First of all, I agree that it was the will of the cpsu that the party would not join the war. It is also true that confusion existed among the party's officials, considering 1)their until that time scarce political and communist education 2)the fact that few of them were actually not in jail and 3)that the soviet union, where some of the party's officials escaped, through radio transmissions intervened in the party's decisions.

there is no published version of the second letter of zahariadis; the archives never refer to it. It was probabaly transmitted by radio (if you are aware of a printed version plz notify me)

the third letter you refer to i have never heard of; asking about it, all the info i got state that it is highly unlikely that it was published by the party. after the ethnical minority adjustments in macedonia, the party seldom referred to a macedonian problem.

Zahariades never actually acknowledged the second letter. More importantly, it wasn't acknowledged by anyone that the party influenced.

About the resistance: It is an undisputed fact that Thanasis Klaras was at Larissa during March, where he was sent by the party to recruit members for EAM-ELAS. The appearance of Klaras in the region is reported even by police reports; and it would be quite extraordinary for a wanted Klaras to have vacations in Larissa during 1941. Consequently the formation of EAM-ELAS was decided before the German Invasion.

In conclusion I believe that the fact that no communist denied service in the war, following any party statement plus the acts of Klaras prove my statements.

My intentions are not to make all party actions look perfect; I would never deny its role in the treaty of varkiza, or it being a soviet puppet from time to time. Consider however, that there are numerous versions of the party's history, each from a different pov. There's Manousakas' pov, Lazarides pov but also hundreds of other members povs that disagree. For the current length of the article, I believe that sticking to some basic facts is enough. I intent however to write a full article, where such statements would fill a more-than-few sections

[edit] Rastapopoulos's editing of editing

Rastapopoulos wrote:

"1. First of all the civil war was not a war between ELAS against monarchist forces, but against the government. Non Communists af all stripes (including republicans, monarchists) as well as non-Stalinist leftists fought on the side of the government.

2. Yes, the British sided with the Greek government. But how can you say this and hide the fact that ELAS was also backed militarily by Greece's communist northern neighbors? When Tito broke off with Stalin, Yugoslavia stopped training and supporting ELAS/DS guerillas, which was decisive for the outcome of the civil war.

3. Your contention that the Anglo-Americans occupies Greece may sound be self-evident to a Stalinist, but would insult just about everyone else's intelligence.

4. Who raped whom and who shaved whose head is tabloidal and really debases the discussion. Heinous crimes were committed on both sides. You cannot just highlight the victims of one side and ignore the victims og the other!

Please lets try to respect peoples' intelligence and keep things balanced and NPOV! Rastapopoulos 12:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)"

1. Civil War is Civil War between two goverments of the same nation! This so called "uprising" of the KKE against the legal goverment holds no water as the goverment was firstly appointed by the British forces, then "elected" on the "elections" of 1946 and constantly supported by US and British forces, German colaborators and of cource the greek Capital. On the other side you had people forces with different prespective of govermental power. If you try to return to the theory of "Communist Uprising", then "lets try to respect peoples' intelligence and keep things balanced"

Your unreferenced insinuations about elections of 1946 being rigged and of Greece being ruled by German collaborators and greek "Capital" reflects your Marxist totalitarian dogma. It would hold water at a KNE Festival but not at Wikipedia Rastapopoulos 07:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, lets see: 'I pledge my legeon to Adolf Hitler' was the oath of X regiments, the greeks that colaborated with NAZI in the military field ! Those were the base of the "goverment" army! Ok, they were not just German colaborators. They were colabarotors of the highest bitter - Germans were there bosses during 1941-1944. Dkace

The X organization was formed during the war by G. Grivas, and was in liason with the Greek government in exile. It was undoubtedly pro-monarchist and anti-communist. I have no sympathy for X, as I am not monarchist but Democratic, so I have no intention to defend it. However, in all fairness, although its opponents accused it of having been a collaborationist, butthere is no evidence to that effect, as is mentioned by a fairly NPOV article in Kathimerini (http://news.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_ell_2_03/06/2007_229281). And in any case, it was a small group, certainly not the bulk of the Greek Army under George Papandreou, which included non-marxists of all stripes and not only monarchists, including democratic resistance fighters such as EDES. Rastapopoulos 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Of cource! X tradors along with a few high ranked police officers and policemen were all on the side of the greek people suffering from the occupation. That is why 2.000.000 people endered the ranks of EAM and were giving the fight in any street or field of Greece. Grivas, G. Papandreou, Gonatas, Evert, all find common ground after liberation by the forces of ELAS and replaced the NAZIs with the British! Dkace

Please provide references to mainstream historians (not KKE members or nazis) that claim that Greece was occupied by the British! Rastapopoulos 13:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Start reading Mazauer - if he is not to Communist for you - and the term occupation will pop in your brain. Dkace

2. Explain this: untill September 1948, DSE had politic, military and financial control of 70% Peloponissos ( I am sure you can read this in Tsakalotos memoires and read between the lines.)Last time I checked the map, Peloponissos has no borders with Yugoslavia, Albania, or Bulgaria!!!

So what? Are you implying that the DSE guerillas were not trained, armed and financed by Greece's totalitarian Soviet-controlled neighbors? Rastapopoulos 07:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

It is DSE fighters. Before the Greek Civil war the Yogoslavians, the Albanian and the Bulgarian partizans had formed together with ELAS a joined command center for the Balcan area. So, when the new invadors arrived - that is the British - they of cource helped and aid the Democratic Army of Greece against the new non(?)-fasist invasion.Explain Peloponissos control first. Dkace

This argument is as ridiculous as if one were to argue that the Greek Army was not supported by the British because the UK does not share common borders with Greece!!! Wake up and smell the coffee: the Greek army *was* armed and trained by the Brits just like the ELAS/DS guerillas *were* armed and trained by the Soviet Union via their puppet states north of Greece. It was a civil war only to the extent that Greeks were killing Greeks. All similarities end there! Rastapopoulos 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

a. I return all this low level inssault like "ridiculous" and other. You are loosing your temper - are you running out of arguments? b. Tell me how it is possible to send 30.000 troops in a foreign ground, thousands kilometers away from their original location without any mean of transportation on a Civil War which a child can understand its special features: No fight line! The enemy is - can be- will be next to you! Please, read first Tsakalotos memoires ( Tsakalotos being the Chief of Staff of the Morch -Fasist Army). You will learn many things about fighting a Civil War Dkace

I did not say that you are ridiculous, but that your argument is: indeed, you have mixed the dates up of the Molotov Ribbentrop treaty. The idea that the communists lost steam and were eventually defeated has been refered to by many historical accounts, including books by Chris Woodhouse and Richard CloggRastapopoulos 13:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I am glad that you "clear" and "direct" answer is covering my point for Civil War "b. Tell me how it is possible to send 30.000 troops in a foreign ground, thousands kilometers away from their original location without any mean of transportation on a Civil War which a child can understand its special features: No fight line! The enemy is - can be- will be next to you" That is to remind to you and the readers my point for fighting a Civil War in a certain country boarders.

Again, are you suggesting that the "DS" received no military aid / training from the north?Rastapopoulos 13:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

DSE did received aid in terms of heavy weaponry and ammo mainly from Yogoslavia and some of these ammo where Soviet equipment. These weapons were held - as all relevant reports from high rank officers of DSE indicate- on the Main HQ of DSE in Vitsi and Grammos as it was impossible to move mass loads of weapons all over Greece. As explained in another post in the Greek Civil war there was no certain battle line. Most of the weaponry of the DSE fighters was arms and ammo hidde it before the Varkiza treaty ( 10-15%), weapons gained from small or big fights in all territories ( Capture of Karpenisi 1947, Capture of Karditsa 1948, Capture of Zacharw 1947 (twice), 1948) First Battle of Grammos 1948 ( 70 days with retreat to Vitsi HQ ground and counter attack to Grammos). First groups of DSE fighters were armed from police and MAY ( Self-Defence Units of Field Ground), people that had originally nothing to do with the Civil War and were just peasants with no will to fight on any side. There are reported cases ( not more than 10% in total is my estimation) that these farmers were former EAM members supporting DSE troops. Further more, as Police forces were mostly manned by german colaborators and X-guerillas, they had no moral advantage during battle against DSE fighters that were fighting for strong believes. The above can be easily proven - but not uniquely - by the fact that the future of 3rd Battalion of DSE - Peloponissos forces, were killed one by one after the last big fight of Zacharw in 1948 as they supply units couldn't capture enough ammo to sustain the 20.000 soldiers in the region and 3 attempts to supply the DSE forces from northern mainland or the islands of Ionio were not succesfull. So, the Battalion had no fate against 80.000 heavily armed troops from the Monarch - Fasist Goverment of Athens led by General Tsakalotos. As General writes in his memoires, the US advisors urged him to unlease an attack on Peloponnisos otherwise US couldn't spend any more forces or money to the Greek Civil War.

In conclusion, yes DSE accepted military aid from other brother-armies, but this help wasn't the main power that sustained this War.80.76.56.51 13:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC) Dkace

3." Mon General, you can start WW3 from Greece" said Frederiki ( the so called "Queen of Greece")to the American Field Marshal tha came to inspect the progress on the greek Civil war in 1948 and the outcome of the US aid on military advisors and military support.

I have no sympathy for the late Queen. How do you feel about the KKE's position against resistance to the Axis powers war before Hitler invaded the USSR? How do you feel about KKE's pacifist stance vis-a-vis the Nazis due to the Molotov-Robbentrop treaty? Rastapopoulos 07:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Chief Leader of ELAS, Aris Velouchiwtis was a low rank officer of the Greek Army in the Greek - Italian War. He was member of KKE central comitee and he managed to return from the front with most of his unit and there weapons in order to start guerilla war against the occupatiors. This was the issue with the few non-imprisoned members of KKE that fought the war in the mountains of PINDOS together with the rest of the greeks. The fasist METAXA goverment didn't allow the imprisoned communists to fight and delivered them to the NAZI as soon as they surrendered Greece to them. Why? but they were communists!!! In Creta, when British troops decided that they leave the island, Communis prisoners escaped from police custody and joined the Greek armed forces defending the airport and other locations. The theory of "pacifist KKE, due to Molotov-Robbentrop treaty" can't explain how the Communist party in Greece urged for an anti-fascist front in 1935 and insisted on this all the 4 years of METAXA dictatorship that surrendered Greece to the British plans for buffering Egypt and Middle East colonies.Dkace

Aris Velouchiotis (who was later disowned by KKE and who died under tragic circumstances, betrayed by his party) obviously defied his party instructions by fighting in the Greek-Italian war. You assert that the Molotov-Ribbentrop "theory" is refuted by the fact that KKE was anti-fascist in 1935. This argument is utterly ridiculous, since the Molotov-Ribbentrop was signed in 1939!!! As a result of the treaty, communists in Greece and elsewhere (notably in France) were strategic allies of Hitler until Hitler attached the USSR. In his memoirs, Greek communist Iannis Ioannidis wrote about a certain fellow called Maggos (a regional communist cadre) who said the following amazing thing when Greece was being bombed by the axis: "The Germans will not bomb us. The moustached-one (Stalin) will not let them, he said that they are communists there (in Germany)" (Γιάννης Ιωαννίδης, ΑΝΑΜΝΗΣΕΙΣ, p. 63). Do you believe that when the Greek people said NO to the Italians, through the mouth of Metaxas, that they were "surrendering Greece to the British plans"? That was the official position of both Goebbels and KKE at the time! Rastapopoulos 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Aris Velouchiotis, or Thanasis Klaras was an old member of KKE, participating on its Central Comitee. He only once defined the party's orders - and that was after the Varkiza treaty. Aris Velouchiotis was the Chief of Staff in modern terms of the Greek Partizan Army, ELAS. Guerilla warfare has its own rules, especially if guerillas are not just a few people struggling for their lives, but a few hundrets of thousands building a new life. Left winged guerillas organizations has a three-men command starting from platoon level up to General Command. The military commander ( in ELAS which was formed after the formation of the Greek Army before the war ) more than 800 officers joint its rank with General Sarafis one of the first recruted officers. The General Commander of Creta joined a few months later and he was appointed as General Commander of the Central Comand Post. Second on equal rank in each unit was the political advisor, appointed by EAM. His task was to confirm the political benefits and loses from a military strike, to keep up the moral of the unit, to make sure that the unit is understanding and helping the commanding authority to each maximum. Finally the decision was up to the Captain, a higher rank partizan who was appointed to each unit because of both his political and military knowledge.

Under this formation ELAS became from a unit of 40 men to a regular army of 150.000 ( 50.000 being reserves, supply line personel, hospital personel). It had cavalary, saboteur, marine and amfibius units working next to full formation Greek regiments. If -on your read of the history - Greek people are murderers and slayer communists and only those few like Grivas, Papandreou, Damaskinos, Evert, Tsolakooglou, were the blossoms of the greek Sociaty, then you don't belong to the people but to each oppressors, whoever they are: Fasists, Monarchists, "Democrats" Turks, Nazis, name them.Dkace

I believe that at the time Greeks killed Greeks. Life had lost all value, people cut each other's heads with open cans (κονσερβοκούτια) and attrocities were committed from all sides. A sad and unheroic moment of modern Greek history. Yes, I would like to let the wounds heal, but not at the expense of historical accuracy: KKE, which raised its arms against its fellow Greeks in an attempt to install a Soviet-style regime, has been righly forgiven in the name of national reconciliation by the more politically-correct democratic governments of the metapolitefsi. But that does not mean that arguments demonizing those who saved Greece from Stalinist totalitarianism can go unanswered!!!Rastapopoulos 13:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Your point of view on this matter is extremely simplified and I believe this is what causes all the mix up on your line of arguments and finally your conclusions; Of cource Greeks were killing Greeks, as Vietnameze were killing Vietnamize, Koreans were killing Koreans, citizens of San Salvador were killing each other, Colombians are still killing Colombians etc, etc, etc. I don't use the three first nationalities out of the stack. CIA has admitted - and that is also in video - "NAM: The true Story of VIETNAM", that the anti-partizan tactics that they succesfully used in Greece and Korea were not able to win the war in VIETNAM. This came as a suprise to the US military. Hmmmm, Civil War I said...But then how is CIA involved on this? Another issue whereas ifone can accept a "legal" and goverment against "uprising communist rebels" or two goverments with different political believes and state programs. Dkace

4. History has many ways to be written, and much more to be read. Photos on the other hand is another story. Nobody has fotos of DSE fighter holding heads of monarc-fasist army soldiers. On the other hand, a huge collection of photographs all over greece show thousends heads of DSE fighters hanging over their slayers.

What is a "monarc-fasist" soldier? Are you refering to the Greek soldiers who fought Mussolini and offered the Allies their first victory against the Axis at the same time KKE was urging Greeks not to fight in an "imperialistic war" against Italy? As for flaunting photo collection of dead Greeks communists or republicans, do you really feel it makes a difference? I have seen photos of dozens of "monarco fascist" children and women civilians slaughtered by the DSE and thrown in a well at Meligala, but flaunting them would be a sensationalistic and populist tabloid approach but would do nothing to help heal the wounds of that nightmarish period in Greek history. Rastapopoulos 07:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Monarch-fasist Soldier: The Greek citizen that is fighting in the Greek Civil war on the ranks of the army controled by the goverment that was appointed by the British General Scoby and led to battle by the greek "King". In a Civil war things are quite different than a dictatorship or a Junta or anything else. My whole post is to clarify that CIVIL WAR between a nation is different in many ways than any other war. But 50 years of propaganda have destroyed many people's perspection on this "details". There is no similarity with the Greek - Italian war, were greeks fighiting with few equipment and tradors in the Joint Staff in Athens against Mussolini fasist troops. MEATAXAS in his memoires after the capture of Koritsa writes: " I can't undersand the why greeks are so enthousiastic". Dkace

Especially for Meligala dry well: It is well known that this Capital-village of Messinia, in the heart of the Messinia's fields was the base of a X regiment, the NAZI armed colaborators acting as "Regular" Greek Army during occupation. They were appointed there by the NAZI commander of Kalamata in order not to invoke Wermacht in the mainland of Messinia were ELAS had control. During there stay there they terrorized the population, they were taking prisoners - most of them were executed by them. The sortest way to burry them was this dry well. After the withdrawn of the NAZI Wermacht, the leftovers of X guerillas, citizen acted as NAZI colaborators during the occupation, and parts of the police also colaborating with the NAZIs were barricated in Meligala and gave a fight with the Regular Greek Army, ELAS. After the end of the battle, and for those that there was no claim for there body from both sides, they were barried in this well. In '90s all the bodys from the well were retrieved - 720 approximately, between them 7 women and 5 children and 2 elder persons( if I recall correctly). Since then more things were reveiled in the area for the actions of X, as since the Civil War, the right wing claimed Meligala to be the place of masaqure by the communists of thousands of civilians. Daily News paper "Eleutherotypia" in its pages of "IOS" and "IOS tis KYRIAKIS" have made a very thorough presantation of al lthe above mentioned combined with all the usefull citation for those that really want to search the trouth around this issue —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.76.56.51 (talk) 11:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Your arguments are highly POV, and are not in line with Wiki policies. If you claim that the Greek army under the democratic George Papandreou were Nazi collaborators, and that the soviet-backed guerillas who were trying to establish a soviet-type totalitarian state in Greece (as "democratic" as Albania or Bulgaria) were in fact the only proper Greek Army, then there is no point in discussing further on such a basis. Such arguments can earn you a red ribbon or a pat in the back from a ταγάρι-wearing Knitissa at the local KNE-ODIGITIS festival, but do very little to support your arguments on an international forum such as this. And please show some respect to the dead from both sides! PS IOS has a very specific ideological slant and is certainly not a neutral point of view venue!!!Rastapopoulos 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Dkace

a. What is the line of wiki policies? I guess is documented opinions, not pure propaganda! History is a science and wiki is following this science through the help of us all. If a wiki administrator is reading this discussion I would very much like to have his opinion on the insults that Rastapopoulos is throughing from time to time.

b. As I say in may of my posts and answers, History - especially history- has many reads, but you seem to want to force your own opinion and all others through them to garbige bag. You can do it. But be carefull! You may thing you are out and instead with your moves to be in the bag and never notice it! Dkace

I have never launched an ad hominem attack on anyone. Just pointed out the fallacies in your arguments.Rastapopoulos 13:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Please lets try to respect peoples' intelligence and keep things balanced

Amen to that! But please, no old-fashioned Stalinist starch! Rastapopoulos 07:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

If we want to keep the discussion up to a certain level accusations are not appropriate. You can't dictate anyone's reaction to what is written in order to accomodate your propaganda needs. And vice - verca!Dkace

I do not like to dictate anyone's position, as I am not a totalitarian communist or fascist :) Rastapopoulos 14:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Bertol Brecht wrote: "Fasism is not something comming from the future, bringing new things to me.... Its rutes embrash the system and are lost in the past, its masks are changed from time to time but not its hatriot against me!..."

Even if you don't recognizing your self under the fasist mask, you wish to dictate everyones opinion, you wish all to have the same as yours - everybody else is a totalitarian communist. This is fasism! Live with it or change it. Dkace

Maybe that is why received the Stalin Peace Prize in 1955 :-) Rastapopoulos 12:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

How dare you, a supporter of Stalinism (as is clearky evidenved by your arguments and reasoning), insinuate that I am a fascist? If your fellow ideologues had their way, to paraphrase Pink Floyd the Wall, they would have us all shot! Rastapopoulos 13:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

dkaceDkace 08:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

Well, this is true. Communists are a banch of lunatics that shoot everybody that opposes their politic line! You are quite lucky that you are still alive my friend!!! These discussions were my bread and butter during my school years, just to have fun, but are becoming quite serious 20 years later between inteligent and educated persons. Further to that it is time to learn something you obviously don't know: For the Marxist -Leninist there is no such thing as "Stalinism". This theoritical model belongs to the Cold Era propaganda against the social states. The people and the parties that have Marxism-Leninsm as a scientific tool on social and economical fields to explain the world and to suggest possible solutions af small things up to the question of political and economical power of the people are not "Stalinists". I know no-one that agrees on that, but I know plenty with same as yours attitude against left-wing and especially Communists, that like to categorise Marxists-Leninists in a simlified - and therefore a very dangarous - category of Stalinists. This in my opinion is occuring to people like you because you denie your self the benefit to be more objective and to try to see the true power that revolves the world on social and economical terms, ending up on a fasist - totalitarian opinion that everyone that claims something deferend should immediately put aside. These positions are no different of the Fasisists, the NAZIs or the buerocratic elite that was well formed during '70-'80 to the former socialistic states and today are rulling these countries as your "Democratic", 'AntiStalinist" resims.

In conclusion to all the above, I DO DARE to recognize FASIST thinking and I DO DARE to indicate that, because I do believe in the Marxist theory of human evolution; People are evolving throughout there life up to their last day. They are evolving to better or to worst. Even a conservative mind as yours, can easily understand with who to be and who to leave when it comes to the benefit of the society, regardless his/hers opinion about the people that is colaborating for a common better future. Dkace

You claim that "For the Marxist -Leninist there is no such thing as "Stalinism". This theoritical model belongs to the Cold Era propaganda": Tell that to Trotsky, who was awarded an ice-pick award in the back - oh but I forget, Trotsky was a Fascist :) How about your former comrades, who left KKE to form KKE(interior), accusing KKE of Stalinism? Agents of the cold war, or οπορτούνες (opportunists), right? Whether you like it or not, KKE refused to join other Greeks in fighting the invading Fascist Italian army, and accused that "monarchofascist" Greeks were involved in an imperialistic war dictated by the British! Let me repeat that: When the "fascists" of Metaxas fought the Fascists of Mussolini, Zachariadis was bound by the Soviet-Nazi non-intervention treaty! Once again: Greek "monarchofascists" were accused for fascism by the KKE because they defended Greece against the invading fascist Italians. Repeat: The KKE was strategically allied to the Nazis when the rest of Greeks were figting against Mussolini. Is this clear enough, or would you like me to rephrase it once more? . Άστο ρε φίλε , το γαμήσατε και ψόφησε... Rastapopoulos 12:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Convinient saying...There is another URL page in the net and an email accusing the whole greek political system as Transexuals ( literally), Sissys and whatever you want. Can they back it up? No!!! But then again who cares! They say it - it has to be true!

This expanded theory that Stalin killed Trotsky in Mexico is a good one! Let's see: Trotsky, the leader of Red Army during the revolution of 1917, disagrees with the CPSU central Comitee and believes that revolution should be exported in all countries that Comintern has powers and that this should be done immediately and should led to an uprising of the workers in all parts of the world. Soviet Union should back up this effort with military aid, troops and weapons if neccessary. This is put to a prespective that revolution in USSR can't be sustained in one country, but only if Capitalism has war all over the planet, therefore it can't win. After years of fighting inside the party's organization chart, he finnaly breaks his ties with the party and founds his own fraction inside USSR in the era that USSR was at war with all possible invasions . This is '20s. He and his fraction are expeled by USSR as enemy of the people and the revolation. Now is an enemy, not the leader of Crasnaya Armee ( Red Army). He picks as his base Mexico, which had peoples movement on the run, both political and military partizans continuing the tradition of emiliano Zapata and his troops. Furthermore Mexico is extremely close to the modern center of Capitalism, USoA. Convinient choise for a revolutionaire to start his World -Wide campaign. Was he hiding? I don't think so. He was working with local unions for his target. Did he and his fraction created enemies? You tell me! The local farm owners were his first and worst. Even not member of the Communist Party he was still a revolutioner. Was he against the Mexican Communists? Most probable as he had left Comintern and by that time all Communist Parties were acting as one all over the world. Who killed him and why? Well my guess after all the above will be... of course Stalin - himself!- because Trotski and Stalin's second wife were having an affair! When you dictate something as a fact you have to go below the surface, especially when history is involved. Me tis ygeies sas80.76.56.51 14:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Dkace

As it is obvious, you want to believe in a fairy tail. The imprisond by the fasist goverment Nikos Zachariadis, sends a letter that the fasist goverment uses for the war effort. "...Every Town, Every Village, Every House, Every Rock,should become a fortress of the liberation fight... Nikos Zachariadis was surrendered to the NAZI invators and served the rest of the occupation years in Dahau. Now, invasion of Creta was before the Enterprise "Barbarosa", wright? How come the Communist Political Prisoners escaped custody and reported to the nearest regiment?And if Communists were like this, the Creta Commander in Chief became High Ranked Officer ( General of some rank ) of ELAS ?

[edit] Are the stub tags needed?

The article has gained some volume, are the article stub tags still needed? Sections are still stubs but the whole article? -- Michalis Famelis 17:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eleutherios Stavrides

His name is missing from the past General Secretaries of KKE - I believe he served sometime during the 1920s -- but I do not have the correct dates handy. Stavrides subsequently underwent an ideological volte face, and proceeded to write a highly critical account of KKE's history.

[edit] Claim by former King Constantine false

It is explicitly stated, in his own proclamation (diaggelma) of 13.12.1967 that explained his embracing of the installation of the junta, and in which he asked for the support of the people, that "there will be no agreement or settlement with the communists, who deliberate the national ruin." As he later tried to claim, he had mediated to G. Papandreou about the legalization of the Communist Party, in 1965 - but is it possible that he ever thought of legalizing the party which he so fervently talked against in that proclamation two years later? This is taken by all historians and journalists as evidence that this claim is false. I will try to provide specific references, but the dated proclamation above can certainly be found for anyone who cares to look.

158.130.22.21 22:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name of the language

The name of the language is Macedonian, seeing as this is an article about Greece, Macedonian Slavic would be ok I suppose to be precise, but Slavo-Macedonian is a pejorative term and liable to cause offence. Please do not revert again. I'm slightly puzzled as to why an Irish guy is pushing a Greek nationalist agenda but, meh, takes all sorts :) - FrancisTyers 07:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Irish yes, Greek nationalist no and a survey of my contributions and my frequent disputes with Greek nationalists would confirm that.

I first composed the list and wrote the biographical article on the subject in question and made sure that his ethnic background was mentioned. A Greek nationalist would not have done that.

My problem is using the term Macedonian for people in history before the formation of the Republic of Macedonia. As regards terms being pejorative - defined as where someone uses a term to express criticism of someone or something - this was certainly not my intention and I apologise if it did cause offence. However, what's pejorative is always down to subjective sensibilities and it is worth bearing in mind that there are people who find the terms Madeconia/Pirin Madedonia/Aegean Madedonian offensive.

Macedonian Slav is a suitable compromise but I'm expecting someone to pop up soon and oppose it on the grounds that it's ... "pejorative" --Damac 07:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I decided to remove the alternative version of Tsipas' name as the his biogpraphical article goes into more detail on this. Neither was it necessary to provide a Cyrillic version as this was not done in Greek letters for the other leaders. In addition, As KKE GS, he was referred to as Tsipas and nothing else. Lists like this should be kept simple with the biographical articles going into more detail.--Damac 07:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

A good compromise :) I didn't accuse you of being a Greek nationalist btw ;) I was just saying that referring to the language as "Slavo-Macedonian" is a Greek nationalist thing to do. I can appreciate concerns with describing it as Macedonian prior to the formation of the Republic — it could get confusing very quickly :) — and I agree with you on that, however in that case simply "Slavic" would have sufficed. - FrancisTyers 08:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

If "Slavo-Macedonian" is Greek nationalist, how do you classify terms such as Skopjanai, Skopjists, Skopja worms etc.? You'd be asking for trouble if you used the term "Slavo-Macedonian" within hearing distance of the Greek nationalist. Slavic is fine but somewhat vague. --Damac 09:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger

I oppose the merger with Panspoudastiki. Panspoudastiki is a separate organization, which clearly deserves an article of its own. That article needs some serious improvement though. --Soman 13:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. It is a seperate organisation and should be treated as such.--Damac 13:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Support merger with KNE (the CPG/KKE youth), not KKE. Panspoudastiki is not too seperate an organization to warant an article on its own, without KNE backing and guidance (imho) Panspoudastiki would not even exist. The history of Panspoudastiki is too closely related with KNE. I'd go as far as to say that Panspoudastiki had the same defining moment as KNE did, in the early 90ies when KNE was split, resulting in the formation of Neo Aristero Revma, and subsequently the same people that split from KNE, split from Panspoudastiki and formed a core of what is now known as EAAK. And what's more, there is not much more to say about Panspoudastiki itself than what there is to say about KNE. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 17:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Organization might be closely politically linked, but still be organizationally separate. Panspoudastiki is clearly the student wing of KKE. But it is not a department of KNE nor KKE. It works in a separate field, and has its own history. It is a movement that plays and has played an important role in Greek campus politics, and there is certainly material enough for it to become a good article. --Soman 08:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Even so, if we had a complete article about KNE, an article about Panspoudastiki (PKS) would be 5-6 (unique) lines long. I mean, if there are 15 things to say about KNE, there are 17 things to say about PKS, 15 of which have already been told... Unless I am missing a whole lot of things about PKS, that is. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 11:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I don't agree. PKS would include history of student elections. That could be well more than 5-6 lines. --Soman 11:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• I believe it is wrong to merge a political party with its coallitions on the labor unions or any other unions. PKS was founded by KNE as the coallition between all the students that share a common position regarding the Greek University as base and extend to any possible aspect of a student live. Nevertheless KNE are young people that work for the Social future of Greece, whereas PKS is just a political union with people that may not agree entirely with the political or strategical targets of KNE-KKE. If all coallitions are refered as the dominants party "front desk" then somebody has to explain how coalliations are formed. PKS is not KNE's front desk in the universities, as KNE is being autonomus in the student movement with its political believes. Colaboration between indepepnd students, or other student groups forms PKS.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkace (talk • contribs)

[edit] Elections

One can also argue that by refusing to participate in the first post-war elections, the KKE precluded its voice from the democratic debate, leaving military operations as the most obvious alternative. At the end of WWII, similar condition of near civil war had existed in Italy, France and Belgium but there, the communist parties chose to become active in the democratic procedures and the reconstruction process.

Either the above part should be removed or there should also be mentioned that the legislative of Greece was not stable, as opposed to that of France for example. The return of the King, which was supported by Churchill as he thought that he would ensure British interest in Greece, was done under some really dubious conditions, in fact the populist believe is that the voting was fraud. This and other reasons made the KKE believe that the legislative would not have been legal in case if they participate in the elections, thus KKE's refusal of participation in the election was done in order to not legitimize to what they saw as unlawful elections. Furthermore the article suggests that Greece legislative held the same intergrity as the one's of France and Italy, which was clearly not the case.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.239.172 (talk • contribs)

Hello, welcome to wikipedia. Please be brave and make the changes you believe should happen. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 17:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] template merging

is there any way to have both "Communist_Party_of_Greece" "Template:Politics_of_Greece" templates used? Mabe someone should make one of these two horizontal instead of vertical. --GrWikiMan 16:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mass emigration

About 60.000 of Communists emigrated to Soviet countries around 1949.Xx236 11:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

This very general. During the last year of the Civil War, that is September 1948 to September 1949, it was quite obvious to the leaders of KKE and DSE that war could not continue much longer. The main problem they had to face - apart from the war itself- was the families and relatives of the DSE fighters together with people that supporting DSE. Peloponissos was a bad example: Thousands of people were either shot, hanged, raped their families were driven away, their houses and fields were louted by the X-soldires and the right wing supporters. So the only way to guard these people was to send them on camps in Albania and Yogoslavia ( later in Romania as well). After the Colapse of Grammos on September 1948 and the return of the regiment of Florakis late 1948, more than 60.000 people ( 15.000 fighters and the rest civilians ) were distributed on all the social states, with half of them located in Soviet Union especially in Taskend. This created a problem to KKE as half of its force was left in Greece, either imprisoned or on the run, and part of the leadership with the fighting force were outband abroad. This cituation created a whole new category of problems on KKE action inside the country. 80.76.56.51 12:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)Dkace

[edit] Stop reverting my changes

I have made some changes (suggesting references for them). Some editors keep reverting my changes, without indicating any reason (except the obvious fact that they do not like what I wright). The only time someone asked for something(references) I added them (althought the whole text is empty of references, without anyone reverting it).

Please try accepting a different opinion (I have accepted your opinions for other disputed matters). Thodoros 18:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] KKE - the same party over 90 years?

Hi,

Following your advise I post my point of view in your talk page.

As I understand you have study a bit of KKE history. In my opinion you missed the point of the existance of the Greek Communist party ( in particular) or any other Communist or "Communist" Party elswhere. I don't want to give a lecture - this is not my point at all- so I will be sort.

The Communist Party of Greece, was founded under the Marxist-Leninist Theory and is still under this ideology. Throughout its 90 year history, although it had turns that brought questions on its character, it never deviated from its original roots. Furthermore, KKE kept the same organization chart all those years - otherwise we couldn't refer to it as a Leninist Party.

Although KKE disolved the greek local organizations in 1950, a small underground organization was still existing in order to sustain the political line that KKE was embrashing those years for peaceful action in Greece. It never disolved the organisations in the Sosialist States and the Central Comitee of the Party was still working with headquarters in Romania. This can be found in all KKE documents but here I talk out of personal experie on these issues.

Splits and rejections of the KKE were held throughout its 90 year old history, but never a party created from KKE's split had neither the power or the same political agenta.

Last but not least, KKE members that entered the Party all these 90 years are still members of KKE and- for what is worth- these members were the katalyst that kept KKE a Marxist Leninist party on the crisis of 1991.

About Elections: Main KKE political line is the creation of coalitions based on peoples political formations and common goals. Under this respect Peoples front on '30s, EAM on '40s, EDA on 1950-1967, United Left on 1974, Synaspismos on 1988, PAME on 1998 are under the same political umbrella: Coalitions of the left winged group of citizens or parties. Even today, although "KKE" was the title in the election several small groups were also joining this effort.

Under the above prespective, KKE has a history of 90 years. You can't detach any of these years from this solid history line.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkace (talk • contribs)

First of all, I can understand both your and Magioladitis' arguments. Both are valid in some way and we should try and find a compromise, perhaps by looking at how parties in other countries with long legacies of splits and changes are treated on Wikipedia.

Just let me outline what I think first. The KKE of 2007 is the same KKE as the earliest version in name. To be fair to DKAce, the party has maintained continuity in terms of organisation (apart from a time during the war when its structures were practically smashed). It is widely recognised as being the same party by people from the left, far left and right in Greece, demonstrated by the fact that it is the only KKE on the scene. Other parties claim the KKE heritage, but have qualifiers (KKE-ML, MLKKE, EKKE, etc.) in their titles. Legally in Greece, the KKE is the only party entitled to the name, so we need to recognise that.

On the other hand, I disagree with the POV that DKAce puts foward that the KKE was "founded under the Marxist-Leninist Theory". The SEKE of 1918 was not Marxist-Leninist; the party only adopted this platform in 1924. Indeed, most of the people associated with the original party were subsequently expelled from the party. Today, the KKE has very little to say about the party's founder Avraam Benaroya. This shows a certain degree of discontinuity.

As regards election results, I am in favour of including all results, but highlighting where necessary that in some elections the KKE participated in a coaltion. Including the results just from 1993 does not help readers appreciate how the watershed of 1989 affected the party's performance.

We should look at how other parties are treated on Wikipedia. Take Sinn Féin for example. It was originally founded in 1905, although the party's aims then are completely different to those of the present-day Sinn Féin. Like the KKE, there are other organisations which also claim the heritage of Sinn Féin, including Republican Sinn Féin and the Workers Party of Ireland. In order to allow the article on Sinn Féin to deal with the current organisation operating under that name, a seperate History of Sinn Féin article was started. This process has to be completed, but it might be useful in the KKE case. Most people on Wikipedia want to know about the KKE of today when they look up the party here, so perhaps we could start a History of the Communist Party of Greece.

Just a final point. Going by your language, DKAce, I take it that you are a member or supported of the KKE. While your contributions are very welcome and do enhance the article, you should take note of the WP:POV. We should always be wary of what official accounts of anything say about an event. Just because the CC of the KKE said something was so does not mean it was so. The party even recognises that, demonstrated by the fact that it has had to "revise" certain standpoints it has taken over the years.--Damac 07:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Well let me just write down some thoughts for the record.

a)I disagree with the fact that "KKE is the same through out its 90 year old history" as organisation. In this party's documents I have read that the 14th Congress [1993] "restored the party's character". So, for some years at least is was not the same party. Moreover, in 1958 KKE canceled all its party organisations in Greece (it had already canceled its organisations in the former SSRs since 1955) so there was no KKE for many years. More? The post-1955 guidance of KKE imprisoned Zachariades and exiled others of the pro 1955 guidance. How can these be the same parties? Ideology is not the only criteria for a party. Many parties in the modern Greek history claim to be communists or the continuation of the old KKE 1918-1955.

b)I agree with Damac that "The KKE of 2007 is the same KKE as the earliest version in name".

The example of Sinn Fein is a good one of what we have to do in Wikipedia and I never requested a split of the CPG article. I haven't check enough the articles for the CPs in the former USSR which I saw have different articles from before 1991 and post 1991 but this has to do that before 1991 we have parties which were part of the CPSU and CPs in a new country. If a split could be made would be for the party before 1956 and after that (because of the 6th Plenary Session and the establishment of a new party from the Soviets in the place of the old party).

c)My main objection is about the election results. In '20s and '30s didn't participated alone in the elections or with the title communist. (I see some exceptions for some elections in Wikipedia but I ll try to check if this really hold. I have a series of books called "KKE - Official documents" and maybe there it's mentioned something relevant). So, the first time we can really have an impression of CPG's electoral results is... in 1977. That's because after 30s we have the WWII, the formation of EDA, the Junta and in 1974 CPG participates in elections with the United Left coalition. The results since 1977, and better since 1993, give us an impression of the influence of today's CPG in Greece and it's not just a catalogue with results.

d)I find the idea of an article for the history of the CPG very difficult to be implemented. The CPG itself tried to do it and stopped in the first volume. I don't have in mind any book of a historian doing that. Of course, anyone who feels brave enough can start it always having in mind the WP:POV. -- Magioladitis 11:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I am glad that we can have this conversation in here and state things clearly. I agree with Damac in most aspects of his post.I believe that the contribution of everyone that has a documented fact is needed and should be merged or compromised with another well documented fact. I also believe, that when in 180degrees contradiction then all facts should be preented equally with there sources well defined for the reader to have the finall call. I will place an example: In the edition of KKE history I read 3 weeks ago, the WWII history of the party was only that created ELAS and that ELAS killed cornal Psaros and his regiment. This distores the truth. I believe ( and this is why I left it untached) that apart from this insident, that I was about to release another version written by the key persons on this situation. But, KKE's history inside WWII was not that! I hope you get my point on this. Maybe we can expanded in more details.

Regarding history of KKE:

a) As for 14th Conference of KKE, the line "restored the party's character" is followed by a tone of pages explaining the mistakes on KKE's tactics of the past 4 years. The party didn't changed its principals neither its targets in any of the previous Conferences, 13th being the most important of those. Critisism on former policies doesn't imply rejections of the "old form" of the party.

b) Untill 1955 KKE had to reorganise its forces and deal with the new cituation: 30.000 members exhiled in SRs and the rest either imprisoned or undercovered in Greece. It was coming out of a war defeat and had to recover. This is far different from changing form or ideology. My father has been member of the CPG since 1944, exhiled in all the "Greek Colleges" of '50s and return to legal status only by 1959. Although member od EDA, he was also part of the undercovered organisation that KKE had sustained inside the Greek borders. In order to understand that you have first to understand why KKE was founded and existed. Here I come to note c:

c) SEKE was the first Socialist Party in Greece. Since 1850 have been many attemps ( BOOK: The Roots of the Greek Communist Movement, Sychroni Epoxi) but they were all partial, local and never covering all the small groups. SEKE first puts a s main target socialism and communism, and is breaking ground for a party to guide this struggle in Greece. Because SEKE soon evolved to KKE, this doesn't brake the roots that it was the first succesfull attempt of the "Communist Party Project" in Greek ground. What happened afterwards to members or even the leader of SEKE, where they ended up or what was the critisism to the CPG is another issue, doesn't affect the historical point of KKE's foundation. Same deal as in 1956, 1967,1989,1991,2001 etc. KKE, being the party of the workers in Greece, not changing its character, its political targets ( via its constitutional principles or its political program) and its actions within the greek political scene is the same 90 years now. I believe that in wikipedia, we have to present first all the historical facts, then - if this is accepted from everyone- to try and put our POV on why this or why not that.

d) KKE's Central Comitee has issued 9 volumes of KKE documents from 1918 to 1974 ( if I am not mistaken) and we expect the newest version. At the same time, an one volume book has been issued: "History txt book of KKE". This present the attitude of today's leadership against KKE's history. Although it excercise hard critisism on the mistakes and the errors made by the former CPG's CC, in no point disambolish time frames as not part of KKE's history. Critisism is one thing, and cutting roots is completely another.

e) KKE (m-l), M-L KKE etc are not denying common history and roots as KKE up to 1956. but they are different parties from this point onward, and like different parties they should be delt with. In wikipedia, we are not going to determine who is a real communist, but what is the written history of anyone.

Thank you for this opportunity, I hope we cooperate under the same spirit from this point on.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkace (talk • contribs)

[edit] To be included in article

" In the mid 1960s the U.S. State Department estimated the party membership to be approximately 30 000.^[1]" --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

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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

[edit] Material removed from article

I removed this information on the removal of children from Greece after the Civil War as it does not relate to the KKE directly. If anywhere, it belongs to the DSE or Civil War articles. I've copyedited it down to the second last paragraph. It needs to be worked on owing to POV.

I've reworked the last paragraph, removing POV and original research and synthesis.--Damac 12:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

According to non-KKE sources, in 1948, the DSE evacuated about 30,000 children from Greek villages across the northern frontiers, to be brought up under Communist regimes.[2]. According to some accounts, the abductions were for the children's own protection; according to other accounts, the children were to be indoctrinated as janissaries.[3] Several United Nations General Assembly resolutions appealed for the repatriation of children to their homes.[4] According to the KKE's official history as well as books written in modern times by high-ranking former DSE officials who have remained loyal to the KKE,[5][6], the evacuation of the families of DSE fighters was as a measure taken after the Battle of Grammos in summer 1948 and the defeat of the 3rd DSE Division in the Peloponnese, after which some DSE soldiers and their families were executed by the Greek Army as well as militia groups once loyal to the Germans.[7] The children of DSE and communist prisoners which came under the control of the National Army ended up to one of the 58 "Children Cities" of the Queen, institutions known for their brutality and exploitation. According to US reports compiled during the Civil War, in the territories controlled by the DSE, emigration was quite small because of the good relations the DSE managed to keep with the local population, which contrasted with the results that followed National Army advances and the defeat of the DSE.[8][9][10][11] As attested by the United Nations General Assembly, Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia gave moral and material assistance to the DSE, including the use of their territory as a base for the preparation and launching of armed actions in Greece.[12] The Greek Civil War was to last until 1949, with the defeat of the communist forces. Factors that led to the defeat of the DSE include the discontinuation of aid from Yugoslavia following the latter's expulsion from the Cominform in 1948, as well as the massive influx of US military aid in the form of equipment and training.[13] As described by DSE Brigadier Colonel Aristidis Camarinos in his book [14], when the United Nations resolutions were passed the DSE 3rd Brigade was in control of 75 per cent of the Peloponnese, suggesting that the DSE did not rely solely on foreign intervention as it would have impossible for the DSE's supporters over the border to send soldiers to remote camps thousands of kilometres away.[15] Albania and Bulgaria did leave their borders open for DSE troops. In the region of Mount Vitsi, the DSE headquarters straddled the border. The main field hospitals and ammunition stores were located in this area.[16] According to General Thrasymvoulos Tsakalotos [17], in 1948 US military advisers forced the Greek government to appoint him as Chief of Staff of the Greek Army and to end the DSE presence in the Peloponnese. Failure to do so would result in the withdrawal of US aid.

I believe that this delicate issue is part of KKE's history, as it effected the evolution of the party itself in the organizations created in the Socialist Countries. I believe that this issue is of extreme importance equal to the formation of DSE, showing the extremely difficult situation that DSE fighters and KKE political leadership had to face at the end of 1948 -beginning of 1949. Dkace 06:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)D.K. Ace

I strongly disagree that DSE does not strongly relate to KKE. KKE was the only political force in Greece that supported the so-called DSE. For all intents and purposes, DSE was KKE. In adding the section on the forced abduction of children, in an attempt to keep things NPOV, I have not mentioned the word paidomazoma neither have I referred to the findings of the Balkan Commission of the United Nationa that stigmatized the paidomazoma as genocide. All references to the paidomazoma are stated in NPOV terms and backed by references. What do other people think? Rastapopoulos 07:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Please let me explain again. This article is about the KKE. Wikipedia also has articles on the DSE, the Provisional Democratic Government, ELAS, EAM, the Greek Civil War and so on. Information contained in one article should not be replicated in another. Now, where does this information on the children belong? The issue relates to equally to the DSE (the people who moved the children), the Provisional Democratic Government (the authority that formally ordered it), the Greek Civil War (the conditions that resulted in it), and the KKE (the party that administered these children in the Eastern Bloc). Perhaps its time to start a new article on the issue - it's a very interesting topic - and to have links from each of the articles above to it.

I just don't think that the article on the KKE is the place to have a 3-4 paragraph analysis of the rights and wrongs of the children's issue.--Damac 07:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough! Of course finding a name for such an atricle would be tantamount to opening quite a can of worms. Paidomazoma will probably be contested as POV, by the ideological heirsf those who perpetrated it. I suggest "Child abductions in the Greek civil war" as fairly NPOV. Any suggestions? As for the articles on the Civil War and DSE, boy do they merit oodles of NPOV editing!!! Cheers, Rastapopoulos 08:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

An article for that subject is not needed I think. You can add information by creating a section to the DSE article. Keep in mind that KKE denies that, so it would be better to present both sides. -- Magioladitis 09:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Surely it qualifies as an article. Not only did it involve up to 50,000 people, but it was the subject of international attention in the 1950s. On top of that, in recent years quite a number of scholarly research has been carried out on the fate of these children in numerous languages. It is certainly considered a topic in its own right.

As regards a name, how about the Evacuation of children from Greece after the Greek Civil War or Removal of children from Greece after the Greek Civil War? Or, to take the title of a recent conference on the subject, we could call it Child refugees from Greece in the Eastern Bloc after the Greek Civil War.

Whether the KKE accepts it or not, of course the article would present both sides of the argument.--Damac 09:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree to place it as a different subject and put there all the references available. Since there were two different "evacuations" referenced in CIVIL WAR history - the one that DSE did and the one that National Army did. The second one had also international coverage back in '50s and as a balance the monarch-fascists in Greece had to make there own story for this subject. I believe it should be under special section on Democratic Army of Greece article where all relevant sources can be put and present a full picture. It is not aligned with wiki policy though to use a title like " Child refugees from Greece in the Eastern Block after the Greek Civil War" since this history does not concern only children located in the ex-Socialist Republics but also children imprisoned and sold to families mainly in US during '50s. So a correct title should be Child refugees from Greece after the Greek Civil War, and as subsections could be : Children located in Socialist States, Children ended up in "Children Cities" in Greece. Nevertheless I believe that there should be a special paragraph with the families evacuated by DSE to avoid slaughter in the section of KKE during Civil War. Dkace 11:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I started the article. Please see [Political refugees of the Greek Civil War]]. I named it so it can also deal with the adults as well as the children who were made refugees as a result of the war. It was necessary to use the term "political refugees" (indeed this is what the refugees themselves used), to distinguish them from people who may have made refugees from the War but as a result of DSA attacks.--Damac 12:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Socialists, Communists and other naming conventions on wikipedia article

There is a problem with Point of Views again: If documentation is stating that DSE had High Command and Florakis is a Brigadier General, then you can't call DSE a "listosimmorites" ( Thiefs and murderers or guerrillas) and there leaders Chiefs, captains or what ever other wing propaganda is placing as there names. Same, National Army can't be called "Greek Army" or "Morch-fasist Army" as its name by the State and by all political forces was National Army. If Provisional Government states its goal as " Greece to become a People's Republic under Socialism" one can't sate that Socialism is a "totalitarian Communist state therefore I will change it to Communist State ". Personal Points of view, although can be stated in here -in talk page- can not be part of a historical article. I hope we can agree to that.

Dkace 10:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

1. It is highly misleading to simply state that DSE wanted to install a socialist government, as there are hundreds of varieties of socialism: communism, democratic socialism, eco-socialism, guild socialism, libertarian socialism, market socialism, revolutionary socialism, social democracy, utopian socialism, national socialism, buddhist socialism, christian socialism, islamic socialism, etc etc ad infinitum. What DSE wanted to install was a soviet-type of communism. It is not POV to mention it. Unless one has the POV to be secretly ashamed of pointing it out and would like to hide behind the portmanteau of socialism....DSE was communist. As the Americans say, if it walks like a duck, if it looks like a duck and if it quacks like a suck, then it is a duck. Διατί να το κρύβωμεν άλλωστε?
2. I have never used the term listosimmorites, please do not put words in my mouth. But the fact remains that the war was between the Hellenic Army, a regular army of an elected government with international recognition (including that of the USSR) on the one hand, and an irregular army of DSE's multi-culti guerrillas, which was domestically only supported by one party (KKE), and internationally by Soviet satellite states such as that beloved socialist paradise Albania. So the use of proper military rank (eg Brigadier etc) for the leaders of an irregular bunch of guerrillas is misleading. Unless you feel that a party, KKE in this case, has the right to bestow proper military rank to people who have not even completed a military academy! Does KKE also have the authority to issue PhDs and medical degrees? Guerrilla monickers such as captain by the way, are not "fascist propaganda" -- your so-called brigadier Florakis chose the title himself: Kapetan Yotis :-) Rastapopoulos 10:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Please do not be confused by your anti-communist passion: I used the words that both sides were calling each other. I still state that whatever our opinion is, in order to maintain the article as neutral as possible we have to adopt at least naming convention of each side. If you believe that the Monarch-fascist soldiers guided by Van Fleet and Purifoe were Regular Army, please do so, but neither me or you can state this on a whan-to-be neutral article for KKE.

- If you can't understand the big difference between Social-Democrats, Socialists-Communists and other similar content of Marxism it is your problem. As it is my problem not to understand the difference between a "liberal" and a "fascist" when they align against communists and socialist. But we are not to solve this here. Provisional Governments aim was a Socialist State under the title People's Republic of Greece. One can put as many sources as he/she wants for this aim , pro or con but none can put his point of view on an article under the title KKE. as we have established so far, sources, regardless their level, are accepted. So, I insist on walking on this line.

Crucial fact for the Civil War is that you have two armies from the same nation. In out case both armies had military trained officers, both armies had political officials, both armies were referring to a government. In the case of DSE, you should be more aware of its tactics as these are still a lecture on Supreme School of War of the modern Greek Army. You should also check the memoirs of Tsakalotos and other hi-rank official of the monarch-fascist army. They are quite revealing of the situation inside the two camps those years. Capitan Yiotis and Capitan Diamandis, Aris, Hfaistos etc were indeed names ( not ranks) chosen by these officials. Capitan, general, Colonel or what else is there were ranks given by the High Command and the Provisional Government. If Mitsotakis and Papandreou accepted this fact in 1989, you should also, otherwise you are very close to be accused as ...extreme-biased "liberal" ! :)))Dkace 11:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

What on earth is AKE, the political force that you claim also supported DSE in addition to KKE? Is it some rubber-stamp offshoot of KKE? It remainds me of George Bush's embarassing coalition countries in the Iraq War which include "superpowers" like the Marshall Islands etc! Wake up and smell the coffee: KKE was the only local political force to support the DSE. Rastapopoulos 13:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

" If history doesn't serve our purposes then too bad for history..." AKE: Agrarian Party of Greece, Αγροτικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας. During Civil War this party was partially merged with KKE. It is true that the Communist Party was the main political force behind DSE and Provisional Government, but there were also others, personalities, small groups etc, that were still allies with KKE and entered the anti-imperialistic struggle.

I don't use substitutes to wake up, so I leave the coffee, the cocaine or whatever else you enjoy to you with the hope that this anti-communist passion of yours will not eat your guts at the end of the day. Do not try to create wrong impressions, try to read some of the 50 references of this article, you may be extremely enlighten! (I wish...:D)Dkace 14:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

1. Exactly! The analogy of KKE members to AKE members in DSE are the same as the American soldiers to Marshall Island soldiers in Iraq :)
2. You probably also dont use soap either, given the natural hygiene lifestyles of fragrant KNITES and KNITISSES. By the way, thanks for the offer , but I think your psychedelics have passed their expiration date, on the day the Berlin Wall came tumbling down :) PS what is an anti-communist pation? Rastapopoulos 14:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

As my greenglish evolve, I found that pation is equal to passion, but you already knew that! As for AKE, by that time it was a different party with different structure and different members working closely with KKE. As KKE was leading the struggle against the imperialism in Greece this doesn't deprive its potential to form alliances with personalities, groups or parties with smaller political force. The KNitis fragrance is a good one, yet it is better if you enjoy it with a liberal DAPitissa! :DDkace 07:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

By the way, in a previous edit of yours you mentioned that Kapetan Yiotis went on a mission behind enemy lines, meaning within monarcho-fascist Greece (according to KKE, AKE and SNOF) or Free Greece (according to all other Greeks). I would like to ask you a few questions in good faith:

1. As a kou-kou-es, do you feel today that you are living behind enemy lines?
2. Now that the King is gone and forgotten (so there is no question of monarcho-fascist state) do you believe the Greek state is fascist?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions, would you feel more at home in a People's Republic such as North Korea? Thanks in advance for your answers! Rastapopoulos 07:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC) PS No 1. as for AKE it is nice to know that KKE also had some local (albeit marginal) political allies, and not only the likes of the Bulgarian Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization :-) Rastapopoulos 07:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC) PS No.2 Best of luck with the DAPitissa, that would be rising up in the food chain :) Rastapopoulos 08:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You mix again reality with your expectations for reality:

a. At the end of the Civil War in Greece, there was one battle front well established in terms of military tactics ( which obviously you don't understand): That of Grammos. Therefore, operating that front was for DSE operating behind enemy lines. Answering your question, first I am not a kou-kou-es ( I know you very much like to use naming convention that security police had been teaching to your breed for 60 years) I am a Greek Communist. I live to Greece and I am struggling for better future for me, my children, my people. Not alone, with all of them. I see enemies, only when I demand my rights through syndicates and oppression mechanisms are fighting against me. Where do you stand, is the question ( rhetorical after thousands of lines in here I must say). And to feed your curiosity, I feel at home and I want the thiefs and the murderers away from it, as DSE did, but failed at the end. Thousands other carry on though! A small defeat is the best way to final victory!

b. The history of KKE being an anti-greek party that wants to destroy our Nation is long -gone and condemned by the vast majority of this People regardless their political beliefs. Unfortunately, there are still "units" leaving in the past and don't see ahead of their nose what the evolution is.

c. Indeed being a DAPitis is a low level mamal. They communicate with screams like: "Aa kai OUOU kai DAP-NouDou-FouKou" . So becoming equal partners with communists or other normal people is a rise up in the food chain. :D Dkace 10:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Boys, this is not the school yard. Rastapopoulos AND Dkace, can you please refrain from arguing political matters on Wikipedia. I suggest you exchange email/telephone details and continue your deliberations elsewhere.--Damac 10:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

1. To conclude I would just like to say that had DSE won the civil war, it is likely that Greece and Greeks would have presently have been in the same position as our northern neighbors Bulgaria and Albania: workers would be making an average salary of about Euros 150 per month ( except for ex-Party members who would be ruling the economy and many women who would be sadly exercising the oldest profession abroad). Ah yes, Greeks would also need a visa to visit Thessaloniki...
2. The beginning of a great friendship? I think not...I will respect Damac’s advice and refrain from any personal discussion going forward. Rastapopoulos 12:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

As history is not written with "if..." sentences, it is obvious that you describe your wishes as reality. Unfortunately for you, the Greece's neighbors are under your favorite "liberal" capitalism and they are starving to death, following a completely different path than 20 years ago, when industry was flourishing and the people's life was 100 times better. For this you can just check on the statistics. Following your lead though, let's say that DSE was winning the war, then Greece wouldn't have become a part of the imperialist camp, Turkey would have certainly follow , not to mention middle east. Woh! A world without US and British control of the oil!!! Imagine that Purifoi, the ambassador during Civil War in Greece, is not appointed to latin America after his failure in Greece, Korea is one and is a socialist state!!! Then dear "liberal" - right winged-...- today we will be talking ghow to improve mistakes of socialism, not if communists are murders and thief's.

As this is an "If..." sentence, you can't object to this "reality"! But as written before " History is not written with ifs..." .Dkace 07:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

(With my apologies to Damac!) Industry was flourishing in the good old days of Real Socialism, you say, just check at the statistics. This argument would equally hold for Nazi Germany and Greece during the Junta. Ah, the glorious Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant, Chernobyl, the concrete gray Xenia Hotels built by Papadopoulos thoughout Greece, the trains leaving on time during the rule of il Duce, fun fun fun in Adolf's autobahn! But all at the expense of political freedom and basic human rights. Thanks, but no thanks! (Ευχαριστώ αλλά δεν θα πάρω!) PS Dkace if you really want to discuss theoretical issues not related to KKE, let us continue at either my or your discussion page. Rastapopoulos 07:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

My apologies for the negligence. I thought for a moment that by doing some abstractive statements regarding the status quo of the life in ex-Socialist States you will get your answer regarding the today economical status- but no! Anti- Communist Propaganda is deep down your bones.

Let's continue this under my discussion page.I agree. Dkace 09:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Aye, aye, kapetan! Rastapopoulos 09:50, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is the expression "Official KKE history" a valid one?

I propose that the expression "official KKE history" is POV-laden; there is nothing "official" about history written by any party. I instead propose "KKE archives" or the current "party line" - let us not forget that the party line of KKE at the time changed very frequently to reflect the latest orders received from its base in Moscow. Rastapopoulos 14:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Please note that you are trying to contribute to an article, not to make cheap propaganda of your anti-communist opinions.

One way or another, KKE's archives, as well as KKE's releases on its own history should be the base documents in order to present the history of a party. Other sources, such as sources from politicians, generals or others that opposing KKE or opposed it in the past should be presented as well. The effort should be not to try to mix things in such a manner that will not help presenting the real facts.

I.e. If I want to present that KKE was the backbone of greek resistance,( this being my POV) I have to do it via VALID sources that can back this up. Same applies if I want to show that KKE's only aim was to murder innocent civilians and betray Greece( my POV again). If I use a source like i.e. Marinos, who is a wright winged journalist and he is - using his words- an anti-communist, then I have to state it so in the article. On the other hand, if I use KKE's released documents from KKE, I have to state that these are KKE's official documents. If I want to use documents that today are being processed by Coalition of Left, then I have to state that this source is coming from this process.

Applying this policy, everybody can contribute his/hers portion of knowledge, avoiding silly "battles" that end to a non-valid article.

Despite the above "fight" between "good and evil" I believe that we can at least agree on this presentation.Up-to-day we managed to do it quite well, let's refine it and the article will be a "state of the art" - at least regarding its presentation.

Dkace 13:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

1. I will not comment on your repeat ad hominem attack about my "cheap propaganda". Please read about AGF and DBF before pursuing the matter forward.
2. My point is that the expression "KKE party-line" or "KKE's official archives" is preferable to "Official KKE history." Let us see what others have to say.
3. You have used expressions such as "according to sworn enemies of KKE" or "according to anti-communist propaganda" which are clearly biased and non-wiki. I can imagine you hitting the ceiling if someone wrote "according to pro-communist propaganda." - and rightly so! Think about it. Moreover, it would be very awkward to write "according to pro-communist sources / according to anti-communist sources" thoughout the articles. I suggest instead that it is more NPOV so say: "according to communist sources / according to non-communist sources". Let us see what others have to say. Rastapopoulos 15:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if you received the phrase "cheap propaganda" as an attack, it wasn't my intention ( this time). I only wanted to stress out that by using phrases like "party line" on cases of historical facts is like you are trying to apply propaganda rules to a history article. I withdraw the phrase, please keep the meaning .

I found the phrase "sworn enemies" replacing my edit of "anti-communists" and I thought that it was edited in order to avoid biased view of the subject. I agree on your suggestion. Each event that has different approach from multiple source should be noted as you suggest.

Regarding the propaganda issue, i stated my opinion of some sources such as Marinos. Even me or you can write down a small "book", baptize it "Source of History" and make a reference to it. No problem with Woodhouse, or the "Black Bible of Communism" - no problem as a source, as they serve certain political views but they have done there homework - but if we have to refer to Marinos as a source we have to state his political opinion on the issue: Sworn enemy of KKE. Same as G. Papandreou. Although PM and Minister from 1920 to 1967, he was the "supreme" communist "prosecutor" throughout modern greek history. In his speeches in 1950 he was proud of it. When we refer to him as a source regading KKE histry, this, I think, should also be stated.

Dkace 08:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the constructive comments. I still do not agree with the expression "sworn enemy of communism", very much the same way as you would oppose (and rightly so) to the expression "sworn enemy of democracy" if applied to KKE. How about using the expression "political opponent of..."? Rastapopoulos 09:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Communists are not "sworn enemies of democracy" but of capitalism. I agree on the expression. Let's use "political opponent of KKE". Dkace 09:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, agreed. However, please note that sincere democrats (and I am not refering to the type of democrats you appreciated Pol Pot) are sworn enemies of a dictatorship of the proletariat, as they are of all types of democracy. And no, I do not consider G. Bush a sincere democrat ;-) Rastapopoulos 07:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You refer a lot to red hmers of Cambodia. I never favorite there politics and tactics neither there perspective of "socialism". There regime was defeated from Vietnam forces in 1976 and the Socialist government of Vietnam gave the chance to Cambodian people to vote for their government. Today, there is King ruling and a center government after "western" type elections.Economy is Capitalistic, applying good relations with Vietnam. This happened because revolutionary forces of Vietnam could not tolerate the Red Hmer's ruling in the name of Socialism and did their best to protect the neighbor nation.

As for "dictatorship of the proletariat", this has the ultimate democratic rules than any other "democratic" state: Its base is the decisions of the union meetings -unions referring to working places or leaving places- were all the people have access can put there opinion under questioning and vote for the best. This is organized up to the top the same way, and decisions are going from the base to the leadership and vice versa before hitting the streets. When this model is not working, then small or huge problems are created ( like the ex-Socialist States). What I want to stress out is that is not an one way road this "dictatorship of the proletariats" . What it is for sure, is the only - until today- answer to the "dictatorship of the Capitalists" which is being dressed as " western type democracy", "dictatorships". "Nazism", "Fascism" etc,etc,etc.

Sorry for this irrelevant answer with the subject ( I believe that part of it is not irrelevant, as it is the bases of the formation of the KKE). If it is too much, we can continue it at my discussion page. Dkace 11:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Well it is very democratic, provided you are a proletarian. If you are not a proletarian and are, for example, the owner of a small company that has offered many young people (like ourselves) jobs and is not a lackey of domestic and foreign monopolies, then you are at the receiving end of the cucumber of this so-called democratic dictatorship ;-) For me this is not a hypothetical story, because I am the owner of such a company (which I created, and not inherited from anyone). Maybe we can continue it at the dictatorship of the proletariat discusssion page ! Rastapopoulos 12:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It depends on which category of the working class you are referring as "proletarians". Back in 1850, these were the industrial workers, receiving no education, no liberties, what so ever. The alliance with the "workers of the land" was obvious, so the Communist party emerged. Today, KKE is aligning its politics in the current economical situations. Proletarians with the original meaning do not exist anymore due to various reasons. But people owing small or medium businesses can be a valid alliance of the modern proletarians? If you think about it, yes. That is because, the socialist revolution doesn't aim in the destroy of any ownership, but first on the control of the production media from the people that operate them: That is the people. A small company can work more prosperous in an environment that its workers have a high status of leaving and can develop its business . But it can't control the economy. After all, if you see it under a different point of view, it is much better and much safe to work for the community and try to develop its standards rather than work against it and try to "make more money". Although simplified, the above are more or less the bases of the "dictatorship of the proletarians". To enhance historically this point, in 1936, there was the 4 year congress of the Agricultural workers in USSR with Stalin introducing the pros and cons of the 19 year evolution of the Soviet Agricultural economy. In his speech, he stressed out that the socialization (κοινωνικοποίηση)of the land in 1936 should be on the 26% of the total hence it was in the 85% which was causing problems with the agrarian population who was not political persuaded to work on the Community farms but they were forced to do it as there was no other way to gain profit. According to CPSU that was a big mistake in their socialist economy. A mistake they never fixed due to the war... Today, KKE is fighting with the greek farmers to maximize there production and deliver goods to the greek people that need them instead of following politics that minimize the farmer population and leave the land . Is it because it favors small or medium property on land? No! It is because victims of the capitalization of the agricultural productions are the farmers and they have to defend there land and their production in order the rest of the people to enjoy fresh and low cost agricultural products. Many other examples can follow, but let's stay on the right path :D "dictatorship of proletarians", "Socialist Republic" etc are the system that the people rule - pretty similar to the principles of ancient Athens Democracy. All systems have mistakes, the question is which system guarantees a better future for humanity. For me this is Socialism, and the advanced stage, Communism. Dkace 13:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Na tonisw stous tiflwmenous apo pathos aristerous-dexious oti stin makedonia to elas den aftoxaraktirizotan ws "komounistiko" alla "patriwtiko" exou kai to megalo draft-rate apo tin perioxi. Episis i ethniki adistasi einai enas mithos. pote den egine tipota sovaro apo ti stigmi tis paradosis kai meta, dexioi kai aristeroi itan poli apasxolimenoi stin prospatheia tous na ifarpaxoun tin exousia kai na ipakousoun stous afendes tous pou afinan tous germanous na alwnizoun.

gia perissoteres plirofories diavaste ta vivlia tou ges gia to thema kai tis apoleies twn nazi apo ta arxeia tis stazi (na sas xenerwsw to noumero einai dipsifio, se troxea to pasxa perissoteroi pethenoun).

Sorry for the greek but there should be bilingual answer on this post:

File mou anwnyme, to na diavazeis mia pigi kai na nomizeis oti katexeis ti monadiki alitheia, den nomizw oti prosferei kai kati idiaitero. Gia skepsou ta akoloutha:

1. Pou vrikes ta arxeia tis Stazi gia tin Elliniki antistasi? Ta mona arxeia gia tin katoxi pou exoun kykloforisei einai kati biased anafores twn katoxikwn dynamewn pou profanws - opws kai oi amerikanoi sto IRAQ- den anaferoun tipota! Mono i dimoiria tou theiou mou stin Hleia katharise 200 Germanous sto Lala tin anoiksi tou 1944! Kai itan 16 atoma, 1h Ypodeigmatiki tou Syntagmatos tis Olympias.

2. Ta arxeia tou GES den anagnorizoun drasi Ethnikis Antistasis se organomeno strato. Oute kan anaferonte kai opou to kanoun prospathoun na apodeiksoun oti o stratos tis mesis anatolis itan o "Ethnikos Stratos". Kalo, e! Kai tote giati oi Nazi kratagan 11 merarxies sti xwra, xwria tous Italous kai tous Voulgarous?

3. To na eksoraizeis kai na midenizeis ton agwna ekatomyriwn gia mia leuteri Ellada einai dikaiwma sou. Opws dikaiwma sou einai na epilegeis kai tis "istorikes piges". Apo ekei kai pera yparxei aki i antikeimeniki pragmatikotita kai uti orizetai apo pollaples piges kai diaforetikes prosegiseis. To oti kapoioi theloun na kataskevasoun tin istoria opws goustaroun, den simainei oti to proion tous einai kai katallilo pros vrosi!!!

Tin epomeni fora kalitero einai na ypografeis ta keimena kai tis diorthwseis sou.

Dkace (talk) 08:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] KKE'S policy on the secession of northern Greece

Magioladiti, I changed it to the bottom of the article as it refers to the politics of KKE on a special subject. I still have things I want to change and update, but I don't believe that it follows the flow of the artcle if it is put second after the foundation of the party.

If we have to refer to special politics of the party, then we have to open another subject, not a paragraph in between the history issues. Dkace (talk) 13:23, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

You moved the first 3 paragraphs after the section for the WWII. That's what i reverted. Check the article's history log. Please use summary to describe your actions and talk page for large-scale modifications. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

So, I did and I restore the damage.

Reading the article, from top to bottom, we have: Foundation, WWII, Civil war, Post war era, Legalization. Then participation to governments, alliances, KNE. When I refer to "special" politics, is the above structure. KKE had a policy for WWI, and the Minor Asian campaign long before the Macedonian Issue. It had a policy for the 8 hour work, the social security, the distribution of the land to the poor farmers etc. It was one of the biggest contributors in the big strike of Thessaloniki in 1936 for better salaries, political liberties etc. These form the political agenta of KKE together with the Macedonian issue and the issue of the minorities in the Greek Social State.

I believe that we can present aspect of this political agenta, commend, put references etc, at the end of the historical overview of the party- of any party- not at the beginning.Otherwise the meaning is lost. It is like KKE existed only to "cut" parts of Greece! This is not a correct approach.

Or, we can build the article based on the ideology that KKE is supporting. Then we have to explain why it was founded, what was its first steps - article by article- ans so on .

If we choose the second, we will have a real war in such an article which is not the issue here.

I suggest we move paragraphs that refer to KKE's policy on different issues at the end of the historical presentation.

Dkace (talk) 08:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

DKace, I really appreciate your edits to the KKE article. You expand it and helped so that many parts of the article are not disputed. Please take care of WP:POINT before editing just to trigger a conversation.

About the place where the section you moved has to be placed: Maybe we have to change the section's title if this confuses you. But this section is not meant to explain KKE's policy on the secession of N. Greece and the whole story behind it. (Why should in particularly in this subject?) It was meant to be part of the history of KKE and more specifically, it's policy in 20s. And since of of most important political issues discussed in Greece in 20s was this it would be good to know KKE's opinion. So this section has to go before the section for WWII. Moreover, of course it's good that the section also presents KKE's later opinion in order to disallow any misunderstandings. Maybe we ave to present them as a whole? Change the section titles? I don't know. But if we move this section then we have a gap for KKE's policy in 20s. Please suggest another approach. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't disagree that this position of KKE was of great importance in the pre-war era. Same magnitude position was the anti-fascist front that was dictated from a decision of Comintern. Same magnitude position was the participation in the government of 1935 under the Sofouli-Sklavena treaty. What I want to stress out, is that this era is not illustrated in the article - that is the mid-war era-. We use a title "KKE'S policy on the secession of northern Greece" just after the openning of the KKE article, directly "implying" that KKE's main role of existance was to destroy Greece. Just check the structure of the article.

Instead of this, we can rename the paragraph as " KKE during the Mid-War Era" and have this chapter explained in detail ( or not) in there. Otherwise - and until we decide that- I suggest we leave at the end of the article, not as an issue of minor importance, but as a special point that has to be stressed out.This is my feeling for the present article's structure.

Dkace (talk) 12:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aim

I believe an important addittion would be a description of the agenda of KKE at the moment (probably a summary of Πρόγραμμα του ΚΚΕ would be enough). Better yet a retrospection throught time of the refinements and changes that came to. I mention it since I definately don't have the time to do it. A nice, fairly independent source might be the Από τη «Λαοκρατία» στην «Αλλαγή» (online) book. Besides CPG archives tend to be very accurate (besides rizospastis). Please dispence with the personal comments rastappopoulos and dkace. I don't care if your father was a x-iths rastappopoulos (or not), stalinist totalitarianism was not the aim of eam and if you want cradible sources go to your history books of trith gymnasiou. The rest of your quarells can be treated the same way. And dkace people with "fragrance" need perfume to cover their smell. I care not if you are commisioned by the CC of CPG, all we need here is the truth beyond bourgois perception (mainly), anticommunist propaganda or left-wing petty lies. Please get a grip. You manage to piss off anyone who reads your "discussion".

Houdalakis

My father was a x-iths? Well, your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries! Rastapopoulos (talk) 13:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)